Importance of sights in self defense

Things I have learned on the internet:
*In a gunfight you don't need sights.
*Competition shooting will get you killed.
*Chemtrails are real.
 
Why put sights on a defensive pistol? If they were not there for a purpose?

It would make for a cheaper weapon, leaving sights off.

I have never been in a gunfight (close, pointed guns at people in England, USA) Now fist fights (or whatever was handy) lots of those.

In my case, I always hit first! If the person or persons I was involved with were talking, they were not fighting and were vulnerable. In all but a couple of fights, this was whilst working. Working at the Cavern Club in Liverpool, 1960-1964.
I was stabbed twice, the last year 1965 prior to moving to Sydney, NSW Australia was at the Blue Angel Night Club on Seal St.

The human nose is a great target, done right. Pain, restricted breathing, when broken, involuntary closing of eyes (just long enough) to go some were else, shin, knee kicks.

Why introduce fistfights into a gunfight story, as in using sights? Very much relative. You have to instantly react! To get the average Joe to realize instant action is required? Is very difficult. The first thought, in many cases, seems to be disbelief. And not an instant movement. I worked with an ex SAS Trooper at both places, Larry Newport, I only found out he was Ex SAS after he died in 2007. I was living in Toronto at the time. He was a great fighter, a bit nuts.

In this day and age, here in the US of A, fist fighting will get you a record? Not a national pastime it seems (Put a uniform on, collect a few Buddies, and head to a waterfront Bar?) that changes things.

Gunfights? Same thing, not a lot of citizens have been in those, very few Police Officers even.

Wear the same gun, in the same place, always. Practice clearing that pistol, a lot (Unloaded gun!) In my case, a Glock 19 4th gen, TruGlow night sights, an extended slide release (I know Glock does not call it that) tight fit Kydex holster, off to the races. Love Florida.
 
The front sight is your friend whether 5 yards or 500 yards. I see the front sight even at 3 yards. A perfect sight picture isn't required at 3 yards but I see the front sight.
 
Shot a lot of table pins with a J-frame, sight make sure all hit happen.

When solidly hit, the pin slowly move back off table, off-center then it rolling on the table.
Still had good time, but ate a few pins.

ALso use the "ready" period to load cylinder with speadloader without looking, keep your eyes of the pins!
 
wherever possible, I try to use the sights on my gun
Click to expand...

common sense rules the day!


sometimes you cant or simply do not have time to use your sights in the tradition sense... and that's fine. If circumstances reasonably allow for the use of sights, I will certainly use them. Its not really deeper than that, they put sights on a gun for a reason.
 
FireForged said:
common sense rules the day!


sometimes you cant or simply do not have time to use your sights in the tradition sense... and that's fine. If circumstances reasonably allow for the use of sights, I will certainly use them. Its not really deeper than that, they put sights on a gun for a reason.
Click to expand...

:D

Technically ... Duh. ;)
 
