Front Sight Press AND Quick Kill??

Status
Not open for further replies.
Obiwan, actually this particular tech is not trendy

As I wrote to you and others it has been around for a long time.

R.B. Has also related to everyone that it has been around for quite some time.
I was trained in it in the 60's and 70's by the LE Org. that I was with.
It is a good 'great' tech and it is very effective at the ranges I have been talking about.

Like you have said though, training and continuing practice is the key to it. And any other type of self defense...
Practice and train. This one is a real good tool to put in your git kit.

I believe you are very correct when you advise to get your sights on them fast.
But while doing that, a few down stream with this tech maybe the difference between life and death.
For the person who use's it as a tech (tool) for their defense.

Harley
 
Oh...by trendy I didn't mean new...just ....trendy

The names change but the song remains the same....remember fistfire:confused:

And many of the approaches are very very close to sighted fire
(ie: the weapon is in the visual plane ) We can talk for ours about target focus/weapon focus/soft-hard focus/hocus focus

But if you are standing in a weaver/iso stance with the weapon at eye level.....that is sighted fire in my book...which won't ...unfortunately sell books:D

And as I said before ...what I call body indexed shooting has its' place....and sighted fire is approporiate for everything else.IMHO


Where I generally see the true point shooting (hip shooting) advocates flounder is when they have to make a longer range shot under truly sub-optimum conditions. Mess with their stance and they can't get "in the zone"

Provide them with a very obscured target ...same problem...generally
 
I would not use the word trendy. I would go with the word timely. Threat focus shooting systems always come back into use whenever we are at war. The neccesity to make hits on the fly without taking the time for sights verification is an absolute must in combat and once we are at war, people always scramble back to the threat focus systems that were born out of combat.

The "frontsight only" trend is a peace time trend, born out of competition. It is a trend that is popular when there is no one shooting back at the users.

Of course our disagreement is purely semantics. It is obvious by your posts that you use threat focus techniques, but you perfer to not call it what it is. That's cool, call it whatever you want, but don't use threat focus techniques and disparage it at the same time. That sends a very confusing message to those that have not closed their minds to threat focus shooting.

You have obviously made up your mind, and there is nothing I can say to change that. I have known many people just like you, many of them are my close friends. Talk will never change anything with people such as this. That is why I put my closed minded friends into FOF. There is nothing more fun than taking a "sights only" guy and showing him a world he never knew existed. Watching their eyes turn as wide as saucers, totally fix on me, and seeing them shoot from positions well below their line of sight, as I go on the attack.

After the confrontation, they know what I was talking about, they know that they were wrong. As I walk back to them, you can just see the embarassment. In a very polite and caring voice I ask them "what did you see?" This is where I usually get a "F--- you!":D Then I teach them some threat focus shooting skills.
 
Last edited:
When your in a real shoot situation, your not going to use your sights, you might as well file them off. Most shootings are 3 to 10 yards and at that range your going to point shoot, and your not going to place every bullet in the kill zone. Take for example a recent shooting in my area. 54 round went down range from 4 different officers. 3 found thier mark. These officers were using pistols and AR's. Of course the three that did hit the subject fatally wounded him. I seriosly doubt these officers used thier sights. They were being fired at and i'm sure they just pointed and sprayed as many rounds as possibly.

I train with my sights, but i spend more time point shooting. As long as I can place all my rounds in a man shaped target, I am happy. Remember three shots in tight group is not going to stop a threat as quick as several rounds hitting several different organs.

Good luck and be safe.
 
You are correct there superman

One in the Liver. One in the Spleen. One in the Heart. Those are a few organs that really count.

I remember a shooting where the first round caught the guy in the pubic bone he doubled up and the second one went in a lung, the liver and a kidney, slight angle across the body. Expired at the scene.

Some are not as good, like 8 shots fired and no hit. Susp started screaming don't shoot, don't shoot. Since they could not hit the guy they quit and he gave up.

Sometimes you are lucky and don't have to kill someone. Paper work is hell and the monday morning quarterbacking will make you very cautious, so cautious you might not shoot the next time. Pretty scary when your partner just watchs and returns not one round. Happens quite a bit.

Some are not prone to shoot others are. The trick is you don't know till it counts.

Harley
 
Superman and Harley, those are perfect examples of why people need threat focus skills. If you can not get to the sights and you do not have threat focus skills, you will revert to spray and pray.

Spray and pray is not a threat focus skill. It is what a "sights only" guy will do when the reality sets in that they do not have the necessary skills to make the hits, while being focused on the person that is trying to take their life.
 
