Look in Shooting to Live. Sykes and Fairbairn developed a system of shooting based on the fact that traditional target shooting like they had been taught was not working. They were having their rears handed to them by the local scum. Problem is the same as it is now. Those who try to rape, rob, or mug someone get up close. We are talking a few feet. Not yards. Typically then or now the bad guys will come up to contact range or close and either demand money if that is what they want. And depending on the situation either leave quickly or basically execute you. Times haven't changed all that much.
At those ranges if you try to draw your gun and thrust it forward you will,
a. Be handing you weapon to the badguy asking to be shot or disarmed.
b. The time frame in which such thing occur at such short distance does not allow time for extension of the arms (also as mentioned above the close proximity does not allow this) , aligning the sights, letting out half a breath, and doing a controlled trigger squeeze.
Most of their practice placed emphasis on a system of using the body indexing the target to aim the gun because of the reality of again the short distances and therefore compressed time frame. In Kill or Be Killed although their was some slight modification of the technique the reasoning behind the technique used was the same. Target style shooting with classic usage of the sights simply was imparactical due to the type of fighting the majority of encounters in which a handgun was used. But some of you seem to be missing an important point here.
Look at both books. Included within their teaching methods when time and distance permitted of course you used the sights and two hands. Look at page 48 Figure 15 in Shooting to Live. And read the statement made relating to this. "For a long shot in the standing position we think the two handed methods are best calculated to produce results.....practice this at any distance from 10 yards upwards". If you look at figure 15 it is an Isoceles stance. Then look at the text Kill or Get Killed.
First off second paragraph on page 136 at the end of the paragraph after contrasting point versus aimed fire. "It is difficult to draw a clear cut line between the two types of firing, but the well rounded shooter should be trained in both phases. Each complements the other". Page 137 shows a man kneeling using a classic Weaver hand hold. Page 145 shows different methods of two handed shooting. The whole picture shows a man in an Isoceles stance without knees bent. An alternative hold of the hands shown is the Weaver hold including the push pull method used in this technique.
Later additions to point shooting include the "Modern Technique" of punching the gun out from the draw towards the target. And shooting from various low ready positons. Then look at page 146 if you think the idea of using the gun for various strikes when circumstances dictate is new. The only thing they empahsize is that you should be behind or moving to cover when using these two handed stances. Don't stand there and make a nice target. Shoot and move!
Cooper and the practitioners of the "Modern Technique" teach the "speed rock" for extremely close combat. And at a bit longer distances a "Flash Sight Picture". Then with enough distance the full use of sights and the Weaver or Isoceles stance. They both teach very similar methods. Contrary to what others would have you believe it is not either Point Shooting or the Modern Technique. Both teach a form of shooting at extremely close ranges that use body indexing. The Modern Tchnique calls the extremely close shoootingwithout sights the "speed Rock". Slightly longer range a Flash Sight Picture in the Modern Technique or bringing the gun up to eye level and looking over the guns sights in Point shooting. The same technique for both referred to as the Flash Sight Picture or watever it is the same thing.
Both advocate use of sighted fire from a stable stance when time and distance allow. The main difference seems to be that most emphasis in the Modern Technique is placed on two handed, sighted fire at longer distances. In the Point Shooting method emphasis is placed on the closer shooting methods were most bad things happen to civilians and often Law Enforcement.
Saying it is either/or is not understanding what either system is about. Or how they were developed. Point Shooting developed when classic target shooting would not work due to compressed distances and time frame that would not allow this technique to work. But did not do away with two handed, sighted fire when time allowed. Cooper and the Modern Technique basically developed when Col. Cooper and a group of several shooters started shooting at paper targets for scores. Shooting one handed at greater than contact distances they were soundly beaten by Mr. Jack Weaver and his use of two handed firing. That became the basis of their shooting system.
It comes down to simply this. At contact and shorter distances both use Point Shooting rather you want to call it a Speed Rock or at a little more distances Flash Sight Picture or whatever. It's the same thing by a different name. Both agree at longer distances two handed, sighted fire is the way to go. The proper tool for the proper job is what it comes down to. To take a page from empty handed fighting you don't grapple 6 ft. from each other. And you don't kick at each other from grappling distance.
Yesterday I worked with someone only trained in two handed, sighted firing. When I put him 3 ft. from the target and told him to draw and fire he actually tried to get a two handed grab and extend the gun up to eye level and out. At 3 ft.! We went to air soft guns and I promptly showed him the error of his ways. Same thing with a young lady I worked with. She tried to target shoot at 5 ft. hunched down, both hands extended, traditonal sight picture. I let her do it. Then gave her an air soft gun and had her try the same thing while I stood behind the target firing back at her with an air soft gun.
Being stung by the little pellets hitting her all over the place made her realize at that range being shot at by little pellets that stung like hell she couldn't apply that technique for that situation. Much less if bullets were coming her way. Another thing is that the too many of the practitoners of just the Modern Technique can't shoot worth a damn if they are forced to use one hand. Some have never practiced it! If you can shoot well with one hand, two is easy. The reverse is not true.
Continue to fight either/or if you want. But the truth is for the best chances of survival you better practice both. Sykes, Fairbairn, Applegate, and Cooper did. Point Shooting has proven itself in combat for a long time. If you think point shooters try the technique designed for 3ft. at 25 yards like the old cowboy movies you don't understand the technique. If you think the Modern Technique is the same at 3 ft. as 25 yards then you have never learned the Speed Rock. You have not learned the Modern Technique properly. Right tool for the right job. A complete tool set is not just a hammer or a screwdriver. It is much more. And if you want to do a job right you better have a complete tool box and know how to use those tools. As a friend once said, "You may not like what the other guy does in a fight. But you better damn well know what he does if you want to survive"!