You know this really gets a bit silly. If someone is right on top of you then you are lucky to clear leather and fire. Trying to bring your gun up when someone is right on top of you will not work. That's why short barreled revolvers used to be called "Belly Guns". The only thing you had time to do was bring your pistol up into the person when they were that close and fire.
Like "9mm vs. .45" and all the stupid arguments that go on all the time on line. So many seem to polarize to one thing or another. Either/or, "all or nothing thinking" tends to dominate most of these discussions. Look in the classic "Kill or Get Killed" if you really read the book and study it you will find the author states that point shooting is for short distances. The book if you look through it
clearly shows one handed point shooting. And two handed versions of what we now call the "Weaver" or "Isosceles" stance.
The two handed holds are usually behind cover. And often braced to make them as stable as possible. Applegate says that you should learn aimed fire as it is a necessary skill. And if you have the time use it. He said the problem was in up close shooting you don't usually get the chance to. Read the book. His instructors were rotated out to Europe and other areas of battle at regular intervals to test the effectiveness of the things he taught. And if it didn't work in battle it was eliminated.
What do you not get that his techniques were used who knows how many times in actual gunfights with armed opponents. It's not a question of it they work. They are proven. From page 137 entitled two handed shooting he shows various shooting position using two hands. On page 138 he talks about using the two handed positions when "long, deliberate, sighted shots are required". Usually on top of two hands braced, and behind cover. Page 145 clearly shows what we call the Isosceles, two handed, shooting stance.
On the page entitled Two-Handed grip he states "The average shooter can shoot much more accurately with aimed fire, when under combat conditions,
by using a two handed steady grip on the weapon"! He also talks about training with your weak hand, and on page 146 shows using the weapon as a striking tool. Also each time you draw to visualize and opponent. And to train until it becomes reflexive. He also advocates the use of wax bullets for training force on force (page 141). Simunitions from a different time?
He also recommends at one point of using one of the old dart shooting guns with suction cup ends for training. The "air soft" of the time. Duelists centuries ago practiced with wax bullets loaded into their muzzle loading dueling pistols to simulate combat. In other parts of the book he has a model for "shoot house" using various sounds, lighting, and shoot/no shoot situations with life like targets. Setting up combat simulations. Scenario training. educate yourself on the history of gunfighting.
As it says somewhere "their is nothing new under the sun". They new their were times when things would be close and no time for bringing the gun to full shooting position. Time, circumstances, distances would all determine what technique you used. And the Modern Technique does include the "Speed Rock" which is point shooting from the holster when someone is on top of you. The modern technique includes the "Flash Sight picture". Which is the hand(s) fully extended but just a rough sight picture. All you have time for at that distance. Then at greater distances two handed aimed fire.
Perpetuating the myth that Applegate only taught point shooting at all ranges is simply not backed up by his Master Text on the subject. It is disingenuous to act like this is the case either through lack of knowledge. Or pushing a certain agenda or technique. Bill Jordan taught point shooting up close. Yet he recounts how one time on the Border an agent was ambushed by someone with a Winchester. And he only had a .38.
The bad guy had all the advantages except he did something stupid. He kept popping up from the same position to fire. It took three shots from the .38 if I remember right to get the exact spot where the bad guy popped up his head. Forth time he caught one in the head. The guy with the .38 and good tactics, mindset, and training won. Look at modern Martial Arts.
Used to be that some styles look at kicking at long range to be sufficient to defeat someone. You could keep them out of range. Others said hand techniques were the thing used at middle ranges. Others said elbows, knees,
headbutts and the like at closer ranges. And really close grappling. Well it turns out that through MMA we've found out you better know all the above for the appropriate use based on distance. Point or body indexing up close in feet. Looking over the pistols sights for a bit longer distance (Flash Sight Picture). Both hands, aimed, hopefully behind cover when time allows. It is not one or the other. It's being well versed in any distance, time, or situation that will save you.
And many of the older guys that used point shooting were also champion competitive marksmen. And read Jim Cirillo's book for goodness sakes. He taught what he called a "nose point" for up close. It was a two handed form of body indexing(point shooting) for up close. You want to pick and choose to validate your system by quoting an instance in which it worked and the one you don't like failed. The truth is all the Master Gunfighthers in there books show both techniques. Both work in the environment they were designed to be used in. Anything else simply is not the truth.
 
I prefer to use my sights in every shot, however I do try to practice point blank draw and fire. I like a red dot for the ease of PoA and PoI, no need to make sure you are aligning the front post correctly. I like the laser more for intimidation than aiming, everyone knows what a red dot on their chest means if they don't back off but the wife prefers the laser over anything.
 
For those who seem to think you cant make good, or at least, decent hits, without using the sights, much beyond contact distance, anyway. I shot this target this morning, with a Glock 19, at 10 yards (yards, not feet). That target has around 70 rounds in it, and all were fired at that distance. About 2 mags worth in the head were "aimed" double/triple taps. The rest were shot without using the sights, and most were at least a double tap. All were shot/started from a SUL ready.

Basically, for all the "unaimed" shots, I pushed the gun straight out from SUL, at about nipple height, maybe a little higher, and my focus was on the target, where I wanted the rounds to go. I didnt consciously see the gun or the sights while I was shooting.

enhance



Im in no way saying you shouldnt use your sights, and I normally do, especially once Im past 10 yards or so. What I am saying is, its not at all hard to make "good" hits, where your looking, with no sights, and even while moving, if you make it part of your regular practice. I practice both, every time Im out.

If you dont/havent/never practice it, well, yea, I guess your results will probably not be all that great. Then again, same can be said for your "aimed" fire.
 
Something from Rex Applegate's book, that I read many moons ago, that stuck.

He described an attack on an Opium Den, at 0-dark thirty, or thereabouts.
In which part of the approach had a squad of his mixed Constables, American, Brits, Chinese, in Shanghai. Creeping down a narrow alleyway.

Coming back, after a Succesful conclusion to this raid, now in full daylight, the medium to tall Constables walked into cloth lines, wire ones, strung across this same ally. "When did they put these up?"

They were up always. But the natural crouch that the body of the stressful man adopts, put them below these clotheslines. In fact, the one-handed mid belly crouch was a position taught by Rex.

Nothing is new seems like a good statement, yes?
 
AK103K said:
For those who seem to think you cant make good, or at least, decent hits, without using the sights, much beyond contact distance, anyway. I shot this target this morning, with a Glock 19, at 10 yards (yards, not feet). That target has around 70 rounds in it, and all were fired at that distance. About 2 mags worth in the head were "aimed" double/triple taps. The rest were shot without using the sights, and most were at least a double tap. All were shot/started from a SUL ready.

