New (to me) Shooting Technique - Comments?

Point shooting is a useful and important skill. If practiced one can reliably put shots with the gun in a retention position on a close in target very quickly. If the target is further away and still a legitimate threat, you need to hit the target and not just spray lead around the environment. Only hits count. A hundred misses is not firepower; one hit is firepower.
 
During the entire time that I have recieved instruction in fighting with firearms I have only ever heard of anything vaguely similar in my preperation to serve in war zones while I was in the Army (suppression, fire for effect and kill-zones). Any training I have recieved for personal defense has always been very careful to reinforce that we only discharge rounds into the threat, never around him/her. Maybe he misinterpreted firing from retention?

There are too many variables to risk putting rounds out there without a great deal of confidence that they will hit the bad-guy in my opinion. You may be tossing rounds away, sure. You may be trying to scare the guy away and forcing him out of his OODA loop, okay. But EVERY BULLET HAS A LAWYER ATTACHED TO IT.

You may stop the scumbag, but can you say with great certainty that your first two rounds, which you may have just launched between his legs, will not maim or kill an innocent bystander? Sorry, I'm not gonna take that chance. At best, I'll go for a Pelvic girdle shot on the way up, if-I-even-think-about-anything-besides-how-big-the-knife-is-and-how-much-trouble-I'm-in-at-that-instant-as-I-pray-I-can-stop-him-from-hurting-me-as-my-muscle-memory-kicks-in-and-I'm-yelling-and-frothing-like-a-rabid-idiot.

So, I bet you can guess that I'm not gonna use this technique.
 
You are certainly wise to ask about this, and nothing in my post said otherwise. Your instructor may be a great guy, but the idea itself is very flawed, as many have said in this thread.

A far better technique would be to take several steps backwards while drawing and aiming. I've read and been told that you should be able to get your first shot off in 2 seconds, not several. Of course, the element of surprise, your position, and your method of carry will largely determine this, as well as your level of practice. Practice is everything, no matter what the technique or weapon. Standing still and firing low doesn't generate time and it wastes ammo you might need. It also endangers innocents. If you back up, you increase the distance the attacker has to cross to get to you, and that buys time. THAT'S what you're looking for here.

I watched my CWP instructor demonstrate this. He simultaneously drew, aimed, and shouted, "Stop or I'll shoot!" while taking several steps backward. As he moved, his gun remained locked on the torso of the imaginary attacker. If legalities are mentioned, this also backs up your defense, "I gave him every chance to cease and desist." Moving also messes up the attacker's path of advancement. He's now reacting to your movements, you're not reacting to his. You are in control. You can even turn sideways so the backstop behind him is clear of bystanders. Much preferable.

Didn't mean to step on your toes, but you asked for opinions, and I gave mine.
 
Keltyke said:
...I've read and been told that you should be able to get your first shot off in 2 seconds, not several. ...
Click to expand...
In my training, we were expected to draw and place two rounds COM in 1.5 seconds at 7 yards, and we all did. And we used our sights.
 
In short, Not Good Idea.

But it isn't new. I've heard this described and discussed in the early 1980s.

The downside is very obvious: Uncontrolled rounds downrange.

gvf. if this man is a friend of yours and you respect him, I understand. However, this technique - at least as much as been discussed here in context - is a very poor idea and at best will cause you grief.
 
It is a combat proven tactic that the old timers used with very good effect......period.

While I teach point shooting, I do not teach this due to todays liability concerns. I do let my students know about it's combat proven record, but leave it up to them on whether they want to incorporte it outside of my class

Once again.....I do not teach it......but that does not take away from it being a combat proven tactic. I teach that the first shot is taken as soon as the gun clears the holster and it is parallel to the ground.

Many of my students get quality combat hits, from the hip, around five yards, from concealment, in around .9 of a second after a couple of hours of training in EU/ED

Elbow up/elbow down....enough said.

The law of physics and economy of motion is irrefutable.
 
2. (the biggie for me) You are intentionally letting off shots that you don't think will hit him. The potential for collateral damage here is (to me) unaccaptable. It goes against the whole "Be sure of your target" rule, and is effectivly laying down suppressive fire. Short of full scale war, there is not a good reason to use suppressive fire.
Click to expand...

Well said. :)

I am an advocate of using the sights when you can, that's why they put the bloody things on the gun in the first place.

With that said, there are times when you may not fire from a "normal" position, making the traditional use of the sights pointless. Even when firing from a retention position though I do have a form of aiming. I am indexing my body on the target, and the target is close. Remember, the closer the target the easier it is to hit without using the traditional sight picture.

I would strive to use the sights all the time for another reason though. When you are involved in a shooting you may or may not recall seeing your Front Sight, but if you have practiced enough your sights will be online with your target and it becomes a subconcious reaction. In short, you are using your sights without even realizing it.

