handgun sights in a stress situation

Sights have a place. Having someone rush you from 12 feet away isn't one of them. That's close enough for point shooting. If you can get to full extension you should probably use the sights. There are plenty of instances where full extension would either not be advisable or not possible.
 
Jason Iowa,

The role of the shooter is dramatically different between private citizen carriers and those carrying in service roles. No question or disagreement there. Having said that, all of the guys I referenced above used their handguns inside realistic defensive ranges. One friend said his longest range using a handgun was about 40 feet. Most described situations ranging from 5-30 feet. Among those was a friend going Sig P220 vs AK inside of a room.

When they referenced using sights, it was always in a flash context, except the one LEO describing relatively deliberate aiming after instinctively firing the first three rounds. The sights were useful for them at defensive distances.

There is an asterisk. None of them used sights at contact distances. That makes sense, of course. They weren't at extension in 5 foot gunfights.

You may not have used your sights at close ranges. I believe you when you say that they weren't useful for you. I also believe these friends when they relate their experiences. These are no BS, upstanding guys, who have earned my trust.

After having spoken with them, experienced my own situation, and done a lot of sim work, I wouldn't want to go without sights. Beyond 7 feet or so, I prefer having them for flash reference. Inside that distance, I would almost assuredly not use them. The time it takes to be aware of them at realistic defensive distances is near zero, and hits are worth the investment.
 
My close friend, the late Jim Cirillo was in over a dozen gunfights as a member of the NYPD stakeout unit. He used his sights, from his first gunfight to his last.
 
jason_iowa said:
. Carbines and rifles yes we had lasers and lights/IR etc etc. These were not defensive tools in any way shape or form. SWAT officers generally have more of the sighting tools on their weapons but again they are not using them defensively in most cases.
( I would still consider a carbine a defensive weapon as you said in most cases)

My whole premiss is based on shootings outside of your home by the way. You are under way less scrutiny if the shooting takes place inside your home.

( a defensive shooting is going to be stressful in or out the home)

On a defensive gun I would never use a laser sight. If you practice so little that you need a laser sight then you should probably rethink carrying a weapon at all. Great training tool while dry firing, useless dangerous junk on a carry weapon. Just my opinion based on years of experience in military and law enforcement. With actual combat not mall ninja bs
Click to expand...

(Everyone has an opinion. At the range or target shooting at home, the laser grips are turned off. When gun is doing nightstand duty, the laser is on. I also appreciate the night sights glowing in the dark. My gun lays in the same orientation & distance, but it helps when waking from a dead sleep in a pitch dark room to see exactly where it's at.)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
By jason_iowa;
Military and Law enforcement are completely different applications and rarely defensive. You are sanctioned by the government. You are under much less scrutiny. You are not confined to fear for your life to use lethal force. Its apples and oranges.
Click to expand...

I feel you are wrong. The decision making process, all that leads up to, and follows may be different, but the act of engagement is not greatly different in any material way.
 
A civilian in a non stand your ground state can not use lethal force unless they are in fear for their life and have no means of escape.

Military and law enforcement have no such requirements. While this has gotten completely off topic its frightening to me that people are having trouble with that distinction. Part of carrying a weapon as a civilian is knowing at what point you can use lethal force in your particular state. You do not have the same rights to use lethal force as an LEO.

Again I would stress that people do some research on self defense shootings and the average distances then go to the range and look at a man sized target. 7 yards/21 feet is the distance someone with a knife or other hand weapon can close in the time you can draw and fire. It is VERY CLOSE. You push that to 10 yards/30 ft aka a first down in football which is still very close. You shoot a guy with a knife at that distance and you better have one hell of a good lawyer. You get beyond that and it becomes more and more unlikely that you could not escape a dangerous situation or defend it in court.

