A CRITICAL PROBLEM WITH THE USE OF SIGHT RELIANT SHOOTING.
There is a critical problem associated with training Police and others to use Sight Reliant Shooting in Close Quarters life threat situations where there is the greatest chance of being shot and/or killed.
The problem is that according to the science and studies that deal with those situations, Sight Reliant Shooting isn't, or can't be used in them. That's due to bad lighting, lack of time, the dynamics of the encounter, or the results of our Fight or Flight response which is triggered instinctively and automatically in them.
So, unless you know and use an effective alternative to Sight Reliant Shooting, you will have no shooting method to use in your self defense.
And that's a critical problem, because if you are going to be shot and/or killed, there is an 80% chance that it will happen at less than 21 feet. For example, in the time period 1854 - 1979, 254 NYPD Officers died from wounds received in armed encounters, and the shooting distance in 90% of the cases was less than 15 feet.
The traditional method of shooting training for over 100 years, has been Sight Reliant Shooting. And millions and millions of people have been trained in it. So, it is logical and reasonable to expect that there should be 100's if not thousands of pics and/or videos of Sight Reliant Shooting being used effectively in Close Quarters life threat situations. But, that's not the case.
THE EFFECTIVE USE OF SIGHT RELIANT SHOOTING IN REAL CLOSE QUARTERS LIFE THREAT SITUATIONS HAS NEVER BEEN DOCUMENTED VIA PICS OR VIDEOS.
No matter how bizarre that may seem to be, that is the truth.
Have you ever seen some, any?
Here's a link to a page on my site that has been set aside to display pics and videos of Sight Reliant Shooting being used effectively in Close Quarters life threat situations.
Since January 2000, the total that I know of, or have been made aware of is zero.
This is a link to an article by Larry Seecamp that has more info on this. It also answers the question of why Seecamp pistols don't have sights.
SIGHT RELIANT SHOOTING AND POLICE CASUALTY RATES:
Police casualty rates have stayed just about the same, year in and year out, for the past 22 years. Police Officers are shot and killed at the rate of one every week, and thousands are wounded each year.
And what have "the brass" and trainers done about the killing and maiming that has gone on for 22+ years and continues today?
Sadly, nothing of note that I know of.
As a matter of fact, at the 2010 ILEETA conference (International Law Enforcement Educators and Trainers), a use-of force panel discussed Point Shooting vs. Aimed Fire.
There is an article by David Griffith about the panel discussion. It is in POLICE Magazine. This is a link to it.
"The panel, which consisted of firearms trainers, law enforcement officers, a physician, an attorney, a physician, and a psychologist, discussed the issue in terms of training and officer-involved shootings. And it concluded that point shooting may be what happens in a gunfight but to point shoot well under stress officers need to aim when they train."
"Point shooting well under stress is all about muscle memory," said one panel member. "And the way you achieve that muscle memory is by learning to align your sights."
He said that training officers to point shoot without training them to aim was a "shortcut." "There is no instinctive ability to shoot. So we need to teach our people to use the sights under realistic conditions. That's the answer, not point shooting."
That opinion is blindly adhered to by true beliver Sight Reliant Shooters and many who are in charge, but it is not supported by documentation in the form of pics and videos..
For Police Trainers to call for continuing with that which hasn't worked for 22+ years, won't bring about positive change. It calls for more of the same, which is the killing and maiming of Police Officers, and at the established and atrocious rates, which have been about the same for at least the past 22+ years, and which continue today.
Respectfully and IMHO, that is immoral, unscientific, and borders on the criminal.
I hopefully await to be proven wrong via pics or videos showing the effective use of Sight Reliant Shooting in real Close Quarters life threat situations, as that would provide some rationale for what has been done.
ALTERNATIVELY - WHAT IS NEEDED:
a. What is needed are studies that address Sight Reliant Shooting training and its relevance to, and effectiveness in Close Quarters shootings, and
b. making changes in training protocols and courses that accommodate and reflect the study findings, and
c. sharing that information widely for the benefit of all Police Agencies, and the millions of citizens who have a gun for self defense use.
The Force Science Research Center has conducted several useful studies in this area, but none that clearly focuses on traditional Sight Reliant Shooting training and its effectiveness in Close Quarters shootings.
There are some trainers who support innovation and change. But, change does not occur rapidly in the world of the gun given its institutionalized dogma, which can be a formidable obstacle to innovation and change. Also, going against the estab;ished dogma can have bad consequences.
For example, in the late 1500's established dogma held that the sun revolved around the earth. So, when Gioedano Bruno suggested that the sun and planets were just one of many similar systems, that space was boundless...., he became a persona non grata. He was tried by the Inquisition, condemned, and burned at the stake on February 17, 1600. And his works were banned by the Church in 1603.
In 1633, under the threat of torture and death, Galileo Galilei renounced all belief in the Copernican theory which held that the Earth revolved around the Sun. His sentence was house arrest for life.
Today, the consequence of going against established dogma is no longer as dire, but the goal of the powers that be, is basically the same: squelch and suppress those who do not march in lock step with it.
WHY SIGHT RELIANT SHOOTING CAN NOT BE USED IN CLOSE QUARTERS LIFE THREAT SITUATIONS:
Your ability to focus on objects depends on the lens of your eye which is adjustable from thin to thick. To enable focusing on near objects like the sights or for reading, the flexible lens of eye (A), is compressed or thickened by a contraction of the ciliary muscle (B). For focusing on far objects, the ciliary muscle (B), relaxes and the lens (A), is flattened.
When the ciliary muscle contracts, the lens gets thicker for focusing on up close objects like gun sights.
And when the muscle relaxes, the lens will be thin for focusing on objects that are not up close.
Up close objects will be out of focus when the lens is thin.
