CQB and Sights

A

amprecon

New member
For those of you who have gone through the training or experienced CQB firsthand, do they teach you to use your sights? Or is it just a point and shoot method? It seems under such close proximity 20ft or less, it'd be much quicker to point the weapon at the target and get the shot off rather than take the valuable time required to bring the weapon up to use the sights.
I remember reading somewhere a while ago that the Israeli's taught their trainees a particular method with handguns where they could accurately point shoot at their targets within a given distance and be consistant.
I know some rifles and handguns would be more difficult to point shoot with because of their design than others.
When I went to the Reserve Police Academy, they taught us to focus on the front sight of the handguns and never take your eyes off the target if you have to reload or if you have any other distractions.
I have seen many instances where the handgun or rifle or shotgun is already up at eye level when clearing, but do the sights really get used at such close proximity when the adrenalin is pumping?
 
Textbook of Pistols and Revolvers

MG Julian S. Hatcher, 1935:

I'm going to quote Gen Hatecher: Some may not like it, but his statements are as valid today as they were when he wrote those words.

"Many practical users of pistols and revolvers are fond of making fun of target shooting, and the advice given on how to learn this branch of the sport. Such an attitude is well understood by the psychologist. It is founded in the unconscious jealousy and feeling of inferiority that the poor shot feels when he sees a well trained marksman making scores out of his power to equal. Unconsciously he will try to belittle thaqt accomplishment that he does not possess, so that he will seem to his audience to be just as important and well quuipped as the good marksman whom he ridicules."

The practical shooter not using his sights, who learned to shoot without any target practice is likely to possess only a very sketchy degree of accuracy. He is discribed as a trigger snatcher, registering a large percentage of shots on a man size target at ten feet, but likely to have many misses at targets at twice that distance.

The target shooter, using sights who has graduated to the practical state is likely be a first-class marksman at either slow or rapid fire target shooting, or at standing or moving targets of any kind at further distances. These men, even the best and fastest of them, use the sights for such shots.

The practical shot who dosnt use sights, and have no experience in of accurate target shooting may find himself at the mercy of a good target shot, AT ANY RANGE.

I have instructed pistol shooting, combat and bullseye in the military, and was an LE fireamrs instrcutor. I discovered in my 30 plus years of firearms instruction, the points of Gen Hatcher are as valid to day as when people started using pistols and revolvers. Those who are taught to use their sights are not handy capped by time. Those who dont are handicapped by distance.

So I'll set back and wathc those whom Gen Hatcher callse Practical shooters condemn me.

Let the games begin.
 
I've seen both target shooter and point shooter have problems. Both at opposite ends of the spectrum.

The point shooter tends to have rather generous size groups and a hard time getting precision.

The target shooter has problems going fast. They tend to go so slow they would have died before they fired a shot.

I don't mind those who point shoot. But to me it's a secondary skill one learns after they have mastered the essentials.

I don't mind target shooters, as long as the learn to snap the gun into alingment so the sights are pretty much on without any adjustment for extreme precision is also a secondary skill to me one learns later.

One can get by without using their sights in 90 percent of the enguagements, and one can get by without point shooting in 90 percent of the enguagements (but at differerent ends of the spectrum!)

And that is why I prefer a form of retention/hip shooting and sighted fire.
 
I've been taught, teach, and rely on both methods (rely on as in use, as in move throughout structures while clearing them), sighted and P&S. Now a'days, optics almost "blend" the two, and has been observed to be almost unfair.

Almost...
 
Last edited:
As Clint Smith wrote in the January/February 2008 American Handgunner:

"It's always argued that in a fight shooters will not look at their sights. I strongly agree -- if no one has ever taught them otherwise. To say that people don't, or won't, look at their sights is wrong. People have, they will in the future, and they'll hit the...target too. The correct alignment of the sights is a learnable skill. Is a textbook perfect sight picture available in every fight? Of course not....In fairness, the sights are only part of the issue -- the jerked on trigger doesn't improve anything."

With the proper training and practice, it's amazing how fast one can acquire a flash sight picture and hit accurately. Learning those techniques and developing proficiency in the use of those techniques also gives you the flexibility to deal with targets at pretty much any distance. Yes, most gun fights are close range affairs. But what do you do if you've focused all your training on engaging targets 5 to 7 yard away; and the one time you really need to use your gun, it's the one in a hundred case in which you must engage an armed threat 10 to 15 yards away and partially behind cover?

The idea behind the flash sight picture is to focus on the front sight quickly and align the sights only as precisely as warranted under the circumstances. At distances on the order of 5 to 7 yards, when the target is the center of mass, a rough alignment will be sufficient to assure good hits (as long as you have good trigger control). As distances increase or the target shrinks, the alignment needs to be more precise. But with training and practice you can develop a good sense of how good is good enough and be able to make instantaneous judgments.