Basically, for all the "unaimed" shots, I pushed the gun straight out from SUL, at about nipple height, maybe a little higher, and my focus was on the target, where I wanted the rounds to go. I didnt consciously see the gun or the sights while I was shooting.

enhance



Im in no way saying you shouldnt use your sights, and I normally do, especially once Im past 10 yards or so. What I am saying is, its not at all hard to make "good" hits, where your looking, with no sights, and even while moving, if you make it part of your regular practice. I practice both, every time Im out.

If you dont/havent/never practice it, well, yea, I guess your results will probably not be all that great. Then again, same can be said for your "aimed" fire.
Click to expand...
Oh no! 70 shots and you completely missed the cigarette!

:-D
 
I see

Distance does make difference.

Within arm's reach, obviously sights are not used; the gun is pulled from holster, there is NO arm extension and the pistol is turned sightly away from the body if an automatic.

As distance increases sights begin to enter the picture, especially the front sight.
 
For those who are saying you don't need your sights. I recommend you take a class.

Yes, you are better off with your sights. Train to use them under the watchful eye of an instructor. Both eyes open, breaking tunnel vision, a full field of vision.

Don't be lazy. Spray and pray isn't what armed citizens do.
 
Within arm's reach, obviously sights are not used; the gun is pulled from holster, there is NO arm extension and the pistol is turned sightly away from the body if an automatic.
Click to expand...

I don’t believe the target picture was meant to be illustrative of proper form for indexing the pistol without sights.
 
Constantine said:
Don't be lazy. Spray and pray isn't what armed citizens do.
Click to expand...
This always seems to be the response, when people dont agree with things like point shooting, burst fire, etc.

If you arent doing what they think you should be doing, youre "spraying and praying".

If youre putting rounds on target, where they should be going, how does how they get there, matter?


I think probably the biggest point missed with things like this is, if all you ever practice is just "one" thing, thats all you're likely going to be reasonably proficient at. And from what Ive seen at the various ranges Ive been to, its not even a guarantee that you might be good at that.

A lot of people seem to think casual, slow fire bullseye target type shooting, is a good indication of your skills.

Unsighted shooting IS a valuable tool to have in your toolbox, and it should be regularly practiced along with everything else you practice.

The whole point, is to have the experience registered in your brain, and to the point you dont have to think about it, so that if needed, you dont have to think about the response. Your brain has already "been there", understands whats going on, and knows what to do, even if your conscious mind is focused elsewhere.

And dont get me wrong here, Im not advocating this type of shooting over sighted shooting, far from it. Its all part of the same thing. But each and every subset, has its place.

The only difference between shooters is, experience and knowledge. Some just have a more broader experience and skill set than others.
 
I think probably the biggest point missed with things like this is, if all you ever practice is just "one" thing, thats all you're likely going to be reasonably proficient at.
Click to expand...

Using sighted fire in practice (live fire and dry fire) teaches you the muscle memory to use unsighted fire. So by training sighted fire, you actually do develop solid skills to index the pistol without sights or with more rudimentary indexing. As a result, training sighted fire practices multiple skills. The opposite is not true though. Time spent on practicing unsighted fire doesn’t build any additional skillsets besides trigger control. With a speed rock or similar presentation, you don’t even get to practice elements of the draw stroke.
 
Bartholomew Roberts said:
Using sighted fire in practice (live fire and dry fire) teaches you the muscle memory to use unsighted fire.
Click to expand...
To a point, but only in a "sighted" fire stance.

Shooting below line of sight, one handed "point" from the shoulder and other levels, etc, not so much.

You also need live fire with any of them, to confirm you have it down, and at various distances to know roughly what your limits are.

Bartholomew Roberts said:
Time spent on practicing unsighted fire doesn’t build any additional skillsets besides trigger control. With a speed rock or similar presentation, you don’t even get to practice elements of the draw stroke.
Click to expand...
It still builds the "pointing" skills needed for your brain to understand whats going on, and know the indexes that make things work.

Sighted fired doesnt teach "everything". You do need to try and realistically practice "everything" you can though if you want to be proficient and a bit broader in your skills.


"Everything" teaches you something. I guess you have to decide if what you learn is relevant to you, or if its worth the bother to expose yourself to as much as you can, and learn from it, or if what you already know, is all you need to know.

If you know who Bruce Lee was, and understand his thoughts on things relevant here, I think youll find, he was on to something, and a very smart fellow. A little younger than Applegate, and of a bit of a different discipline, but just as enlightening.

If you dont know who he was, there's something else new to learn. :) ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top