I recently ran across a thread on Point Shooting on a forum that is said to be populated with mostly gun industry professionals, and members of LE and the military. (2008)
The thread starter said that his students were able to or nearly hit a wadcutter box at 25 yards after 50 rounds of training, using a two handed point shoulder arms straight stance and focusing on a small target or a point on the target. They started out at 7 yards.
I thought that was bit out of the ordinary, and agreed with another party that stated "for anything more than 5-7 yards I switch to 'sighted fire' or 'sight focus' shooting."
The comments soon started to go negative and continued in the vein of:
- "Oh no! Not again;
- Nonsense;
- What if you need to shoot from another position;
- What about the nub on the end of the gun;
- How will you explain missing and hitting an unintended target and not using the tools given;
- When I use my sights, I got hits, and when I didn't, I didn't;
- PS is based on muscle memory and things may not be the same in a fight;
- PS utilizes less mental discipline, so in a fight you may default to the easy way, and not use your sights.
The original poster then came back to the thread and said he had not wanted to stir up a hornets nest, nor dump on sighted shooting, ...etc..
Postings both pro and con, and some with supporting rationale, continued for a few pages, and then with page 5, they turned mostly con.
I add a post about my just learning about the 1835 book produced by Google in electronic form. It calls for Point Shooting using the index finger for aiming and the middle finger for pulling the trigger, when shooting at close quarters.
The postings, then turned very con and personal.
Immediately below are parts of one that makes several assumptions and presents incorrect information. IMO, such postings are made to muddy the water, and to also "reframe" the situation so that multiple arguments will be needed in response. And each of them may in turn, become sub arguments, and branch into more sub arguments....
It's sort of like having a dog chase its tail. Nothing really constructive comes from that, and it makes the dog look silly in the process.
- "John, Newer shooters don't know anything, which makes it important that they learn from better sources and stay away from bad practices."
The implication is that P&S is a bad practice.
- "This is not your normal bubblegum message board. On this board you have police and military and trained civilians, many of whom have trained at the best schools and have used these techniques in real life."
The implication is that P&S is a questionable and unproven technique.
- "...I've attended several courses where point shooting was covered and nowhere do they teach pulling the trigger with the middle finger."
Again, the implication is that P&S is a questionable and unproven technique.
- "Show me any credible shooting school, shooting instructor, or police force that teaches pulling the trigger with the middle finger. Some obscure paper or book from 1835 doesn't cut it."
Again the message is that P&S is not taught so it therefore must be bad. And a mention in some obscure book doesn't change a thing.
Of course, the elephant in the room, the hit rate of < 20% in armed encounters by police who mostly are taught Sight Shooting, escapes notice or of being a real problem in need of resolution.
- "Point shooting is also referred to as "instinct shooting." This is not to say that there is an instinct to shoot but one to point, as can be seen with infants."
This is a bit confusing to me, but IMO, the meaning is that just because one can point instinctively, it does not follow that one can shoot instinctively.
- "If point shooting is appropriate for the situation, the handgun's slide or barrel does the pointing. There is no need to have your trigger finger along the gun to point because the slide of the gun or the barrel becomes the pointing finger."
That assumes that holding a gun in your hand and pointing it at a target is the same as, and as accurate as, using your finger to point at something. That is just false, and particularly so given the short sight radius of a pistol. It also can be tested easily via shooting at close ranges.
- "As already pointed out by ........, gripping the gun with 2 fingers is a terrible way to hold the gun because you do not have nearly as solid a grip or control of the gun since you only have two fingers on the grip...."
Note the value word TERRIBLE. Also the statement is not accurate. That could be the case if the gun was being gripped with only 2 fingers. However, that is not the case with P&S which utilizes 4 fingers.
- "...When gripping the handgun, the middle finger is probably the most important one...."
If using a 3 fingered grip, that indeed could be true. But that is not applicable with P&S, as it uses a 4+ finger grip.
- "... If you need to hold someone at gunpoint, holding a gun with two fingers around the grip is a very weak way to do it...."
That also could be true, but again, that is not applicable here, as P&S uses a 4+ finger grip.
- "....It is also horrible for any type of weapon retention and a weak way to draw the gun from the holster."
Again note the use of a value laden words, and the statement is not necessarily accurate.
- "Keeping your pointing finger along the frame and pulling the trigger with your middle finger means that you must draw the gun with only your last two fingers. This is an extremely weak and fumble prone way to draw."
Again, note the value laden words, and the statement is not accurate.
