Does anyone here practice point shooting?

Even a marginal hit, and maybe even a near miss, can reset the OODA loop of the person with whom you have engaged. An OODA loop is the time it takes a person to Observe, Orient, Decide and Act. Perpetually resetting someone's OODA loop is a great way to survive a gunfight. Each OODA reset can buy you more than enough time to put another shot into the fight, meanwhile the bad guy might be unable between resets even to fire his weapon or advance his assault. Properly done, resetting the OODA loop becomes a vicious momentum that terminates the fight in your favor.

This is why I point shoot, this is why I move and shoot, this is why if I shoot a bad guy once it is likely I will shoot him to the ground, however many rounds that takes. This is why I train. This is how I live.
 
Aaron,
Yes, Kirby tended to keep that BAR slung across the front of his body, and blaze away from the hip. The original assault rifle. . . ?

RedState--I like your application of the OODA loop concept to individual SD. I was trained to apply it in tactical & operational planning. . .and I should have thought of applying it to HD before now! Well-done!

And like you, I fully expect to shoot a burst if I ever fire at all. Then, depending on what I observe and whether my daughters are at home in the other bedroom wing, I'll maneuver to new cover. . .either forwards to cut him off, or backwards to my "New Yawk reload." :D
 
aarondhgraham said:
I can't remember him aiming that BAR very often.
Click to expand...
That's because with a BAR, he didn't have to! :cool:

redstategunnut said:
Even a marginal hit, and maybe even a near miss, can reset the OODA loop of the person with whom you have engaged. An OODA loop is the time it takes a person to Observe, Orient, Decide and Act. Perpetually resetting someone's OODA loop is a great way to survive a gunfight. Each OODA reset can buy you more than enough time to put another shot into the fight, meanwhile the bad guy might be unable between resets even to fire his weapon or advance his assault. Properly done, resetting the OODA loop becomes a vicious momentum that terminates the fight in your favor.
Click to expand...

This is an excellent point. Anything you can do to cause your opponent some sort of confusion, distraction or indecision is in your favor. Move and shoot - that gives him a geometic/lead-computing problem to solve before shooting effectively. A police officer once told me (between giggles) that a robbery victim screamed in a lisping voice, "Oh my heavens, you can't hurt my princess!" (and he was alone) which confused the bad guy enough that he could move, draw and shoot him in right side through to a kidney with a .38 Super. Certainly even minor hits may cause their OODA loop to reset, but I'd never count on that. It should be something they couldn't have planned for or an action that's unpredictable.

Anyone remember an old Police Story episode in which Lloyd Bridges was the officer chasing a robbery suspect into a parking lot? He ducked down and saw the guy's feet behind a car several stalls away. He poised himself and then made a turkey call -- "gobble-gobble-gobble" -- and the bandit stood up and got waxed. It was so unusual the (idiot) robber stood up looking for a real turkey, not realizing it was himself.


(n.b. The police story episode was penned by Joe Wambaugh from a 1960's incident in which an officer actually did that. He also took a line from the shooting inquiry where a senior sergeant says "gobble-gobble-gobble and he went for it?
 
. . .and the moral of that story is to pay close attention to war movies! Any bets that the cop who gobbled got the idea from the old 1940 movie, Sergeant York? (Not to spoil a good story, but I've read several books on York, and there's no indication he "gobbled" at the Germans.)
 
I have also read a lot on this topic (Applegate, F&S, Jordan, Cirillo, and old and current stuff from professional trainers). As a result, I do practice point shooting but typically only at distances out to five yards. At this close range, speed is paramount so practicing ensures better hits in a real world deal. At distances beyond that out to 12 yards or so, I really practice to get that flash sight, but still have both eyes open, with the main focus on the threat. Beyond that, its all sight focused for me. I also believe that training to use the sights is very helpful when it comes to point shooting. I have seen a study where very proficient police shooters, who always used sights to train, did well in a force on force exercise in which all reported involuntarily not using the sights (they were being shot at with SIM training rounds). The reason was that, due to extensive practice, the pistol was in the same location as it was for sighted firing, only difference being where the eyes were focusing.