So in most close combat situations we're talking very short ranges if you can't draw, point, fire and hit vitals on a man sized target at 21ft with out sights you NEED more range time. It's a simple matter of training and muscle memory. Under stress you react based on how you train. Train enough and you can do it blindfolded <don't do this as a live fire exercise>. Get a SIRT PRO Training Pistol and try it yourself. Great training tool I have gotten a bunch em.
 
jason_iowa said:
...So in most close combat situations we're talking very short ranges if you can't draw, point, fire and hit vitals on a man sized target at 21ft with out sights you NEED more range time...
Click to expand...
And with that much range time, you should be able to get a flash sight picture. With that kind of training, at distances of that sort, a flash sight picture should be no slower.

But at arms length, point shooting from retention would be the way to go.
 
So in most close combat situations we're talking very short ranges if you can't draw, point, fire and hit vitals on a man sized target at 21ft with out sights you NEED more range time. It's a simple matter of training and muscle memory.
Click to expand...

All fine and well on a square range but the circumstances of self-defense vary (movement, obstacles, stability of footing, etc.) and shooting method must adapt to the situation.
 
years ago, when I was able to practice to my hearts content in the desert, I would draw and shoot (double and triple tap) as slow as possible using the sights. Before I knew it I was getting pretty fast as my muscle memory was being created.

I would practice at home with unloaded weapons. I would pic a target, close my eyes and draw - when I opened my eyes the sights were perfectly lined up. This increased my speed and accuracy when at the range.

I tested myself to see if I was using the sights by putting electrical tape on the rear sight. I still hit everything.

Practice, practice, practice, practice, practice and you wont need to think about using them or not, it will come natural
 
Frank Ettin said:
And with that much range time, you should be able to get a flash sight picture. With that kind of training, at distances of that sort, a flash sight picture should be no slower.



But at arms length, point shooting from retention would be the way to go.
Click to expand...


Exactly this.

The difference in flash sight picture or unsighted shooting from extension isn't a time thing, it's just about what your eyes do.
 
God save us from the Tuller drill!!!

The 21 foot "rule" isnt a rule at all... Its a guide line. The real world is not a square range and circs change. If i have my wife with me i may not be able to avoid shooting an edged weapon assailant if he were 35' away. What about if i have my 10 year old daughter. Should i wait till the assailant is closer then 21'

All Dennis Tuller did was show in a quantifiable manner that a knife wielding attacker does not have to be able to touch you to hurt you. It had NOTHING to do with max distance he was a threat.

Back on point (pun intended). The sights exist for a reason. Just like different size hammers and wrenches. If your encounter is so close and fast that you dont need sights then you better have the skill/training/muscle memory to get good hits without them.

If your encounter requires more precision then unsighted fire permits, then you better be able to get the sights aligned to the level needed FAST

As to the civilian vs LEO vs military topic i can tell you that the physical act of gunfighting is identical. The thought process varies a little, but once its time to get on the trigger it dosent matter what "uniform" you are wearing. BDU's or cargo pants and an LL bean shirt over your armor or jeans and a t-shirt.

Everybody thinks its easier in a war zone..... It aint. BTDT

As an example... In post Bremer Iraq under the Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA) a US cilvian contractor could be arrested, jailed, tried and sentenced to an IRAQI prison for any crimes commited in Iraq. If you think the thought of a US citizen spending even 1 day in an Iraqi jail didnt cross our minds before we dropped the hammer on some Haji... Boy are you mistaken. Now truth be told our OGA friends would have prob gotten us ut of the country if the need had arisen. But who wants to bet on that
 
Last edited:
Sharkbite said:
God save us from the Tuller drill!!!

The 21 foot "rule" isnt a rule at all... Its a guide line....
Click to expand...
And it really isn't even a guideline.

Dennis Tueller developed the exercise to test at what distances an assailant with a contact weapon could be a credible threat. The Tueller data can be helpful to a defender who needs to establish that he was reasonable in concluding that someone making threatening gestures with a club had Ability, Opportunity and put him in Jeopardy even if the "assailant" was 20 feet away.

And regarding the duty to retreat (where it's the law): One would be required to retreat before using lethal force when he could do so safely. This of course could raise all sorts of questions about whether the defender indeed knew he had a safe way to escape or was reasonable in concluding that he did not. And the defender's decision, which he had to make in an instant under stress, might then be second guessed by members of a jury who have all the time in the world.
 