- "...Also, the trigger finger has more dexterity than the middle finger--which is why people have been using the trigger finger to pull the trigger forever...."
The middle finger is the stronger, and pulls back straighter in the hand, has more nerve inputs to it than the index finger, and can be extended and flexed independently. And the "why statement" is not accurate.
There then followed some comments by others that IMHO, were both personal and negative, or I just may be sensitive. :-)
Another party then jumped into the thread and posted:
- "The rest of the argument is futile. I will say this: Walter J. Dorfner was a firearms instructor for the Vermont State Police about 40 years ago. I know this because I teach on the range named for him three times a year at the Vermont Police Academy in Pittsford VT. As one of the top instructors at said academy, I can assure you NO instructor has taught that method in the last ten years that I personally know of and suspect that no one has seriously thought it was a good idea for about 25 years.
- "We teach sighted fire at all ranges. I provide a demonstration of the difference in sighted and unsighted fire at 3 yards. At my level (whatever that might be) there is NO difference in speed and very little difference in group size. At 15 yards I repeat and there is a noticeable difference in both. I actually find it difficult to justify shooting at such a distance NOT using sighted fire.
- "I repeat for those of short attention span. NO ONE SHOOTS with there middle finger pressing the trigger anywhere, ever. The reasons have been beaten to death. I will throw in that a normal strong hand grip the pinky finger does more to control recoil/muzzle flip than you might expect due to the ergonomics of a handgun and the distal anatomical position of the pinky finger to the bore line (in english the pinky is further away and controls recoil better due to that very obvious fact)
- "I'm sorry Mr. Veit, you're preferred method is wrong and any modernly trained shooter with comparable range time will smoke you in any drill. I will bet you the cost of an airline ticket and match fee plus ammo on that."
That post was followed by:
- "Wow, just WOW!
- I think Mr. Veit may have stumbled on the wrong website."
And then this:
- "John,
- He's been stumbling for years on other sites, too...and getting canked from most, if not all of them."
And finally by a moderator:
- "This is a useless discussion and has shown that some people truly do not have a real concept of shooting for blood.
The thread is closed."
..........
It was then locked.
And so such things go, in the polite society. :-)
..........
To continue the discussion, I entered the first half of the last long post in an e-mail, and sent it to the poster along with my comments.
I also included links to several old publications that either referenced P&S or cautioned against using it when shooting the 1911, which was the case in some US military publications.
The e-mail, along with a few more that we exchanged, are shown below. They are presented with only minor editing.
Here is the initial e-mail. It starts with two of the paragraphs from his posting.
Hi .....,
- "The rest of the argument is futile. I will say this: Walter J. Dorfner was a firearms instructor for the Vermont State Police about 40 years ago. I know this because I teach on the range named for him three times a year at the Vermont Police Academy in Pittsford VT. As one of the top instructors at said academy, I can assure you NO instructor has taught that method in the last ten years that I personally know of and suspect that no one has seriously thought it was a good idea for about 25 years."
- "We (I) teach sighted fire at all ranges. I provide a demonstration of the difference in sighted and unsighted fire at 3 yards. At my level (whatever that might be) there is NO difference in speed and very little difference in group size. At 15 yards I repeat and there is a noticeable difference in both. I actually find it difficult to justify shooting at such a distance NOT using sighted fire."
..........
To me, your post misrepresented what Walter was about, and what he was trying to do.
Per Walter, he introduced new recruits to P&S (as I call it), but it was not taught at the VSP academy.
The brass there at the time, were obviously (to me anyway), SS types.
No problem with that, except SS just doesn't work in most Close Quarters shootings and as a result, a lot of cops die who don't know how to shoot otherwise, or they are shot and wounded.
Due to the BAR in CQ situations, fine motor skills, which are necessary to SS, are lost to use. That's what the science says, and studies like the SOP 9 have shown to be the case. Nor could a connection between range and street performance be established.
I am a bit surprised that you don't know that.
..........
As far as I know, Walter retired and died soon after he retired.
That was in 2001, so his method was not one of 40 years or so ago as you IMPLIED in your post.
..........
Also PS is not a bar to the use of the sites, if time and conditions and one's physical state allows for their use. It should be option 1.
I don't know of any PS types who don't advocate the use of the sights where possible.
And IMHO, only a moron would attempt to use PS at beyond 25 feet.
For millions of apartment dwellers and homeowners, having a room 25 x 25 feet or larger for example, would be a dream. And even if they had one, the shooters most likely would not be backed up against the walls, so shooting distances in most situations would be well under that.