As far as hip shooting, I do practice it regularly, but only at very close range distances and then only for one or two shots before backing off and bringing the pistol up to line of sight. Kind of like this very realistic movie clip (minus the reprehensible coup de grace of course).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jmKR6evZRQQ

Bottom line: Practice it, don't condemn it. It is a gunfighting skill not a marksman ship skill.

One last thing, I have to say that the single action revolver is completely inadequate as a self defense carry piece in the modern age. Romantic, yes, quick on the draw, of course. However, it compares so poorly to the double action revolver and semi-auto that there really isn't a contest. There are some world class guys like Bob Munden and a few others who spent all day every day shooting it but they're the exception. I love single actions due to the Cowboy factor but not for SD unless that is all that is available.
 
An excellent way to practice point shooting is with a moderately powered airgun.
Being able to see the pellet or bb on it's way to the target really helps.
 
Point shooting:
I practice point shooting 75% of the time I am shooting. Nothing gives better confidence.
I taught more than a few point shooting. Some of the women are damn accurate.
 
Lloyd missed an opportunity,,,

He ducked down and saw the guy's feet behind a car several stalls away. He poised himself and then made a turkey call -- "gobble-gobble-gobble" -- and the bandit stood up and got waxed.
Click to expand...

Personally, I would have shot him in the ankle,,,
Hard to run form me on a wounded foot,,,
Also messes up his aim.
 
An interesting experience yesterday evening,,,

Long story short,,,
I took a lady friend to the range yesterday after work,,,
She has never shot a handgun of any type before yesterday.

I had a poster of the Twilight vampires glued to a cardboard sheet,,,
I set that up as a target at about 5 yards from the line,,,
I loaded my 4" Model 18 with Federal bulk.

We started with a cylinder or three of aimed fire,,,
Just so she could get the feel of the handgun,,,
Then I told her to just point and shoot.

For the first cylinder or six her shots were all over the place,,,
But after 30 to 40 rounds she started zeroing in,,,
By the third box of .22 she was on target.

I set up a new target (Hannah Montana this time),,,
Holding the revolver near her hip,,,
She hit the guitar body,,,
Almost every shot.

Then we switched to a different revolver,,,
I brought out my 2" Model 34,,,
Same results as before,,,
Hannah went down.

So what's the point of that exercise,,,
It was a convenient event to try a theory,,,
Take a new shooter and try some point shooting,,,
In this case my lady friend got real good at it right off the bat.

I'm giving up aimed fire for a while,,,
I'm going to concentrate all of my efforts on point shooting,,,
Of course I will concentrate on this using a limited selection of handguns.

I'll use my Model 36/Model 34 pairing,,,
And my Model 15/Model 18 pair.

BTW, don't laugh at my selection of targets,,,
I was in a Dollar store last month,,,
They had a big sale on posters,,,
Five for a one dollar bill,,,
I bought twenty of em.

.
 
I practice hip shots, firing from retention, and firing between the draw and sighted grip. I only practice this at less than 3 yds, as given any more distance, I'll be moving and shooting with aimed fire. I guess the answer is I don't do point shooting by definition. I don't find it practical at all, and feel it's a fall-back for inexperience.
 
.357,
If it works, how is it a "fall-back for inexperience"?

I'll accept the description of "inexperienced," if you wish, because I don't claim to outshoot anyone on this forum. And after all, I've probably shot no more than 10,000 rds. of pistol in my life, never in competition, and never in combat.

But would you say that Fairbairn & Sykes, plus Applegate, would develop and use a system that was as flawed as you imply? Granted, they specifically were trying to train inexperienced people as quickly as possible. . .which is exactly what armies, police forces, and most general trainers try to accomplish. (With a whole lot less than the 10K or so rds. I've fired.) And their system clearly worked/works for that. But they used these approaches themselves, and they certainly saw enough tight spots to not rate the description of "inexperienced."

Do you disagree with their assessments of human reactions when faced with close-range threats, and if so, how & why? And how does that shape your approach to shooting?

PS--Bill Jordan used point shooting, but a completely different version than F&S + Applegate. Jordan relied on muscle memory developed thru thousands of rounds of practice, so that his shot went off at the split-second it was pointed where he wanted it. I doubt many can duplicate his proficiency with any less practice, and that much practice is essentially the province of the professional. It's not a system that can be adopted on a large scale.
 