"The names change but the song remains the same....remember fistfire"

Yes I do, thats not the same song you are listening to here though. That statement would lead me to believe you do lack the understanding necessary to hold an intelligent conversation on the subject of QK or threat focused methodologies and tend to lump them all together.

"But if you are standing in a weaver/iso stance with the weapon at eye level.....that is sighted fire in my book."

And if the weapon is at that level, you probably should be using the sights.

What about not having sights on the gun and the gun 4-8 inches below eye level and still making the hits? Still sighted fire to you?

"Where I generally see the true point shooting (hip shooting) advocates flounder is when they have to make a longer range shot under truly sub-optimum conditions. Mess with their stance and they can't get "in the zone"

My guess?, You don't know any true threat focused advocates nor have seen any use their skills.

Any "true point shooting", as you put it [ from the hip ] will only be used when it is appropriate to do so. Which leads me back to having a hard time believing you have seen true pointshooters anywhere if that is what you actually saw someone attempting to do from the hip.

My guess?, You don't know any true threat focused advocates nor have seen any use their skills.

"Floundering" is usually caused by a lack of understanding when and where certain techniques would be beneficial on the street in a defensive situaion involving a firearm, and using something at an inappropriate time when another technique is the correct solution.

"Provide them with a very obscured target ...same problem...generally"

Thats not the time to use hip shooting.

"Reality is that you may not be able to get to your sights and to be a truely well rounded shooter you need threat focus skills out past contact distances"

Good for you....but.......

That is not my reality"

It would seem, it's not your reality because your opinion is based on presumptions and not any real experience in threat focused methods out there.

No one is advocating not using the sights when appropriate. No one is advocating removing the sights. No one is advocating that sights are not a necessity at times and should not be used when possible.

Your statements seem to counter point comments not made or advocated by anyone here.

True threat focused shooters [ what you call point shooters ] know both how to use their sights effectively, how to use the tool in their hand without making use of sights to get hits, and when the situation dictates they do not have to, all based on time and distance requirements.

In your own words, "That is what training is for"

Robin Brown
 
Last edited:
Steve2276 quoted me:
“I suspect not as the sights are used but not in focus and distances implied are about 5ft to several times that. The sights are used, but different from what I have come across before.”

Thanks for the helpful clarifying edit comment -- substitute ‘barrel is’ for ‘sights are’. It was actually more like ‘barrel awarness.’ My hasty words got in the way of communication.

The snub and I will play this tune again in a few days. My only concern about QK is that it may degrade sight aligned and FSP action, but I really doubt it. Too many personal sports experiences suggest otherwise.

‘Four legs good, two legs baaaaad.'
;)
 
Riverkeeper

I like to go to the range alone, I focus, I shoot, I practice.
I is not we and you are, alone. ( I said that just a moment ago on another thread but it is true...to the bone.)

Sports and all is fine, fire teams are great. But in that moment of time and truth, it is you and your ability.

Brings to mind Sgt. Ralph Gillete RIP. He was one tough hombre and died of natural causes. A True LAPD legend. I am honered to have worked with him, he was one with nerves of steel and basic raw courage.

Harley
 
If you have any questions at all k9lwt, you know how to get a hold on me. ;)

Here is a little something I wrote up once I had the training and the knowledge.

Breaking it Down

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Threat focus shooting is something that is best done without thinking about it. It is a technique that is best shown, then done. That is the truth of the matter, but because of this it is often seen as some sort of parlor trick or worse, something that is not accurate or dependable. I would like to take an approach to this that I have not seen before. That approach being, to try to break down why threat focus shooting actually works. By breaking it down to it's "bare bones" we could take some of the mystique away.

There are many elements that go into accurate threat focused shooting and by knowing exactly what those elements are we will see that we are actually using a very well developed aiming system. By knowing that it is a well developed aiming system, the confidence in the technique will soar and when the time comes that you need it, it will be there like a trusted friend.

First lets look at the elements of sighted fire.

(1)Kinesthetic alignment

(2)Sight alignment

(3)Sight picture

This is a very simple and highly effective form of sighting in. But it is also something that is, in the most part, done on a conscious level.


Now let us look at the elements of threat focus shooting.

(1) Understanding and ability to square up.

(2) Understanding and ability to use the centerline.

(3) Understanding and ability to draw "Parallel to the ground."

(4) Understanding and ability to use the nose index.

(6) Understanding and ability to use a body index.

(5) Kinesthetic alignment.

(7) Use of peripheral vision verification.

