[dallascj]

Thanks for that, robo. As I was reading this post, I was wondering why philosophies had changed over the years. Back in the late 90's it seemed one-handed and weaver were the preferred methods to engage a target, and weaver only for stability. I hadn't thought about the lethality of a single hit, tho.

[WDB]

Robo as always great insight.
Most of us don't wear body armor daily and I truly respect those that have to. While I respect your input the Weaver stance is what I use. A smaller target and considering the prospective shooting expereince of a hostile person I may encounter as a civilian it seems right for me. Then again I am somewhat set in my ways and can't image giving a large target to an aggersor witrh out wearing body armor. Most of us practice on targets that display full body, and learn to shoot two or three shots center mass, few targets for the Weaver stance. I what my bad guy squared up just like the targets I shoot.

[HighSpeed]

Originally Posted by WDB

Robo as always great insight.
Most of us don't wear body armor daily and I truly respect those that have to. While I respect your input the Weaver stance is what I use. A smaller target and considering the prospective shooting expereince of a hostile person I may encounter as a civilian it seems right for me. Then again I am somewhat set in my ways and can't image giving a large target to an aggersor witrh out wearing body armor. Most of us practice on targets that display full body, and learn to shoot two or three shots center mass, few targets for the Weaver stance. I what my bad guy squared up just like the targets I shoot.

As someone who does wear body armor daily, and was trained in Modern Isosceles, I've just recently realized that when I have a suspect at gunpoint or I'm advancing on a threat with my gun drawn, I am usually either in motion or a modified Weaver... I've never noticed until about a week ago that I do it.

[diggsbakes]

I shoot with the Weaver most often and feel strongly that it gives the shooter the most stability. In addition the Weaver allows readiness to move if necessary, in order to engage a second or multiple targets.

Originally Posted by robocop10mm

Weaver does make you a slightly smaller target, but the available target is more vital. Thank God I'm a lefty!

If you are bladed to the right, your left arm pit/side is exposed. A single bullet can take out both lungs and heart/aorta. If you are wearing body armor, you have exposed the seam and rendered the armor all but useless.

If you are facing the threat (Iscosoles), your armor covers more of your vitals. You got a spare set???

I see the logic in that if you are wearing body armor, but for the general public, that won't apply.

I'm gonna ask a question about individuals and Body armor, but not in this thread.

[cpttango30]

Originally Posted by diggsbakes

I see the logic in that if you are wearing body armor, but for the general public, that won't apply.

What you don't have Level 3 body armor with three extra trauma plates duct taped to your front and back? What the hell is wrong with you?

[orangello]

Originally Posted by cpttango30

What you don't have Level 3 body armor with three extra trauma plates duct taped to your front and back? What the hell is wrong with you?

If you didn't use OD duct tape, those extra plates are virtually worthless.




Seriously though, it is good to hear the LEO side of this discussion. I had wondered if they worried about their arm holes and seams; i sure would.