Most will be under 20 feet if one is to believe the literature. That is the distance in which most cops are shot and/or killed.
Here's a link to SOP 9 results on my site.
And here's one to the digest of Walter's paper that he approved of as written.
..........
I would be happy to post this e-mail and your response on my site in a page titled: A discussion about SS and PS.
..........
The PS thread was locked just as I was about to add in some more info. It is shown below.
I have sent it to the admin who locked the thread, but don't really expect that it will be included in the thread, even though the info could be helpful to professional instructors in search of what works, and might even result in saving some officers from being shot and/or killed.
Hi Ben,
Was going to add the following to the PS thread, but it is closed.
Feel free to add it in administratively, as some of your members may be interested in the books mentioned and in Google's publishing project.
..........
From page 151 of Frontier Living... published in 2000 : ..."He did snap shooting, without sighting the gun, by placing his forefinger along the barrel and squeezing the trigger with his middle finger...
..........
From the pub: Recreation of January, 1898, pg 148 : ...In shooting a rifle, most sportsmen use the index finger to pull the trigger. If your readers would try using the second finger, and squeezing the hand together, instead of a direct pull, they would find a great difference in the pull of the trigger. This method is of great advantage when one has a standing shot at deer, as one is less liable to pull off...
..........
From Trauma Room Ibe: The JFK Medical Coverup : Detective Leavelle, cuffed to Oswald's right are, notices Ruby holding a pistol by his side. He sees Ruby crouch, extend the pistol, and quickly move in on his prisoner, but has no time to react. Ruby, gripping a .38 Colt Cobra pistol tightly in his right hand in an "assassins grip" (a Chicago term for the grip used by an assassin to prevent the weapon from being wrenched from his hand; this grip utilizes the middle finger on the trigger and the index finger on the cylinder above),.....
(I found the comment about the gripping method to be of particular interest, since the grip is often called weak by P&S detractors, and without any rationale provided as backup.)
..........
From Bullet and Shot in Indian Forest... 1900, ...Some beginners are very apt to "pull off" in the act of firing. If such will make a practice of using the middle finger put well round the trigger, in place of the forefinger, they will probably find a great improvement in their shooting...
........
From Automatic Pistol Shooting... 1915, ... Some Englishmen shoot with the second finger on the trigger and the first along the pistol;...
..........
From Popular Photography - Page 136, 1955, ...When I was an instructor with the Ft... It was a matter of using the middle finger on the trigger instead of the...
..........
From Platoon Training - Page 612, 1921, ... (3) The trigger should be pulled with the forefinger. If the trigger is pulled with the second finger, the forefinger extending along the side of the receiver is apt to press against the projecting pin of the slide stop and cause a jam when the slide recoils...
..........
The inclusion of such a statement about using what I call the P&S method, leads me to believe that, shooting that way was a standard shooting practice with many at that time, or else it would have made no sense to include it in the training manual.
[[ Since the exchange of e-mails, I found that same warning in a 1917 military manual describing the automatic pistol Caliber .45, and an ROTC publication of 1921.]]
It also is my opinion that by excluding the use of a method which allows one to naturally, automatically and accurately aim a weapon, effectively squelched it. And with dire and continuing consequences for those who were to rely on the use of the 1911 and similar arms in close quarters life threat situations.
Limiting life saving options in the use of a weapon, to accommodate a weapon, rather than making a minor modification to a weapon to accommodate those who go in harms way, makes no sense to me.
..........
Here is the e-mail I got in response:
- "Sir,"
- "I never said ALL point shooting was completely invalid. I said your method was invalid. Your grip in nothing short of insane and those who knew Walt, told him as much. So basically only two or three people in the history of combat shooting think that grip is a good idea."
- "Having been in every type of fight there is: from fist to pistol to rifle, I still say your grip is counter intuitive and dangerous to teach. It does not fit in with any fighting matrix I can think of."
- "Every person I have ever shot, I used my sights, maybe only a flash sight picture, but the use of sights was there."
- "Point shooting is not invalid, but should NOT be taught at the academy level, because the basics of marksmanship are more important . Cops can not afford to miss, and don't train often enough to try and utilize two different methods of shooting, one is hard enough."
- "A technique is not valid in my opinion unless it meets three criteria:"
- "1) It must be safe"
- "2) It must be simple"
- "3) It must be "street" proven."
- "First, yours is not safe, if a recruit has never fired a pistol before your grip is counter intuitive, and it is difficult to control recoil."
- "Second, It is not simple, intuition tells you to grip the pistol with as much hand as you can put on it."
