[BigByrd47119]

What are your opinions? I know there are some very knowledgeable folks on here and I just wanted to see what everyones personal preference is. Has either played a significant role in your training or real world situations?

In general I'm still pretty new to handguns and I am attempting to weigh which of these methods would be best to train on. I'm sure some will probably suggest both seeing as at 10 ft, no ones using sights regardless.

Thanks fellas.

[JonM]

it is wise to train using the sights. the more familiar you are with the correct usage of the sights a steady even trigger pull and where the bullets go when it is done correctly the easier and more natural "instinctive" shooting becomes. it is not really a either or but a cart before the horse thing. you can struggle and grunt pulling the cart with the horse tied to the rear or let the horse pull it for you.

if you dont have the ability to pull the trigger smoothly and aim with the sights how are you going to develop accuracy and speed by just yanking the trigger blindly.

thats my way of looking at it. i hope it helps.

[GoBlue]

Each to his own and all that, but I remember reading that Fairbairn & Sykes said that using the sights in an actual close-up gun fight is pretty much not going to happen once the fight-or-flight instinct kicks in.

http://tinyurl.com/ShootToLive

[bladenbullet]

until youve trained without sights you cant have an appreciation for the accuracy and speed you are capable of with point shooting skills...a competent point shooter can have several shots in center mass before a sight shooter raises their gun to near eye level...

in training classes i have seen students go from basic skills to tearing ragged holes in targets with multiple rapid fired shots in very little time shooting without sights...and show accuracy out to 60' that is comparable to the accuracy they are capable of with sights...

it can be difficult to undertsand unless youve trained in the proper use...the fairbain and sykes methods are accurate and fast...

you are not pulling the trigger blindly...you learn better trigger control without thinking about it than you do when concentrating on sights...how youre breathing and the exact position of your finger on the trigger are secondary as opposed to primary and become instinctive as the shooting does...

i shoot idpa matches point shooting and am very competitive in a sport where accuracy is prime...my first shots on target are faster than sighted shooters and half hip up close stages result in times that get astounded looks and comments from others...

if you are training for self defense you need combat accuracy and speed...not good looking time consuming form and breathing exersizes...the first person with metal on meat usually wins the fight...the nobody asks what the loser looked like while they were taking incoming rounds...

[larry5081]

I was surprise how accurate I was when I first tried point shooting. It just seem so natural. I train with it all the time now.

[bladenbullet]

Originally Posted by GoBlue

Each to his own and all that, but I remember reading that Fairbairn & Sykes said that using the sights in an actual close-up gun fight is pretty much not going to happen once the fight-or-flight instinct kicks in.

http://tinyurl.com/ShootToLive

well stated....

whats more valuable when absolutely necessary?...the ability to instinctively place lead on target not utilizing sights?...which is the most likely scenario in a self defense situation as they most times happen in close quarters...or...to be able to place a nice group of holes in a target at 30 yards with no pressure and controlled breathing and trigger excercises?....

[sarge_257]

Whe Army and the Police both teach and train point shooting. Using the sights and aiming while your finger presses the trigger. As was said, you should first learn to hit. And only point (aiming with the sights) will teach that. I have shot both ways because some matches are so fast that flash shooting is the only way to stay in the winning. But when I shoot that way you better believe I am not shooting a standard pistol. I will be shooting a comp'd and light trigger 45 auto with weights on the front. Then all I have to do is look at the target and the gun will follow my eyes. I do have the sights in my vision just below my eye level.
But starting out shooting that type of aiming or lack of aiming will just break your bank account buying ammo to use ventilating the back stop. In most gun fights the first aimed shot is the winner.
Sarge

[Standby]

Point shooting, flash sight picture and sighted ALL have a place, trick is to know and reflexively use the relevant technique on demand, if your thinking about it your too slow. ….As bladenbullet pointed out, it all about training!

[BigByrd47119]

Thanks for everyones responses. I guess I should have known this all already, relatively speaking. However with so many great minds on this forum it never hurts to ask. As was stated by an earlier poster, when SHTF your gonna probably want to just point and click. With that said, it essentially comes down to a situational thing.

Once again, thanks to everyone!


~~~BigByrd

[canebrake]

"It's an axiom that hitting your target is your main concern, and the best way to hit is to use your sights, but circumstances do arise in which the need for speed is so great, and the range so short, that you must hit by pointing alone, without seeing your gun at all.
Pointer fire is not as hard to learn as sighting, once you realize it's range limitations. using the 1911 auto-pistol I have found that I can teach the average infantryman to stay on a silhouette at 10 yards, using pointer fire in two-shot bursts, more easily that I can get him into that 25 yard bullseye using slow fire and sights.

Of course this sort of shooting is strictly a way of obtaining body hits at essentially indoor ranges (30 feet and under). But up close pointer fire can be murderously effective, and its mastery is often the difference between life and death." - Lieutenant Colonel Jeff Cooper (1920-2006)