(8) Use of ones natural ability to point your finger at an object.

(9) Use of ones natural hand/eye coordination.

(10) Absolute confidence, knowing this all adds up to a very accurate system.

When broken down into it's elements it hardly looks mystical anymore. It seems to be a highly developed aiming system. Another thing to take into consideration is that almost all of this is done on a subconscious level. These are elements that you do not have to think about. That is why threat focused shooting is best done without thinking about it. Once you know the elements, trained with the elements, it all comes together in a micro second with zero conscious thought. This is why threat focused shooting excels in dynamic confrontations. It is a natural human response.

Thoughts, comments?
 
Thoughts, comments?
Click to expand...

My "thoughts and "comments" are that you guys are lagging behind the self defense shooting curve.
Willing to argue minutiae, but hardly with cutting edge ideas....especially the guys with the old eyes.

Why am I such a proficient self defense shooter?

Because, with regular combined practice and surprise targets, I point shoot out to about 15 feet, laser sight shoot out to about 50 feet and sight shoot out to distances that I would tend not to engage unless I had no other choice.

Recreational/game shooters are concerned with rigid form, practiced stances, breathing and other trivial details that have little to do with sudden self defense scenarios that could likely involve dodging bullets.

Point shooters/laser sight shooters - are concerned with getting as many hits on target as possible, day or night, in the shortest amount of time and even in compromised shooting positions. (e.g. on one's side, back, belly...around, under and over obstacles and simply 'shooting the laser dot')

So, let's all get on the edu-train and get our tactics up to 21st century speed. Live and learn, fellas!

Y'all can start here:
http://www.crimsontrace.com/mtsvid.wmv

.
 
Skyguy, Your statements are based on ignorance. You have no idea who I am, what I do, or what I've done. You seem to think that you are head and shoulders above everyone else with your little regimen. That makes you appear to be very arrogant.

Why not try to shed your ignorance by asking some people some questions before you start making asinine statements, since you have no idea what you are talking about.
 
Sweatnbullets, Your statements are based on ignorance.

You have no idea who I am, what I do, or what I've done. You seem to think that you are head and shoulders above everyone else with your little regimen. That makes you appear to be very arrogant.

Why not try to shed your ignorance by asking some people some questions before you start making asinine statements, since you have no idea what you are talking about.

Go reread what I wrote, learn a little....and don't let your ego get the best of ya!
 
"My "thoughts and "comments" are that you guys are lagging behind the self defense shooting curve.
Willing to argue minutiae, but hardly with cutting edge ideas....especially the guys with the old eyes."

A broad brush statement (you guys.) That insult peoples intelligence (lagging behind the self defense curve.) That shows your arrogance (hardly with cutting edge ideas.) Then back into ignorance (especially with old eyes.)

Three of the four quotes speak for themselves. The fourth about cutting edge is ridiculous. It is my opinion that almost everything there is to know about fighting (including gunfighting) has already been known a long time ago. Cutting edge has just been taking old techniques and ideas and repackaging and renaming them.

If you think that all we (you guys) do is point shoot, you are seriously mistaken.

Since you think I did not understand your post....that is probably because it was not written well. Did you not just insult "you guys?"

How about you reread your post and clarify exactly what you are trying to say without the broad brush approach.
 
Gentlemen, keep it civil and impersonal, please! This is a good thread, but I'll be forced to Quick Kill it if the personal attacks continue ;) .
 
Skyguy—
The video on CT showed some great and difficult shooting by what appear be fine instructors.

A few months ago after messing with CT on the store’s blue plastic faux handgun decided to wait some more. It ‘seemed’ FSP and even sight alignment could be achieved as fast in the store, BUT WITHOUT ANY TRAINING, ANY IDEA OF WHAT I WAS DOING OR SPECIFIC EXPERIENCE. It was of course not a fair test and the advantages of CT during dark situations, strong hand injuries and impossible body positions are persuasive.

I’d already decided to rent a CT handgun tomorrow at the range as well as do some real QK drill – off hand, awkward positions etc. My assumptions is that after some intelligent practice, CT might ‘shine’.

In order to get the CT handgun into a shooting position, a point shoot/semi sighted -type presentation initially seems appropriate – tho’ anything that works….works. Any quick suggestions or tips?

BTW – it also appears that QK can be ‘done on the run’, in tough positions and in almost dark conditions….tho’ probably not as accurately... I do not know.

Thanks for your contribution.
 
I believe that all aspects of shooting must be embraced in order to reach the fullest level; there is no one magic technique superior to everything. There are times when using sights is more effective, and there are times when pointshooting is more effective. Learn to use both. It's no different than when people ask "should I have one eye open or both eyes open when engaging a target."