- "Three It is not street proven, of the thousands of police and close combat military shootings I have researched I have found many that included point shooting, none using your prefered grip."
- "If you want to keep using that grip go right ahead, but when you have literally hundreds of people telling you you are wrong, based on hundreds of combined years of shooting experience AND you have no scientific basis to back up your ascertain. Maybe you should consider that you are actually wrong."
- "Lastly, when anyone has a ridiculous idea or tries to propagate a method of teaching something that can and eventually will cost someone there life, I will tell them."
..........
Here is my response:
Hi ........,
Thanks for your response.
Here are two links showing Jack Ruby shooting Oswald and using a P&S grip:
Both parties were moving and the target area was small. It was not a contact shot as Ruby was 5-3 feet apart when he fired.
Here is some more info on the grip.
It is from Trauma Room One: The JFK Medical Coverup : ... Detective Leavelle, cuffed to Oswald's right are, notices Ruby holding a pistol by his side. He sees Ruby crouch, extend the pistol, and quickly move in on his prisoner, but has no time to react. Ruby, gripping a .38 Colt Cobra pistol tightly in his right hand in an "assassins grip" (a Chicago term for the grip used by an assassin to prevent the weapon from being wrenched from his hand; this grip utilizes the middle finger on the trigger and the index finger on the cylinder above), ...
...............
As to not being used in combat, the grip and method now taught to most police has resulted in the miss rate of 80+ % in CQ shootings.
To my way of thinking, teaching a grip and method which, as proven by the SOP 9 study of thousands of police combat incidents, results in a hit rate of < 80 % in real life threat situations, is setting up police to be shot and/or killed.
It is akin to putting airbags in cars that are faulty, in that the bags are known to fail most users when needed most.
..............
Thanks again for your response, and I don't plan on continuing this exchange.
Feel free to visit my site, and check out the factual information there on P&S and other Point Shooting methods like QK which also can be learned with little or no training, and the other info available.
Best regards,
..........
Here is his e-mail reply:
- "The grip is NOT the reason for a police shooting miss rate of around %80, nor is sighted fire. The primary reason cops miss when they shoot is they are scared out of their minds, the second is a lack of relevant, recent and realistic training. The fact is that most cops aren't gun people and don't really believe they will ever have to shoot someone. So when that truly corrosive moment arrives they are unprepared physically and mentally. That is why they fail, miss and die."
- "The current grip/ trigger control is the most ergonomic and natural (handguns are designed with that grip in mind)."
- "Most hands are too large to properly manipulate the trigger with the middle finger, too much finger ends up on the trigger. Additionally, when I attempt to hold a revolver that way my index finger extends past the front of the cylinder, if fired in that manner with a high pressure load, my finger would undoubtedly be damaged. So IF I was to train that way I would have to hold semi-autos one way and revolvers another. That it self flies in the face of simplicity. Add to that the fact that shotguns and rifles are fired by pressing the trigger with the index finger."
- "Ruby shooting Oswald, it's a premeditated assassination. It has no LE application or relevance."
- "As to the strength of the grip for take away purposes, I hold an instructor rating in Krav Maga. I can tell you from personal experience having taken away hundreds of training pistols from students the more fingers around the grip of the weapon the harder it is to remove from their possession."
- "Your Curriculum Vitae as it were leaves much to be desired in the way of recommending a "better way" to shoot in combat. 11 years of "research" and some informal shooting practice, pales in comparison to the millions of rounds fired (training and for real) and thousands of people killed by us "professionals". Dogma has nothing to do with results."
- "Those of us who take seriously our societal obligation to stand in harms way, question methods that are taught regardless of who is teaching. Applying our individual common sense and knowledge of physical skills and ergonomics to the method taught. If someone teaches me something they created to "make it more better" doesn't make sense or isn't simple, I call B.S. and make 'em defend it."
- "All the best shooters in the world utilize a "traditional" grip. That includes competition guys like Dave Sevigny, LE trainers like Dave Spaulding and Delta soldiers like Larry Vickers."
- "All those whom I trained with and under, as well as the hundreds of professional police officers/ police trainers and professional instructors on ........ forums. I may be the least qualified person who dismisses this method. NO ONE I have asked about this thinks it's a good idea for the many reasons I and many others have illustrated."
- "Not being an LEO or combat soldier you don't have a practical leg to stand on. Your website target is telling, missing with the fifth round. How fast did you put those rounds out? I can put five SIGHTED rounds on any target bigger than a quarter at 15 feet in less than two seconds including draw. Utilizing your method I challenge you to shoot an El Presidente exercise in front of witnesses and send me your time and points down."