What about those of us with some types of revolvers whose sights are not removeable or easily modifiable? Case in point my M15 revolver. Its a classic so im not going to cut up the integral front sight just to dovetail a tritium/fiber optic sight on. The sight is black front and a adjustable uncolored blade on the back.

Sure in situations were there is enough light, ya I can see them just fine. At night or situations were the light is poor and the target is in front of a dark background and it drowns out the sights.. So im learning to shoot with a light in my hand but because of that light I don't have as good a grip on the handgun so I cant get shots off as fast as I normally can.

Unless someone has found a way to get a full hand grip and hold a light at the same time, please help a brother out.
 
I feel your pain

I started of with a mdl 64 as a duty gun. You think your mdl 15 has hard to see sights?!?!?!

Lots of ways to intergrate a flashlight with a handgun. None allow an uncomprimised grip (at least to some degree). Hence the intergrated lights on semi's

The good news is once a flashlight comes into play the sights get easy to see
 
mordis said:
What about those of us with some types of revolvers whose sights are not removeable or easily modifiable?...
Click to expand...
It's a simple fact that if you choose to use a handgun with sights that are difficult to see you have voluntarily forgone any benefits you could realize with sights that are easy to see. You've created/accepted a disadvantage which you may want to train and practice to overcome as best you can.

Your choice -- your decision.
 
People use what they can afford/are issued and they adapt to it. In the old days we dolloped white correction fluid on the front sights of our service revolvers for 'night work'. My compatriots so armed were in 12-13 shooting incidents over a five year period, where I knew the party(s) involved and spoke with them afterward. Most saw at least their front sight and those prevailed early in the affray.

Mine came in sufficient natural or artificial light to see the sights and I saw them both times. Not a perfect sight picture but 'perfect enough'.
 
...The flash sight-picture involves a glimpse of the sight-picture sufficient to confirm alignment....The target shooter’s gaze at the front sight has proven inappropriate for the bulk of pistolfighting. However, the practical shooter must start at this level and work up to the flash, which becomes reflexive as motor skills are refined. With practice, a consistent firing platform and firing stroke align the sights effortlessly. This index to the target eventually becomes an instantaneous confirmation of the sight-picture.

...Using the flash sight-picture programs the reflex of aligning the weapon’s sights with the target instantly....There is good reason for sights: one needs them to align the barrel with the target reliably....
Click to expand...

That is the best description I have seen of flash sight picture. Add to that a solid repeatable index and you nave an excellent way to deliver VERY fast hits at all but grabbing distance.

Now in Jim Cirillo's books he did write of engaging three robbers at once with a S&W M10 .38 in NYC, hitting all three of them, and he not only saw the sights but remembers seeing the serrations on the front sight.

Now yes at close ranges point shooting can work just as closer ranges hip shooting can work. As I have posted many a time over the years, as a BASIC system a form of sighted fire and a form of retention\on/hip shooting is enough. If master those two will cover the spectrum of zero to maximum handgun range.

Once one becomes proficient with the two, if one wishes to add other techniques to their skill set then by all means do!

And the Tuller drill depends alot on many factors such as reaction time of BOTH parties ability of the attacker to close the distance, and how one carries their gun. An attacker with a knife who has short legs and is rather overweight will close the distance later than a tall athletic person with long legs. And the defender who practice once a year will present their weapon in far longer time than a IPSC grand master with his favorite rig!

Yes 21 feet is a guideline at best.

Deaf
 
So why then frank do we see people recommending M10 revolvers to newbs for there first gun so frequently if the platform is sub optimal for self defense. By your definition most every revolver out there is inadequate.

What are you trying to say with your comments? That getting a revolver was foolish? That since I have been on hard times financially I had to get rid of ally my guns but the one my family member passed on to me?

Please clarify but your post is implying something negative towards revolver ownership for self defense.

Shark bite, the sights are black on black, how is that not hard to see?!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top