One way you can practice this is to not look at your sights and "point" the gun at a target, keeping your focus on the target. Then look at the Front Sight. You should be on target even without seeing your sights. BTW, use an unloaded gun that you've triple checked if not doing this at a Range.

I think your Instructor's method is a load of bovine fecal matter and will create more problems than it solves and encourages a "spray and pray" mentality. Wyatt Earp said it best year's ago, "Accuracy is final."

Biker
 
"I am an advocate of using the sights when you can, that's why they put the bloody things on the gun in the first place." ...BikerRN​


Actually the gun manufactures put sights on for those who can't shoot without them. :D Just fun'n :)

I've followed this thread with mild interest in how it would play out. I'm actually surprised that so many have vehemently picked up on a few ill chosen words and went ballistic. Myself, I tend toward a more pragmatic approach to internet speak and less of a literal OMG, He Said That! After all, the concept as relayed by the OP was presented for discussion. I guess I took it to be a subject for theory and not as an all encompassing foundation of conflict resolution.

Anyway ... carry on.
 
Bill Jordan's thought on this theory

The technique you described has been around for awhile. The famed lawman and pistoleer Bill Jordan dismissed this same theory in his book No Second Place Winner. He wrote,

"The idea of this being that even if those first shots only plow up the dirt between yourself and your opponent they will disconcert him and cause him to miss. In my opinion this theory defeats the whole idea of fast draw marksmanship, which, when reduced to its essentials, is simply to place your shot in a vital spot before you are hit by your opponent. Surely nothing could be more disconcerting to the accuracy of your adversary than a .357 Magnum slug applied judiciously in the region of the belt buckle. No man can afford to spot an opponent the two or three, or even one wasted shots advocated by the exponents of this hair brained theory." Page 57

Of course Bill, one of the fastest men ever, advocated hip shooting from 0 to 3 yards. As soon as the barrel cleared leather, it was leveled toward the target and fired. The barrel would be pointed at the suspect's torso. He could do this in around a quarter to a half a second.
 
Short of full scale war, there is not a good reason to use suppressive fire.
Click to expand...

Really!

How about where a brick wall is the back stop or you are out in the middle of nowhere and you are so far behind in the reactionary curve you are already taking incoming.

Resetting the adversaries OODA loop with shots as quickly as humanly possible is a combat proven tactic. It has a very good track record.

This stuff is not new......it has been around for a very long time. The old timers knew more about gunfights than most of the modern guys.....and that wealth of information is making a huge come back now that the training is combat focus and not just competitioned focused.

Everything has it's place inside of the fight continuum. Precision shooting or suppressive fire.....and everything in between. You just have to open your mind and see that the situation is the dictating factor......not the technique.
 
Bad idea BUT he may have been talking about the very old way to richocet birdshot or buckshot, not handgun ammo, off of cement or blacktop. That was actually, in the early 1970s, that this technique was tried and used for some riot conditions. If he was talking about richoceting shotgun ammo he may have left the wrong impression with you which has you believing it was done with pistol ammo. One state police group I know of tells its troopers that every time that they fire their gun off of a range, that's a million dollar lawsuit waiting to happen. A shooting technique like the one he describes is not a good idea because it actually lacks good shot placement to let the bullet work. Remember, you really do want "the bad guy backstop" to catch your fired rounds.
 
Keltyke said:
1. You're wasting rounds you might need.
2. Your firing without aiming, indiscriminately, and there's no telling where the round will go, especially if you fire into a hard surface like concrete.
3. There's a good chance you'll shoot your own foot off.
4. You're expecting a reaction from the attacker you might not get.

Never forget the first two rules of shooting.

1. Never point your gun at anything you're not justified in shooting.
2. Never put your finger on the trigger until you're ready to shoot.
Click to expand...

1. If the bad guy is already on top of you and has a contact weapon, you won't need any rounds because you will either be severely injured or dead.

2. I don't believe that the original poster called for firing indiscriminately at all. He mentioned letting off shots while the gun is on the way up (30 and 60 degrees). Assuming that this really is a life and death situation and the bad guy is practically on top of you, the 60 degree shot just might hit the attacker.

3. You will only shoot your own foot off if you shoot straight down (duh). If you practice shooting at 30 degrees and 60 degrees, you have little to no chance of shooting yourself.

4. There is NO expectation here. The idea is to get shots off before you even have time to get the gun level. If you hit the attacker on the way up, it will certainly slow him down or at least diminish his ability to attack.

As the original poster said, this is life and death and reacting from behind the curve. My initial reaction was also to question firing off shots that may not hit your attacker. I'm pretty sure what was described was the zipper technique.