- "I will admit you have stuck to your guns as it were. But I believe based on all my years of training and actual experience that the technique is incorrect and dangerous. Point shooting is fine and can be accomplished accurately, at close range, under stress having NEVER done it before if you have always trained with sighted fire."
- "I await your reply, as I love a good argument."
Here is my response:
Hello ....,
Thank you for your response.
I usually do not use quoted segments of a response, and then respond to them, but your response lends itself to that tack. It is also about as long as a small book.
..........
"....The grip is NOT the reason for a police shooting miss rate of around %80, nor is sighted fire. The primary reason cops miss when they shoot is they are scared out of their minds, the second is a lack of relevant, recent and realistic training. The fact is that most cops aren't gun people and don't really believe they will ever have to shoot someone. So when that truly corrosive moment arrives they are unprepared physically and mentally. That is why they fail, miss and die...."
[[As an aside, I would hope that you would put that para on a 3 x 5 cards and give one to each of your recruits at the start of your firearms presentation. That would get their attention, and provide a baseline for them to evaluate what they are taught. And it might get them to thinking of "a better way" to shoot in dire circumstances, as what "you" are going to teach them, doesn't come with a results guarantee that most would deem acceptable. Being taught a method which will result in only a 20% +/- hit rate on the street, gets me to a wondering. It also might spur them into paying very close attention and even putting in some extra effort and time in developing their shooting skill.]]
I believe the opening segment of the digest of Walter's paper addresses the accuracy and shooting under stress issues, plus it presents a practical and lowest common denominator method for an average shooter to use:
"....The Next Step in the Evolution of Survival Shooting
"During the past 20 years or so, little has been learned on how to overcome the limits on performance that occur in survival shooting situations such as auditory exclusion, tunnel vision, rapid impulse shooting, etc.
"For maximum survival shooting performance, the shooting method used must be as natural and mechanical as possible. That will leave the mind free to make appropriate decisions and direct appropriate actions in high stress situations...."
When I shoot, I just grab the gun, point my finger at the target, and pull the trigger. And I shoot as fast as I can point-n-pull. I am not looking for small groups, only to hit the target at CQ distances. If your reference to the target was to Mr. Orange, I normally shoot at COM, and one or more hits will be off a few inches from the others. Usually, all would hit a real person at 25 feet or more, which I understand is beyond the distance at which most CQ encounters occur, and close to the practical range for using a handgun.
I also can use the sights given appropriate lighting and conditions. However, the science and the literature says that most run-of-the-mill shooters don't use them; and the fine motor skills that are necessary to their use, will also be lost to use.
So, I don't train to use them at CQ distances. Nor do I train to shoot at distance targets which would help to meet some arbitrary COF requirement/s. Again, and according to the SOP 9, their were no links between range results and street results.
Training one use the sights at CQ, when it is known that "most" won't use them at CQ, seems to me to be an oxymoron of sorts, or a conundrum which at a minimum could certainly frustrate and complicate an officer's attempt to apply that training in a real world CQ street situations where the officer will be in the most danger.
They will be left to fend for themselves, and if not taught how to point shoot, they will do what most do per videos, point their gun in the direction of the target and blast away.
That also begs the organizational question of whose in charge, management (the brass and trainers), or the employees.
Chiding employees for not having an interest in shooting, or for not practicing, only begs that question more. Management gets what it wants to get. And that certainly should be true in hierarchal organizations like military and police organizations.
And saying that "We are going to train you to use the sights, even though you won't use them in circumstances where you have the highest likely hood of being shot and/or killed", in my opinion, would not engender good will towards an organization and its leadership.
And I am not talking about training of SWAT or SEAL teams, shootists, or professional gun slingers, but just your average constable on patrol.
Having run 4 marathons, I can tell you that the lead runners ("professionals"), are a breed apart from the pack. They come with different and much better natural equipment. And I imagine that if one was to run up against a SWAT or SEAL type in a real confrontation, it probably would not be a good day for that person unless he/she was one of them. That is not to say that one should not try to emulate their ways, but don't count to heavily on becoming like them, unless you have the equipment and time and the training that matches theirs.
So what is your run-of-the-mill type to do. I say use P&S.
..........
"...The current grip/ trigger control is the most ergonomic and natural (handguns are designed with that grip in mind)...."
Actually, I believe the Luger was a more natural pointer given it's grip angle. And that is so, even if the 18 +/- degree angle of the 1911 is spouted about as being the holy grail.