In a real Close Quarters life threat situation, our instinctive Fight or Flight response is triggered automatically, and a variety of things happen which are meant to insure survival. They are "hard wired" instinctive responses that can not be stopped or wished away.
One is a dump of adrenaline into the blood stream, which causes the Ciliary muscle to relax for enhanced focusing on the threat.
As such, near vision focus on up close objects like gun sights can be lost until the adrenaline is no longer in the bloodstream.
Focusing on the sights may not be possible.
MUDDYING THE WATER:
Had an eye exam May 6, 2014, and eye drops were used to dilate the pupils of my eyes to help in the exam. The eye drops act on the eye like adrenaline does, and as such, I should have lost my near vision and my far vision should have sharpened. But that didn't happen. I could clearly see the individual hairs on my arm with my hand at pistol firing distance. It was my far vision that was blurred.
I asked the doctor about that, and he said that the eye drops affect the eye as adrenaline does, but with age and natural changes in the eye, changes in vision may or may not happen.
For the drive home, I put on glasses that I have for distant vision/driving, and my distant vision was not blurry, things were clear. My near vision was not sharp. I could no longer clearly see the individual hairs on my arm with the glasses on, they were like peach fuzz.
So, will you ALWAYS lose your near vision in real life threat situations in which adrenaline is dumped into the blood stream via the activation of our instinctive Fight or Flight response? The short answer is no.
However; we do know that adrenaline is dumped into the blood stream with the activation of the Fight or Flight response. And we know that the adrenaline can result in loss of near vision focus. So, we may or may not be able to focus on the sights.
We also know that Point Shooting works and is effective at close range. It also can be used in situations where the sights can not be used due to bad light, other environmental conditions, time constrains, and/or the loss of near vision.
As such it would be prudent to know of it, and become proficient in it.
If the sights can be used, and there is time to use them, Point Shooting is not a bar to doing that.
Bill Lewinski of the Force Science Institute, had the following info about the eye in his 2002 Police Marksman article titled: Stress Reactions Related To Lethal Force Encounters:
"The eye undergoes three changes under high stress. The pupils dilate, the lens flattens and the eyes begin to move in a "saccadic" fashion...."
Unfortunately, he did not spell out for trainers that the thinning of the lens causes the loss of near vision, and the ability to focus on the sights,so Sight Reliant Shooting will be moot in a lethal force encounter.
The logical result is that Police Officers and others who are trained in Sight Reliant Shooting, will have no effective shooting method to use in their self defense in those situations where there is the greatest chance of their being shot and killed.
That is, unless they are taught an alternate shooting method such as Quick Kill, Threat Focus Fighting, CAR, or P&S which can be used to enhance Sight Reliant Shooting as well as other Point shooting methods. P&S works according the U.S. Army, is effective at Close Quarters distances when stationary or when moving, and against moving targets, and even against aerials.
This is a link to an article about a Chicago PD veteran of 14 gunfights. He says that standard range shooting positions are never acquired in combat. And he is not a big fan of aimed fire, nor is he a precision shooter. His shooting is instinctive shooting [like Point Shooting].
The following is from a 1998 article by Bruce siddle titled: SCIENTIFIC AND TEST DATA VALIDATING THE ISOSCELES AND SINGLE-HAND POINT SHOOT TECHNIQUES
....Cannon (1915) found that SNS excitement triggers pupil dilation, leading to the loss of near vision. The SNS also disrupts the ability to focus, which is a function controlled by the tension on the ciliary muscle. This muscle maintains the convex shape of the lens, which is necessary for clarity and focus. But when the SNS is activated, the ciliary muscle relaxes and the contour of the lens changes from a convex to a flattened state. This results in a loss of depth perception and the ability to focus on close objects. Therefore, the ability to focus on the front sight of a handgun is not possible when the SNS is activated.
Here is a link to it.
ON THE OTHER HAND:
If there was a shooting method that:
(a) does not rely on use of the sights or a standard marksmanship grip,
(b) allows you to engage targets instinctively, rapidly and accurately,
(c) provides a strong and level shooting platform,
(e) can be used with most hand held guns,
(d) is effective at Close Quarters, and
(e) can be learned and maintained with little or no training and practice,
(f) wouldn't it make life over death sense to use it.
AIMED POINT SHOOTING OR P&S:
AIMED Point Shooting or P&S is the simplest of shooting methods, and meets the criteria listed above. And it can be used in good light or bad. It also can be used when moving and against moving targets, even aerials.
It provides automatic and correct sight alignment, and automatic and correct sight placement via employing our inherent pointing ability which the U.S. Army says is a "...trait that can be used by a soldier to rapidly and accurately engage targets."
And besides being brain dead simple, it's free.
All you need do, is grab your gun, place your index finger along its side, point at a target, and pull the trigger with your middle finger.
Also, P&S can be used with, and to enhance other shooting methods.
As with the use of all firearms, common sense and safe gun handling practices are the rule. P&S should not be used with the 1911 or similar guns that have the same design flaw, or guns that are to small or not practical for safe use with it.
Adding my simple and U.S. Parented aiming aid to a gun, can make the use of P&S more mechanical and effective, as it keeps the index finger away from the slide and in place for the fast and accurate aiming of each shot.
You're welcome to add the aiming aid to your personal weapon/s at your own risk and expense. And ditto for Police Agencies. Click here for info on how to do that.
There are other Point Shooting methods such as Quick Kill, CAR, and the method used by Applegate, Fairbairn, and Sykes. They may seem to be less radical to you than P&S.
Check them out as knowing about them, and learning to use them could help save your life.
In your learning process, compare each one against the others and P&S, and determine which is best for you.
Use your go back button to return to the prior page, or click here for the index.