You guys also mention that you can draw and fire in 1.5 - 2 seconds. Have someone time you with a stop watch and see how much ground you can cover taking off from stand still and how much gound you can cover if you are already at a run. If I recall, that is called the Tueller drill. It was explained in my concealed carry calss that 21 feet is an acceptable distance for a self defense shoot against an attacker with a contact weapon due to his ability to close that distance so quickly. In fact, some say that a holstered gun at 21 feet is useless since the attacker can be on top of you before you can draw and shoot. Could the zippering technique allow you to get shots off before the attacker makes contact? I think so. It is not exactly unaimed shots, but low shots made on the way up.

The other comment about backing up is wrong in my opinion. Unless you have eyes on the back of your head, backing up could cause you to trip and fall. How many feet can you move backwards compared to someone moving towards you quickly (forwards obviously)? I doubt it is significant and as I mentioned, could cause you to trip.

If you guys take the technique as what it was probably intended for, it is not so bad once the initial shock wears off. It may not have been described perfectly and many of you have read into things and added things that were not said. In a dire situation where the attacker is practically on top of you and you are ate to react, I think this is a valid technique.
 
Last edited:
I really doubt that the few thousandths of a second between when your first shot would be in the dirt and when your first shot would be COM will make any difference in the outcome. I am also not comfortable with bullets bouncing around the scene.

A far, far better plan: Practice your draw and shoot at 3, 5 or 7 yards.
 
Many years ago when I was about 22 years old I was working at a car lot. All of the dealers had multiple hand guns on or about their person and the property. One night me and the lot manager and one of the dealers sons were sitting around shooting the breez and the discussion turned to how fast the youngster could bring a gun to bare. To prove the point I bet him I could take the gun away from him before he could get it pointed at me. He had a 1911 and we were both sitting in swivel type desk chairs. I was sitting basically in front of him and he already had the pistol in his hand ( it was unloaded and had been checked as such by everyone individually twice). Joe, the manager says go and I very easily took the gun away from the kid (18 year old).


I think it is a common mistake to believe you can get a gun up and leveled faster than you really can. Plus the added effect of watching your time run out as your attacker closes the distance. Most if not all people seriously under estimate how badly this ruins your ability to get a gun into the game.
 
The other comment about backing up is wrong in my opinion. Unless you have eyes on the back of your head, backing up could cause you to trip and fall. How many feet can you move backward compared to someone moving toward you quickly (forward obviously)? I doubt it is significant and as I mentioned, could cause you to trip.
Click to expand...

If you move backward properly tripping is minimized. Also, one of my practiced options against a charging BG is to fall backward and fire while using my legs to fend off the attack.

While it is true that a person can move forward faster than backward, moving backward can buy you extra precious tenths of a second. In the tueller drill you will never reach me before I draw and fire several shots if I can move backward. Even if I muff the draw I could still recover and fire before contact. We used to practice this at work (just for kicks) to pass the time. I never lost while able to move backward. My partner who was way slower on the draw never lost while moving backward. So there is much to be gained by even the slightest of movement IMO.
 
I see several problems with this option.
1. Bullets may hit innocent civilians, in which if you killed one, would ruin your life.
2. The time difference between shooting at the ground 3' in front of you and firing properly from retention is minimal.
3. Firing at such a strange angle with an unconventional grip may invite 'limp wristing' or other problems to occur, possibly jamming the pistol in the process. I'd rather make the best of my 1 chambered shot, as there are no guarantees that you will get another (no matter how flawless your pistol is. I've never had a problem with thousands of rounds through my USP Expert, but you never know if you'll get a bad round, or a weak magazine spring, or any other "impossible" problems).

Practice firing from retention, perhaps throw your offhand onto your shoulder to shield your head with your arm from the attacker, and hope it's enough.
 
gvf: You are responsible for the final resting place of each and every round you ever fire. Purposefully firing the gun when you do not know where it is pointed seems to me to be grossly negligent. And as others have pointed out, you are throwing away a round that you may need.

I don't have a problem with point shooting. I don't have a problem with John Farnam's "zipper" technique (John Farnam's "zipper" technique does NOT include shooting the ground and hoping it ricochets into the perp). I don't have a problem shooting from the retention position.

I do have a problem shooting when your muzzle is not pointed at the target.
 
[1] Yes, suppressive fire has it's place. Yes, throwing lead around may be okay/useful/ desirable in unique circumstances. These techniques are for use in special circumstance. If one wants to promote or encourage their use, he should be clear about when and where they should and should not be used.

[2] Yes, an attacker can cover 21 feet in about 1.5 seconds. That's why the next phase of training might includes moving back, diagonally or to the side as the gun is presented. And yes, you can trip, but practice and training help minimize that risk.

[3] If the BG is close, various point shooting techniques, including shooting within the gun in a closely held "retention" positions may well be in order. These techniques should be learned and practiced. But you are still intending to hit the target.

[4] So I still think it's recless to suggest that one routinely and as a general practice begin firing as soon as the gun clears the holster and without any real intention or expectation of necessarily hitting the target with the initial rounds fired.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top