Even when one has been taught to look at the sights, how much has he actually practiced quickly seeing the adequate sight picture and acting reflexively, without conscious thought, on the rough sight picture? As another trainer, Bennie Cooley, once told me, "It's not that I shoot quicker than you do. It's that I see quicker."

I often wonder if the reason there are so many misses in fights has less to do with the particular technique that shooter has been taught, but the fact that he hasn't trained sufficiently for the technique to become truly reflexive.

And whether you use the sights or point shooting techniques to direct the muzzle of the gun in line with the particular part of the target you want to hit, if you don't have trigger control, your muzzle will not be in line with the part of the target you want to hit when the bullet leaves the barrel of your gun -- and you will miss. But if you have controlled the trigger properly, you will hit.
 
how many that preach that you must use your sights have ever had a gun pulled on them by someone that was intent on shooting them?
 
how many that preach that you must use your sights have ever had a gun pulled on them by someone that was intent on shooting them?
Click to expand...

Sonny, DONT GO THERE: I've been there, used my sights in a dark little tunnel in SE Asia, wouldnt be here if I didn't.

End of story
 
in close quarters combat or in long range combat?

and what with the sonny, cause i have been there also......old guy....
 
who ever came up with me saying don't use sights? how many of you assume instead of just taking the question for what it is?
 
I cant tell you what works best because I am only myself.

What I can tell you is if you practice point shooting, and then go to use your optics/sights, you SHOULD find your sights going exactly where it should be as you raise up. This isnt something you'll discover the day you start, but after going through mag after mag. We are taught that if its about 10m or less, to look over the sights. Thats not CQB schoolhouse training, just rifleman training. In MOUT and sim round training I find myself point shooting with good success. With optics at 25 yards or less I tend to find myself bringing my weapon up, looking through it and centering the target in my FOV opposed to aligning the sight. Seems a bit faster and works for me. When its about 5 yards its all point shooting when I have an ACOG.

What it comes down to is what works for you. It makes no sense to be really fast with your point shooting if your going to miss, and it makes no sense to line your sights if your going to get hit before you fire.
 
To add on, I dont have much training with pistols, well not as much as some one here. The training I have gotten however stressed the form and stance so that when you snap up your natural point of aim is what you are going to hit. It works for me, but I dont have the time behind a pistol as I do behind an m16 or m4, so take it for what its worth.

-Max
 
If I draw my sidearm and bring it straight up to the target,
I find my sight actually aligned— well, sometimes off with
a millimeter. However, in CQB that would have still hit
the target.

I use both eyes open when I do draw and fire techniques.
 
I believe with enough practice and lots of use with any piece of equipment, you tend to learn it's intricacies and learn ways of using it more efficiently than almost any training could provide.
You learn "shortcuts" if you will and what subtle actions provide what given results that enhance your performance. So I guess there is really no wrong answer as each individual finds their own personal "way" of being their most accurate as fast as they are capable.
 
Cheetah-lagra said:
If I draw my sidearm and bring it straight up to the target, I find my sight actually aligned...
Click to expand...
I've found that as well. With practice, you don't have to go looking for your sights. They will be "right there."

Maximus856 said:
...The training I have gotten however stressed the form and stance so that when you snap up your natural point of aim is what you are going to hit....
Click to expand...
I've been taught that, with a handgun especially, in some situations you won't have the luxury of being able to assume a usual stance. It's a good idea to practice shooting from unconventional postures and positions. IPSC and IDPA are not good tactical training, but they do give you a chance to practice shooting fast and accurately from unconventional postures.
 
Unfortunately I have been in a number of situations at different ranges in my military career, mainly in a three year stint with the Polizei in Germany. I found in looking back after the incidents that I instinctively used the "point shoot" method where the distance was what you find indoors, and used the sights when the distances were over 15 yards or so. I'm a big proponent of "one shot on target is vastly better than 1000 shot into the air" line of thinking. At close distances, the point shooting used by someone well practiced with their weapon and well disciplined with proper training is more than sufficient. The mind plays the bigger part here in my experiences. It's natural human nature to duck and flinch etc when someone is throwing something at you or shooting at you. It works sometimes with the throwing thing, but seldom helps in the shooting thing. The person who can focus on the target that's the most immediate threat and stand in there while putting rounds effectively on target is the one who walks out. There are many factors in a violent confrontation that determine who comes out and who doesn't, and most of them have to do with your mental state which inevitably controls your physical reactions.
This is turning into a book. I'll stop now.
Sarge
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top