Sights or Point Shooting in CQB Situations - Page 3




 
--
 
October 29th, 2009  
19kilo30K4
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by SHERMAN
What they did was take M16 or more accuratly vintage M16s, and cut them down to the length of the M4 or CAR-15, or in some cases the length of the shorty.
The IDF has both CAR-15 made in colt factories and what we call "Sawed" weapons, which are the result of this idiocy. If we were in europe or north america this might actually fly, but in the desert it is an absolute catastrophy. They jam very frequently. Its less of a problem now because infantry no longer has them at all, they now have either M4 or Tavor. The only combat units that carry them are armor and arty, which fire their rifles less frequently in combat. Still, I always thought that giving up the Galil SAR for the armor troops was silly. As a tanker you dont tap around much on foot, and the Galil has unmatched reliabilty in any conditions.
Indeed, I actually have some experience with the Galil from 2007 since we were partnered up with Estonians. They use it as their primary rifle, and I must say I was very impressed. I had not even heard of the Galil until I worked with them, and I was amazed at how it paired all the advantages of the AK with improved sights and an improved bolt locking design. My admiration for Israeli improvements grew dramatically once I handled the Galil.
November 13th, 2009  
5shot
 
 
19Kilo30K4,

Thanks for all responses, and yours.

As to the 1911, the original US manual on the 1911 cautioned against using the shooting method described.

And that cautioned was echoed in other manuals of that time. Here is a link to an article that has both the language and links to those manuals:

http://www.pointshooting.com/1911.htm

The links and language on the 1911 are down a ways on the second part of the 1911 article.

In previewing/reviewing how the link and the link to the manual will work, I have found that since I found the original book and the contents for FREE and the link to it, it looks like someone has gummed up the works so all the contents are not available unless you buy the dang book from a source that wants to make a buck.

So, I will research my files, and if I can find a copy that I downloaded, which my OLD and fast fading memory says I did when it was available, I will put it up on my site, and add a link to it here.

..........

As to the method of shooting one should use, per the studies of Police CQ combat, if you are going to be shot and/or killed in a pistol gunfight, there is a 90% chance it will happen at less than 15 feet.

Also, most all gunfights occur at less than 21 feet.

The reason is pistol accuracy in real life threat situations sucks (the Police hit rate in CQB is less than 20%), and that is because of the short length (sight radius), of pistols and because of the human response to CQ life threat situations. Also the link between range performance and street performance has not been established.

So it seems to me, that knowing how to shoot a pistol "accurately" without the use of the sights at CQ distances, would be good if you plan to survive a CQB encounter.

And most of the methods are not a bar to the use of the sights if you can see them and there is time to use them.
November 13th, 2009  
19kilo30K4
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 5shot
So it seems to me, that knowing how to shoot a pistol "accurately" without the use of the sights at CQ distances, would be good if you plan to survive a CQB encounter.

And most of the methods are not a bar to the use of the sights if you can see them and there is time to use them.

Eh, but that doesn't take into account advancements in technology. We've come along way from the year 1911. Crimson Trace laser grips are an affordable and very effective means of indexing a target without focusing on the sights. Pistol mounted flashlights can have a similar effect if you are trying to hit center mass of the illuminated target rapidly. Since you mentioned that most police shootings happen at close range, it is also worth noting that most of them happen at night. Using today's modern technology can tip the scale in your favor. In daylight I would always use the sights unles I am close enough for physical contact, in which case the priority is protecting the gun and getting the muzzle onto the enemy, even if that means shooting from the hip into the gut of the enemy. That instance aside, I have never and will never encourage one of my soldiers to fire a shot that is not aimed, because as we all know you are responsible for where that bullet goes. Even in a justified shooting, if you fire a shot that hits a guy down the street, you are in huge trouble. If you fire a shot that misses the target then you've just wasted your time all together, and the extra fraction of a second you spend aiming may save your life.
--
November 13th, 2009  
03USMC
 
 
In the case of LE and laser sights most agencies don't allow them...mine being case in point. We do allow pistol mounted flashlights but only Tactical Officers are provided holsters to leave their lights mounted.
November 14th, 2009  
A Can of Man
 
 
Is it some kind of public image thing?
November 14th, 2009  
5shot
 
 
Here's a link to several Military manuals that mention P&S as I call it, and also the caution against using it with the 1911 because of its slide stop design fault.
http://www.pointshooting.com/1911pubs.pdf

I had to trick google into giving me the snipets from the manuals that I wanted, because you can't preview them. Something has changed for the worse as all of those manuals are in the public domain.

If you want the Army or Marine pistol manuals of a few years ago, you can download them for free from my site.

And if you want more about the fault in the design of the 1911 and my thoughts on that matter: http://www.pointshooting.com.1911.htm

As to accuracy, most Police are taught sight shooting, but unfortuantely it is not used in CQB for a variety of environmental and physiological reasons. Here is a link to a study by the NYPD of thousands of Police combat cases for more info on that: http://www.pointshooting.com/sop9.htm

The actual CQ combat hit rate is less than 20% so saying that every shot must be aimed, sounds good, but it's not reality.