Just because I make the statement, doesn't make me the authority on the issue. My thought on it is that there is no single "right way" to train. A person should use a method that works best for his/herself. If an instructor tries to tell you "this is how you need to shoot to win a gunfight," then you need to pack up and get a refund.

My personal thoughts, based on my experience with many different methods of "combat" shooting over the last 11 years is that point shooting has a very limited role. There are two main reasons I don't advocate this method:
-bad shot placement
-liability for bad shot placement or missed shots

These can be big problems with point shooting, as your group size opens up exponentially as you move away from the target, and moving and firing becomes difficult as well. Shot placement is proven to be the most important aspect of stopping someone with bullets.

As I said, I find unaimed fire practical in some situations, such as extremely close quarters, or for necessary speed off the draw (with a good backstop!!!) but out at 20 feet, you should be using your sights, and I see no practical reason why a person wouldn't. There is a lot more to winning a fight than getting off the first shot, unless you're having a duel at high noon.

If some folks become so proficient that they can group decently at 7yds or more, then I say more power to them...keep up the good work. In my experience though, I have seen no one who can shoot with any true accuracy at 7yds using the point shooting method. I consider accurate as keeping 90% of your shots in the x-ring of a standard LE B-27 silhouette target. Why so tight? You will likely shoot your best at the range against paper, and your worst against a real person firing at you. Just to play the other side of this for a moment, I have a friend who got into a firefight and did his best shooting under perssure (all of his shots made good contact, including a head shot). He qualifies every time on the range, but is no great shot.

As for the training aspect, no police force I know of teaches point shooting in the academy. No military personnel I know have been taught it either in training. Members of my old dept.'s SWAT team did not use it either. I have seen classes offered to LE for "instinctive shooting", but they were not required.

I don't think it's the "wrong way" to do anything. I just have seen its limitations...but who am I to tell someone else what to do?
 
.357SIG,
You're both a gentleman and a scholar, shown by your well-reasoned thought process. Since both you & I train to point-shoot at close ranges and use sights at greater ranges, the main differences seem to be that I'm more comfortable with using P-S out a bit farther, I consciously prefer a system that requires less experience (most esp. for my wife & daughters), and that my underlying assumption is HD and yours is LEO (I think). I believe this makes me emphasize P-S first, sighted fire second, and you reverse the priorities.

I agree with you completely that there's no set & single way to win a gunfight; shot placement is crucial; and I share a healthy respect for the guys who do this for a living.

For me, coming primarily from the perspective of HD, holsters aren't an issue--the gun is in my hand. Quick reaction at close range is a critical issue. Liability for misses is a legitimate concern, but far less for me in a rural setting. I think that P-S within its limitations is actually a good way to hit, especially in low light and under the highest stress.

Re. shot placement. I assume my target is moving & in low light. Thus, hitting CNS isn't a function of precision shooting, but of achieving several solid center mass hits quickly. If I can P-S my way to fast center-mass hits at close ranges, using "aimed but unsighted fire" (Applegate's term), that's my best chance. Even with side shots. Specific location of the impacting bullet is largely due to chance, under my set of assumptions. Indeed, isn't most training "center mass" for these reasons? And if most "stops" are indeed psychological, a very great advantage generally goes to him who shoots first, starts hitting quickly, and keeps shooting. Foolproof? No. High percentage? Yes.

Re. training, my Army service was 1981-2005, and I sure hope pistol training has improved. Our instruction was basically "hold with two hands" and hit X number to qualify. An hour's practice with close-range P-S would have made most officers & senior NCOs I knew far more capable; most lacked all confidence with pistols.

For modern-day LEOs, the ability to point-shoot at close range seems a necessity, and you indeed incorporate that. At distances beyond 12-15 yds., F&S + A advised the use of two hands, sights, etc., anyway.

Stress. . . .F&S + A emphasized that their point-shooting systems grew out of their repeated observations that people involved in close-range gunfights faced the threat, crouched, and responded with gross motor movements. (Does modern observation agree? I don't know.) In other words, P-S applied because it maximized use of natural reactions, rather than depending on conscious actions and fine motor skills, or the much larger amounts of training necessary to ingrain those as reactions.