More to the point, Applegate says the (average) soldier will crouch, face the threat, and grip the gun in a "death grip". So, you can say goodbye to your grip where you thumb is held along the side of the gun but not pressing against it, and where your index finger is held aloof from the gun, so that you can deftly and smoothly squeeze it to the rear until the shot breaks as if by magic. Just ain't going to happen.
What is going to happen is that when the gun is squeezed in a "death grip" by the thumb and middle finger, it will be torqued down and around to the left as the thumb and middle finger are not opposing.
And as one, per the literature, thrusts their gun out towards the target, it also will be rotated down and to the left at full extension because of the physical make up of the lower arm and wrist. Because of that, Applegate wanted the soldier to have the gun down at one's side, and then brought up from the shoulder and fully extended to negate that. However, in most videos I have seen, officers don't have their shooting arm down at their side and fully extended.
So chances are, unless a shooter is using a grip that allows a death grip to be used without affecting where the muzzle ends up pointing, and also one which negates the torquing of the muzzle down and around to the left as the gun is extended fully, what will happen in a life threat situation is that the shot will go where the muzzle is pointing, and that is down and left.
(Which as an aside, is why one should plan on moving to their left if possible in a CQ encounter, as the shooter will most probably be shooting down and to their right.)
..........
"....Most hands are too large to properly manipulate the trigger with the middle finger, too much finger ends up on the trigger. Additionally, when I attempt to hold a revolver that way my index finger extends past the front of the cylinder, if fired in that manner with a high pressure load, my finger would undoubtedly be damaged. So IF I was to train that way I would have to hold semi-autos one way and revolvers another. That it self flies in the face of simplicity. Add to that the fact that shotguns and rifles are fired by pressing the trigger with the index finger...."
I am not in charge of gun design. Walter said in his paper that the method should not be used with revolvers that are out of timing, or on autoloaders where the index finger rests over the ejection port. I say that common sense should be used with P&S, and if there is a chance that you will be hurt using it with a particular gun, then don't use it with that gun.
Now, some say that if you can't use a method with every gun, and ever holster, then it's bunk. And particularly so, if the small shelf thingy needs to be added to the side of a gun.
Actually there are lots of varieties of guns and models. And some configurations really are a bad joke in my opinion.
The 10 mm is a case in point. Others are high capacity guns, which that stats show are really not needed except in a rare bird case. And most police carry extra mags if they ever are needed other than for qualifying.
Also, high cap guns with their fat grips make it hard for folks with small to medium hands to grasp and shoot rapidly and accurately.
The SIG P226 in 40 Cal. which is used/was used by the Mass. SP, is 1.5 inches wide, is a good case.
A standard 2 x 4 also is 1.5 inches wide. So the next time you are at a hardware store, grab a length of 2 x 4 and see how securely and comfortably it fits in your hand. I have an average sized hand, and gripping a 2 x 4 is difficult and hard for me. And a .40 bucks more than a 9 mm, so you can expect less controlled shooting and less accurate shooting as well. And more rounds = more weight, so unless you are planning on driving nails, holding a heavier gun is more difficult and the longer the gun is up, the more tired one will be.
[[Here's a pic of me aiming a 2 x 4. This pic was not included in the e-mail.]]
If a P&S index finger rest is used, the gun will actually be resting on top of the index finger. And the gun will be accurately aimed at anything you point at, and fast, naturally, and automatically. No thinking required. No aiming and no sight alignment is required. You will already have an automatic and perfect sight picture, using a mechanical grip and your natural ability to accurately point at stuff without thinking about it.
If your hand is to big for a gun, that's just as tough as it is for those with hands that are to small.
..........
"....Ruby shooting Oswald, it's a premeditated assassination. It has no LE application or relevance.
As to the strength of the grip for take away purposes, I hold an instructor rating in Krav Maga. I can tell you from personal experience having taken away hundreds of training pistols from students the more fingers around the grip of the weapon the harder it is to remove from their possession.... "
Which is why the P&S grip is superior to your classic 3 fingered grip. You can grab the gun between your opposing thumb and index finger and try to squeeze the begeebers out of it and nothing will happen other than making your grip stronger, and your ring and little fingers will do there job of adding tenacity to the grip (which is done via the action of their knuckles which can rotate forward. That is unless they are thwarted from doing their job, by a big fat grip that provides them no purchase other than a sideways squeeze.
