Cirillo On Point Shooting

M

matthew temkin

Moderator
Many anti point shooters talk about Cirillo's first gunfight with the Stakeout Squad, which involved some incredible rapid fire aimed shooting skills.
Naturally they use this to knock point shooting.
So I found this paragraph from the newly published book, JIM CIRILLO'S Tales Of The Stakeout Squad most interesting...

.."and when (Jeff) Cooper heard that I was in the Stakeout Squad, that I was in all of these gunfights, that was it--I became HIS hero.
Cooper started dragging me all over the place to give lectures and it was very odd. We were lecturing at a Western Montana police science college, he;s telling them, "Front sight front sight, sight, sight, sight..and I actually had to refute him. I'd say, "Of course if you are in the military and you are shooting beyond fifty yards, you'd better use your sights. But toe to toe, I don't know if you should use your sights. In law enforcement your problem isn't your front sight, it's your background. if you're looking at your front sight you can't see that some poor black guy is pulling a black wallet out of his back pocket, and you think he's pulling out a gun. This has happened time and time again."
Hmmmm..very interesting.
And Jim makes a great point on another benefit of focusing on the threat rather than the sights---visibility of the suspect.
Which is why a lot of my mentors taught me to focus on the BG's navel area when challenging or shooting either with or without the sights.
 
Pointed when it need be pointed and sighted when it need be sighted, that's what I always say. Or something to that effect. (Disclaimer for those unfamiliar with my take on things: I emphasize sighted over pointed fire, then again, I've always been rather handy at pointed fire.)

I admit, though, that I'd love to have a recording of their point/counter point hashing of things out in private.
 
And let's remember also that later in his life Cirillo was a very strong advocate of alternative forms of sighting that did not utilize the traditional sights on the handgun.
 
In an SD situation under 10 feet you'd be crazy to stick your gun all the way out & try to get sight acquisition, you just draw & fire. Muscle Memory gets the bullet to it's intended target & that is all that "point shooting" is. Call it what you must, but it's the only thing that can save your life at near contact distances.
 
I've read Cirillo's "....Tales of a Modern Day Gunfighter" book probably close to half a dozen times now. He distinctly talks about his method of teaching shooters not to rely on their front sight by taping off the notch in the rear sight, the whole purpose being to imprint the square rear sight in the "subconscious mind" as he calls it. The front sight was obviously not that important to Jim in close quarter gunfighting if he was willingto block it from view.
 
I met Jim at a police training conference a few years back where he was doing a presentation on the use of lasers.
He drew small circles on a wall and had us back off about 20 feet and "shoot" the laser from his nose point position.
We were all amazed how often the laser went right into that little circle!!
 
I can't wait to read his latest book. With my experiences in combat I just can't agree with not using the front sight. However as I age I wholeheartedly aree with the new electronic sighting systems. All it took was one of my nephews coming back from Iraq to show me how they work and I now have one on my go to guns.
I sort of think that Jim survived a number of his gunfights because he has massive huevo's.
 
Threefeathers

He and Bill Allard both!!!

It is always surprising to me that Jim and Bill seem at different ends of the front sight debate.

Between the two of them there are a truck load of bodies in the ground. What is unexplainable is that Jim and Bill exited the stake out squad with all of there pieces in tact!
 
Shoot enough

As you shoot the same pistol, from the same holster, worn in the same place (concealed) year in, year out, certain habits form, not really things you consciously think about, they just slip in, then you have them.

Shooting multiple shots at mid distances, say, 7 to 12 yards, two hands, eye level sighted fire might be the best way to strike vital places, a lot.

But whilst holding on to something/someone, with your off hand, that option goes out of the widow. The way these skills form is shooting a lot, in places that have been modified to match the places you might need those skills, and a bench in an indoor range is not the best solution.

Remember the Stake out squad was disbanded not because they were ineffective, but because they were too effective! The lessons learned are still as valid today, as they were then.

In being sent to monitor a class run by Jim Cirillo, I happened across the range portion when only Jimmy was there, lunch? he said would I like to shoot it, indoor range, set up as a basement (parking garage?) you search after entering a door way, "Sure" said I. First image I see, off to one side, a big paper image of a coverall clad man, large wrench on shoulder, I shot him.

When reloaded and holstered I was asked by a grinning Jim, "You are not a LEO are you Mike?" No said I, I just teach them.

Apparently this "Maintenance man" was to be challenged, he was real close to me though! And that was a big wrench! We lost a gifted, and good man with Jim Cirillo's passing, too early.
 
I used to hunt at a lodge in the NY Catskill mountains that had about 50 guys during the opening days of deer season.
There was this one guy named Bill who was always being asked for help by hunters on the rifle range.
Turned out that Bill was, in fact, Bill Allard of the stakeout squad and a former partner of Cirillo.
One night I got him alone by the fireplace and started pumping him for info.
( I think he was trying to get me to become a paying student which, in 1992 or so, was $125 per hour)
I finally got to ask him which was better--point or aimed fire.
His response----"It depends"
Which kind of says it all.
Let us not forget that what the Stakeout Squad did was not the norm of police gun fighting where the officer is taken by surprise and the distances are often measured in inches as opposed to yards.
They had the luxury of distance and being able to choose ( and modify) the battleground/firing lanes and it was them who decided when the confrontation was to begin.
A big advantage, to be sure.
Some may call this ambushing, as opposed to gun fighting.
A term that Cirillo him self used in his classes.
 
Matt,

Nope. I'm saying that Bill Allard gave an excellent interview that is worth listening to, since he's dodged the tusks.

pax
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top