I think modern police strive to develop these different responses thru far more intensive training than in past eras, but what does their high miss percentage tell us? As I've stated elsewhere, I distinguish between "good" misses (suppressive fire, or taking a tough shot) and "bad" ones (spray & pray), so this isn't intended as a low blow. Do most LEOs receive serious training in point-shooting at close ranges, as you have? If they don't. . .how many of their misses are at extremely close range? Is there evidence that their training conflicts with their instincts, causing misses? Again, I don't know.

As for civilian HD, it seems to me that P-S is the place to start, and "sighted" fire is a more advanced technique that is the more dispensable of the two. For what it's worth, every point shooter I've read emphasizes that people should learn precision shooting, too, and I agree. . .if it's possible. And of course, to each his own choices, and let's hope that any/all of us does whatever the situation requires, if the SHTF.
 
I try not to make people feel like they're wrong with their beliefs as much as possible, provided they are not pushing other people who don't know better (such as a new shooter asking a question). No thanks needed, but I appreciate it. Honestly, my "sighted fire" is not traditional anyway. I shoot with my focus on the target, not the front sight, but the sight picture is correct...it's just the sights are blurry and the target is clear. I feel it is more important to keep my eyes on the target and surrounding area, and that can't be done if I pinpoint my focus on a sight.

I do feel point shooting is great for wives that will not make shooting a hobby, etc., which is where the "inexperience" comment comes from. After all, that is inexperience, right? ;):cool: It is also a great method for people who have visual difficulty and cannot work with the sights. My wife is not a shooter, but does come to the range with me once in a while to practice. She has her own Beretta PX4 9mm, and is looking to get the HK P2000SK LEM 9mm for carry (she dislikes Glock and S&W after trying them).

All this shooting stuff aside, I feel tactics are more important than anything else once the situation arises. Cover and movement should be priority #2, right behind the most important thing...not getting shot! I feel actually using the gun is distant 3rd on the list. Having said that, I can't deny that shooting skill is very important, which is why I formulated my opinion in the first place. There's no such thing as "good enough" in weapons use and tactics.

I actually take blame in the fact that I made a short statement without giving any reasoning as backup evidence. For that, I am sorry.
 
Last edited:
It seems we are on the same page anyway...a lot of people consider "point shooting" as not using the sights at any distance and looking at the target only no matter what. This is the definition I assumed, but it seems you were not using it in that way.

If anything, our posts will help a new reader who may not have any training, so it was not a wasted effort.
 
I'm a firm beliver that by the time you practice the fundimentals enough to the point you should add point shooting to your bag of tricks it'll pretty much already be there.
 
.357,
Not to worry, Internet threads are a difficult place to write , because people want it to be short. . .but short sometimes creates misunderstandings. No hard feelings, and no apologies necessary.

And you're correct, the inexperience of my wife & daughters who aren't looking to train to hard makes the point shooting technique attractive to me, for use with them. My personal first tries at P-S myself, however, were highly successful and very encouraging, and indicated to me that F&S + A were indeed onto something. They also encourage an aggressive, combative, winning mindset, which goes a long way towards winning, and is more important than marksmanship, I believe. Not sure how aggressive I can help my ladies become, but they are all morally convinced of the need, justification and even duty of defending the "good guys." Now, I'm hoping that P-S will help them truly believe they can win in a confrontation. Confidence breeds courage and determination.

I also agree with your view on tactics. Marksmanship falls way behind on the list of priorities. Lots of average marksmen make excellent soldiers and LEOs, because they're in the right place, doing the right things, at the right times. And if it comes to shooting, they have established tactical advantages that tilt the odds in their favor.
 
357,
Just read your #76, and I see what you mean. Anybody who pushes P-S at any and all ranges has passed from tactics & techniques into "religious fervor." :-) And such fervor certainly defies what F&S + A all taught. They (and I) cannot imagine being able to hit reliably with P-S at distances beyond about 12-15 yds. And I also agree with their rationale that the relatively pure instinctual reactions that tend to rule at very close ranges are throttled back when the distances increase, and therefore one has increased ability to decide, choose, aim with sights, use fine motor skills, etc.
 
point

Point shooting - any shooting done without using the sights.
Shooting from the hip = one kind of point shooting.
I practice with snubbies at 3 to seven yards and my baby Browning 25ACP at 3 yards. Gun up, two hand hold, right in front of my face so that it is pointed where I am looking.
The "Churchill method" of wingshooting is a form of point shooting.
Pete
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top