The P&S grip is a strong 4 finger+ grip that keeps the gun in a comfortable, strong and level shooting platform, and which utilizes the index fingers ability to help lock up the wrist when it is extended, which in turn helps to control the gun when firing. Finally, the grip and gun can be maintained up and close to the body and one can shoot accurately from that position.
If a life threat was to approach me closer than 6 feet, I would pull the trigger or forward punch with the gun. IMHO, there is no good reason for any officer to approach a "felony" perp within 6 feet unless the perp is already on the ground and on their stomach. I think most cops are killed within 5 feet or so.
..........
"....Your Curriculum Vitae as it were leaves much to be desired in the way of recommending a "better way" to shoot in combat. 11 years of "research" and some informal shooting practice, pales in comparison to the millions of rounds fired (training and for real) and thousands of people killed by us "professionals". Dogma has nothing to do with results...."
I was told to shoot "my" way some 50 years ago by a Sgt who was with the 1st Div during WWII. It worked fine when shooting my grease gun from the hip when qualifying.
Fast forward to the 1990's and the shootout with the Deputy and the 2 brothers on the lam. I was amazed that neither party hit nothing but air.
Until then I thought that gun professionals had things well in hand, and knew how to train cops at least, to shoot accurately. NOT!
So began my recent quest into the modern land of the gun. I was to find out that about 100 years since the advent of the autoloader, combat pistol accuracy was a miserable 20% or less. And nothing was being done about it, other than mostly just doing what had been institutionalized and regurgitated for about 100 years. More than that, the powers that be were most adamant in saying do it our way, or it's the highway for you Jack.
Now, a review of patents from the early 1910's show that shooting using the index finger for aiming was thought of as being a good way to shoot.
I also recently ran across on the web and by searching, that P&S was used in life and death shooting as early as 1835.
The method, per a US Army training manual, eschewed use of that method with the beloved 1911, as pressing on the take down pivot can cause that marvel to jam.
Walter read one of my articles and contacted me. He sent me his paper which I made the digest of, which he approved of, and which we both had published. Paul Castle of CAR, sent me his training manual and tapes, and from them I wrote up the info on the CAR which is on my site. Paul approved of it as written and has since sent me other material as well. It is on my site. And I have received lots of unsolicited and supportive e-mails over time for other Point Shooting advocates.
One reason I was going around beating the drum for P&S, was to have people, in making responses, forestall me from continuing to "waste" my time and money in pursuing and maintaining a US Patent on the index finger rest.
To date, I have been discouraged by attitudes and opinionated strong talk, but not by facts, data, studies, and the like. Actually, after taking the slings and arrows sent by "my betters", and thinking about them, I usually just dig deeper into the subject, and occasionally come up with plumbs like the info on the use of P&S in life and death shooting as far back as 1835.
[[Note:, after our e-mail exchange, I was digging deeper, and came across an egonomics book wherein it says in regard to handtools that "The grip force should not be concentrated on one or two fingers or in the center of the palm, but distributed over a wide an area as possible." The P&S grip dovetails nicely with that as it is a 4+ fingered grip. That book also states that "A trigger should be activated using the middle finger." And "The middle joint and not the end joint should be utilized."]]
[[My response continues:]]
As you know or may not know, individuals and police agencies are welcome to add the index finger rests to their personal or agency arms with nothing coming my way.
I also do not acquiesce or go along with the attitude in the gun world that one must, to gain acceptance, bring whatever it is that they are about, to the experts in charge on a silver platter and with hat in hand.
IMHO, they are the one's who given the atrocious police casualty rates that have been and still persist, should be seeking out and testing by themselves, and for themselves and others, anything that might advance the "art" of survival shooting for police.
That they don't has been a mystery to me. It is though those in charge have a death wish of some sort. That's OK, but not if they visit their bizarre thinking on others, due to their actions and inaction.
..........
"...Those of us who take seriously our societal obligation to stand in harms way, question methods that are taught regardless of who is teaching. Applying our individual common sense and knowledge of physical skills and ergonomics to the method taught. If someone teaches me something they created to "make it more better" doesn't make sense or isn't simple, I call B.S. and make 'em defend it.
All the best shooters in the world utilize a "traditional" grip. That includes competition guys like Dave Sevigny, LE trainers like Dave Spaulding and Delta soldiers like Larry Vickers.
All those whom I trained with and under, as well as the hundreds of professional police officers/ police trainers and professional instructors on 10-8 forums. I may be the least qualified person who dismisses this method. NO ONE I have asked about this thinks it's a good idea for the many reasons I and many others have illustrated.