Check out what the FBI says about the concern about bullets traveling through a threat and continuing on: http://www.pointshooting.com/fbipart1.htm

Thanks again for your interest and comments.
November 14th, 2009  
19kilo30K4
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 5shot
The actual CQ combat hit rate is less than 20% so saying that every shot must be aimed, sounds good, but it's not reality.

.

Notice how almost all the manuals you reference were from 1917? In 1924 the M1911A1 was adopted and it addressed many of the earlier issues that you are talking about and nobody uses the type of 1911 quoted in those sources. What you are suggesting simply cannot happen and it is not true. Sorry, but people use 1911s all the time and this is just not an issue that comes up. If you think a 20% hit rate when aiming is bad, then just imagine how low it would go if you don't aim. The 20% hit rates stated in the FBI stats also include shots that are fired by wounded officers in full panic mode after having been ambushed. It is quite probable that many of those misses were not aimed shots in the first place (using either technique). The heavy hitters in the MIL/LE community have all made well prepared and thought out arguments backed by real world experience and statistical data against this method. If you want to dicount the experiences of people like Larry Vickers and Massad Ayoob and discount the training practices of the top tactical organizations in the world, then that is on you. Your posts and the "references" that you posted out of context are misleading and wrong. No matter how you cut it, there is a reason why major organizations do not advocate the practice of using point shooting and their reasons are based on real world performance not misleading references from 1917. This former SWAT officers sums up nicely why NOT to use it:http://www.officer.com/web/online/Op...gAgain/3$32550

Paul Howe a 20 year vet of special forces who battled his way out of the Blackhawk Down incident and led the team that captured on of Aidid's top guys had this to say about point shooting:
http://www.combatshootingandtactics....g_thoughts.pdf

Word renowned pistol expert Col Jeff Cooper stated "the body aims, the sights confirm" and the list goes on and on.

Not to mention that this Staff Sergeant right here has a lot of combat time and won't bet his life on this method. <------ The only time I have engaged the enemy without sights is when firing full auto belt fed weapons with tracers, and then I walk the hits on.

So, in short, I'm trying to be civil but your opinions are not based on facts and your issue with the 1911 is unfounded and just plain not true. The slide stop detent was invented for this exact purpose! The notch cannot align unless you have defective mags with a poorly fit slide and just happen to be pressing really hard with the tip of your finger at the exact moment the slide locks back. There is a time and place for point shooting... that time is when the enemy can touch you with his hands. Oh, and did you read in the article above about how Wyatt Earp used sights? You may remember him winning many a gunfight back in the days when point or hip shooting was in style. He lived to old age, unlike many of his adversaries. Once again, take it from an actual gunfighter. Advocating combat tactics that have not been proven in combat makes little sense.

EDIT: and one more thing, you wouldn't be able to have your index finger on the end of the slide stop and pull the trigger at the same time anyway unles you are left handed (it's pushed out from the right side of the receiver) and it cannot be pushed out while the weapon is in battery. In regards to lights/lasers many of the country's leading departments are going to them, so don't just write them off as an insignifigant number since... umm, I dunno the largest Sherrif's unit in the country with over 9,000 sworn has been using crimson trace grips since 2003... http://findarticles.com/p/articles/m.../ai_100606756/
November 14th, 2009  
03USMC
 
 
I carry a Kimber Custom TLE II 1911A1 every day I work. Every time I draw it as a right handed shooter I index my trigger finger along the frame and yes it touchs the slide stop pin. Never have I on this 1911 or many others has this pushed out the slide stop or caused a malfunction.

The slide would have to in motion with the right amount of pressure place the nano second the take down notch and slide stop were in the right postion.
November 14th, 2009  
19kilo30K4
 
 
Indeed sir.
November 14th, 2009  
03USMC
 
 
Don't get the idea I'm discounting laser enhanced sites, I'm not. And while some depts authorize them none around me do, nor did my previous agencies or agencies around them. They have their place and they have their uses but many administrators have issues with them on patrol officer weapons. Our MP5's are laser equipped our AR's EOTECH equipped but the bosses don't want lasers on patrol officers pistols because of the PR aspect of little red dots center mass on people Tactical ops is different. We actually tried the laser site that replaces the guide rod on the Glock about 4 years ago. We ordered one installed it in the Sheriffs Pistol and he shot about two mags with good shot groups. Third mag the pistol went full auto. Dropped the guide rod back in the pistol went back to semi. That was the death of laser sites in my dept for patrol officers.


As far as low light and site usage I'm a believer in point shooting using my front site only at ranges up to about 8 yards. After that you need to float the rea
 


Similar Topics
Cherry Point could get 11 new F-35 squadrons
Her Basic (Academic) Training Was Nothing Like West Point
Iraq Presents Graduating Class At West Point With New Challenges
West Point Grads Exit Service At High Rate
India and Pakistan