You sound a LOT like me. Finger on the trigger guard even.
The two main problems I ran into were.
1. Decades of martial arts training have made me instinctively always move back to a side stance. This creates distance and removes vitals for direct view (which I'm sure you already are well aware of). That is the first problem I have with a squared up stance, that the vitals are more presented to your attacker. I know a side weaver stance isn't absolute protection (and if you are wearing body armor you are actually slightly less protected as the armpit hole is now presented) but it seems to me that the vitals are better protected with a side Weaver than a squared up Iso. When using a squared up stance I simply don't feel protected at all and that greatly distracts me from the shooting I am trying to do.
2. The grip. I completely understand that the both arms locked, palms together evenly grip used in Iso can be very precise. The problem I ran into is when I adopted that grip and arm position and then tried to move and shoot, I couldn't find my sights or hit a damn thing. Also people state that the advantage of Iso is that you can shoot in all four directions while Weaver can not. I found just the opposite. I can only shoot in three direction with Iso and cannot fire in the fourth (directly behind me) without shifting to Weaver.
It's hard to be a ACLU hating, philosophically Libertarian, socially liberal, fiscally conservative, scientifically grounded, agnostic, porn admiring gun owner who believes in self determination.
Chuck, we miss ya man.
كافر
Bookmarks