Training Video, why one-handed?

J

JJ45

New member
Looking at the thread on the 1911 training video it came back to me that in those days they were always one handed...more instinctive, no sights?

I really do wonder why. It doesn't seem possible, by that time, that know one found out that a two handed combat stance like the Weaver or Isoceles might be a lot more stable.

I should do more practicing one handed, no sights, purely instinctive....which I would probably do in a crises situation anyway :D
 
I bet if you listen to film narrative you will find sights.
The "pistol" for the first couple hundred years of existence had no sights. The people who used them in combat were generally cavalry and for a very long time mostly using them to shoot at masses of troops in formation at what to us seems insanely short ranges. Cavalry would have one hand in use on reins to control the horse.

So there is a strong component of "that's the way it has been done" lingering on.

If my memory is correct it was actually Cavalry in the US Army involved in selecting the 1911 because they were the branch in charge of pistols. So you can see a history thread there.
 
Last edited:
Why one handed? I don't know if it was being taught at the time, but for practical reasons, if you were using your pistol in combat, chances are you needed your other hand for other reasons. If you were down to your pistol, chances are your rifle was gone and the situation was poor. You needed the other hand to be holding onto or dragging a buddy to safety, to plug a wound, to control your horse, drive a vehicle, fend off an attacker, etc.
 
competition shooters still shoot 1 handed today. olympic and bullseye I believe. They probably focused more on accuracy than practicality.
 
Shadow9mm said:
competition shooters still shoot 1 handed today. olympic and bullseye I believe. They probably focused more on accuracy than practicality.
Click to expand...

Some competition shooters in those disciplines do yeah, many in other disciplines shoot with two. The average shooter is more accurate with both hands than one.

To the main question, that is how handguns were shot back then, with one hand (a hand gun, not a hands gun). When you think about handguns, for centuries a two handed grip wasn't always practical. You don't want your off hand near the priming pan and keeping as much distance as possible from the pan with your face was also a good idea. As pistols evolved not every pistol was a Browning tilting barrel short recoil affair and depending on the action type your support hand could be more a hindrance than a help (retarding the action). Reloads were also more involved (in terms of time and motion) and required a hand to hold the pistol for a longer period of time.

As far as I know that was "the way" for some time. Even the legal definition of pistol as it relates to the ATF talks about usage with one hand.
https://www.atf.gov/firearms/firearms-guides-importation-verification-firearms-gun-control-act-definition-pistol
 
Last edited:
They probably focused more on accuracy than practicality.
Click to expand...
Always a possibility of having either the strong hand or weak hand being injured and having only one lunch grabber able to handle the gun. So why not practice one hand shooting ?
 
Don P said:
Always a possibility of having either the strong hand or weak hand being injured and having only one lunch grabber able to handle the gun. So why not practice one hand shooting ?
Click to expand...


There’s a difference between practicing one handed shooting and shooting that way predominantly.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
One handed

One handed was the norm until around the late 1960's for defensive shooting.
The primary use for the military pistol was for cavalry, who had to use the other hand for the reins.
 
Don P said:
Always a possibility of having either the strong hand or weak hand being injured and having only one lunch grabber able to handle the gun. So why not practice one hand shooting ?
Click to expand...
I think one hand shooting should be a part of your regular practice.

Same goes for "point" or "unsighted" shooting. Its all a part/skill set of "shooting", and makes you a well rounded shooter.

I think a lot of people tend to base things on what they do in practice, and not what they actually might encounter in reality.

There are a couple of instances where you really dont have a choice and have to shoot one handed, no sights, etc, as you go, especially as you move and shoot.
 
I figure in a last minute surprise attack I will most likely be using one hand. I practice strong and weak hand every time I am at the range.
 
TunnelRat said:
There’s a difference between practicing one handed shooting and shooting that way predominantly.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
My point was, in the past, ww1 and ww2 the US militaries training was focused heavily on accuracy to the exclusion of other things, like practical shooting positions and techniques.
 
Shadow9mm said:
My point was, in the past, ww1 and ww2 the US militaries training was focused heavily on accuracy to the exclusion of other things, like practical shooting positions and techniques.
Click to expand...


I don’t disagree that the US military was very focused on accurate almost competition shooting in that time period (you can look at the width of front sight blades on rifles for example), but I don’t think that’s why they were shooting one handed in that training video. Shooting one handed seems to have been the standard of the time. It wasn’t something unique to the US military (as far as I know).

Edit: it’s interesting that in the video that whenever they go to kneeling or prone they do shoot two handed. It’s really only standing and then the pseudo slouch they do that they shoot one handed.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Last edited:
I think there also might be a difference in mentality between the past and today when it comes to tactics. Blading your body to present the thinnest profile to the opposition was thought to be preferable for a long time. Now with many in the military and law enforcement wearing body armor you would want that armor facing the enemy and it’s generally the strongest and offers the most coverage from the front. Facing forward also allows you to get two hands on the pistol and generally have more control of the pistol.

Combat medics I’ve talked to have said that wounds received to your flanks are generally quite lethal, armor or not. When striking your side the round has the potential to go through multiple organs on its way through your body. No one wants to get shot, but straight to the chest hopefully minimizes the number or organs effected given the layout of our internal organs. Of course there are examples of bullets going on bizarre paths through the body as well, but at some point you make a choice based on the odds as you see them.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Last edited:
Just for ‘S&G’ a few years ago I started practicing, shoooting one hand from my waist. Started with a 22, got pretty good with it,,,then moved up to a 380 and practiced until I could put six shots, or ten onto a gong at 6 yards, then moved up to 9mm, and now shooting a 45 from my waist,.. I am am very satisfied with the accuracy,,,,,and besides it’s fun:)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top