The ability to adapt quickly to a situation and respond with the best technique quickly and efficiently is at the heart of all schools of shooting. We'd be better served to humble ourselves and try instead to understand the benefits of all techniques instead of degrading one over the other. Understanding comes only through experience; experience comes only through practice.

Theories do not suffice in combat.
 
Any quick suggestions or tips?
Click to expand...

Yes. Get a CT Lasergrip on your gun....and you'll never look back.

They're in use by the military and many, many agencies. Lasergrips are the new technology that works.

Of course, it's important that you be proficient in the basic fundamentals of shooting, but the Lasergrips save a lot of time/money spent on redundant training that differs in name only.

This will help with understanding:
http://www.crimsontrace.com/5things.pdf

This holds a wealth of information:
http://www.crimsontrace.com/

This tells it like it is:
http://www.crimsontrace.com/mtsvid.wmv


.
 
"with regular combined practice and surprise targets, I point shoot out to about 15 feet, laser sight shoot out to about 50 feet and sight shoot out to distances that I would tend not to engage unless I had no other choice."

Interestingly noted above.

"Regular combined practice" to be able to pointshoot to 15 feet, laser shoot to 50 feet and sight shoot out to distances you would not normally engage unless left no choice.

Had a dentist in today from Tucson for QK training. In two hours he was good to go to 30 feet without sights using my sightless 45 gov model. Hits were at 90% or better at that distance.

The truck was 46 feet from the plates we were banging and on several reloads of mags, he wanted to try it from there. 90% or better from the truck as well, with a gun that had NO sights on it after the 3rd hour of training [ the confidence level Sweatnbullets mentions as #10 was increasing exponentially at that point for him ].

Two torso plates were being hit with mundane repeatability at 3 hours from 15-46 feet by this guy who I considered a "fair" shooter at best.
Fair in estimation as I had to adjust his handhold, and trigger control before he could progress to where he was at today with me.

Not a bad thing, just something he needed to work on and be tweeked as he had not had any formal instruction in any handgun previously.

Then I worked him on hip shooting at 6-8 feet from the draw on the two plates. He needed some time to figure this out but in another hour he was at about 75-80% success drawing to one and swinging to the other, staying at the hip.

"even in compromised shooting positions."

Interestingly noted above.

The last part of the day he was shooting behind his back without turning around, and learned how to turn the 45 into a slow full auto emptying the mag quickly.

We got back to my house to ungear and clean the guns and I discovered he had a laser in the left rubber grip panel of his defender 45. Had not seen it all day until he lit it up on the garage wall checking/verifying the QK technique with the laser.

I asked him which he thought would be faster and he stated he was faster today with QK than he ever had been with the laser. He also stated the laser was very hard to see during the day and he had decided to use his sights during the day and the laser in low light if needed.

So, here we have a fair shooter, once corrected in handhold and trigger control who was hitting 90% or better out to 30 feet in hours. Then hitting 90% or better at 46 feet in another hour when his confidence in his ability to hit without sights had increased.

Lasers can fail, they are mechanical devices. One can become dependant on them to the detriment of actual skills building in some areas.

IMO, lasers are useful training aid in the development of ones handhold, trigger control and eye/hand coordination. Useful perhaps in low light, but certainly not any more useful in total darkness than iron sights.

They are not something I need to rely on past a certain distance, say 15 feet. They are not something I need to rely on to 30 feet, nor even 60 feet [ admittedly I have a lot of practice at this in the last 24 years of using QK ].

Lasers, good. Good crutches, like sights. There is a time and place for sights, and a time to go to guns without them. Those who have the knowledge of QK have no need for sights or lasers to distances others may deem impossible.

Look to the student today, in 4 hours he was 90% or better out to 46 feet. I was surprised, not because QK worked out to that distance reliably [ which I know it does ], but surprised that his "fair" skills in weapon handling could be brought to that proficiency level in half a day.

Learning to rely and use your own skills seems to me to be more reliable than a mechanical device with all it's inherent liability of not being there when you need it.

Murphy follows us everywhere. The less one relies on anything other than their own skills and training, the harder it is for Murphy to interject himself at the most inopportune time.

When yours or anothers life hangs in the balance, would you rather rely on your own skills and training to survive or the mechanical device of a laser which you may not be able to "see" when you have trained to need it?

Afterall, one lives or dies by the choices they make in life. Choose your paths wisely folks.

Robin Brown
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top