Not being an LEO or combat soldier you don't have a practical leg to stand on. Your website target is telling, missing with the fifth round. How fast did you put those rounds out? I can put five SIGHTED rounds on any target bigger than a quarter at 15 feet in less than two seconds including draw. Utilizing your method I challenge you to shoot an El Presidente exercise in front of witnesses and send me your time and points down.
I will admit you have stuck to your guns as it were. But I believe based on all my years of training and actual experience that the technique is incorrect and dangerous. Point shooting is fine and can be accomplished accurately, at close range, under stress having NEVER done it before if you have always trained with sighted fire.
I await your reply, as I love a good argument."
With all due respect ........, if Point Shooting is fine and can be accomplished accurately at close range, under stress having NEVER done it before if you have always trained with sighted fire, how come the hit rate is so piss poor in armed encounters, because in most all the videos I have seen, the cops are not sight shooting, and most all have been trained to Sight Shoot.
Now, Point Shooting is just about brain dead simple, (at least P&S is), and it can be learned with little or no training.
It is much like riding a bike. An impossible task until done, but once done, a task that is just about automatic. However, leaving the learning until one's life is on the line in a CQ life threat situation, is more than a bit bizarre to me.
I'll leave it at that.
All jobs are honorable.
And gun professionals get paid to do what they do.
I just expect more than a resultant hit rate of 20%, as the best they can do.
Best regards, Good luck, and sorry for the book,
..........
And here is his reply:
Sir,
Your argument is circular and obviously something is being "lost in translation" as it were. Walter was looking for other opinions that backed his, I know this from first hand information. So you backing his assertions and his backing yours are mutually exclusionary. Also you didn't answer my question as to how fast you put those four out of five rounds on target.
The fact is cops don't train often at all. I know of a few departments where all the patrol officers train every other month, that is almost enough. Most qualify 1-2 times a year (mine included).
You cannot train cops to point shoot for the simple reason that the liability falls back on the department in the event the officers misses and shoots the wrong person (see your Mr. Orange target) I would then have to testify in court that I taught officer so and so to just point his gun at Mr. bad guy and blast away. I didn't bother to tell him to use those little nubs on the top of his pistol used for aiming it. Then the department eats about 100 million bucks for killing little Suzy Q down the street. I'm not saying it's right, it just is.
I can't get cops to practice on their own. I own my own range and give away free ammo and my time to train and no one comes. They just aren't interested. The onus though still falls on me to train them during their mandatory once a year firearms qualification. the standards are MINIMAL at best and given the mandated course of fire P&S shooting would fail anyway because most of the rounds are expended outside of 5 yards.
The method of training is not at fault it is the amount of practice, the bean counters who hold the purse strings say to us "Well the last cop killed in the line of duty here was in 1947, we don't need 10,000 rounds per year per officer when we hardy ever have shootings." Again I'm not saying it's right, it just is.
Fighting for your life is just plain scary, having done it on several occasions. There is no way to replicate that kind of fear in a training environment. Our FOF training I see probably 60-80 percent hit ratios from our better shooters (the two of us who practice religiously and compete hit about 90%)but during FOF there is not real fear. The adrenaline dump doesn't happen, time doesn't slow, vision doesn't tunnel. These are things I and others I know have had happen during real life DF encounters.
Punching holes in paper or running simulators or FATS or even life fire shoot house problems doesn't fully address the problem, regardless of the method of employment.
Yet another problem your grip encounters in teaching cops to shoot is they have to defeat multiple holster safeties that are designed with a traditional grip in mind. Moving your fingers all over the place to establish a different grip after defeating those safeties adds time to the first round fired. Hicks law states that is an inevitability.
You can publish anything you want, as I lose any right to the privacy of my thoughts as soon as I press send.
Awaiting your answer,
P.S. I am having my buddy at the Force Science research Center look into putting your theories to the test, with scientifically designed tests."
..........
And here is my response:
Hi again,
I don't plan for this reply to be a book, nor a precise reply.
My way of looking at the circle is it shows that we are mutually supportive, as your 10-8 associates are in castigating me. And we all may be wrong without a truly scientific study and investigation of just what is, is. So I welcome that.
Long long long ago, the sun was supposed to revolve around the earth, and more recently than that, the earth was supposed to be flat.
That was then, and this is now.
As to shooting speed, I just shoot as fast as I can point and pull. In my video of shooting five times using P&S from a side held position, I brought the gun up and fired five "aimed" as in point-n-pull shots in under 2 sec or less shooting two handed, and under 3 sec or less shooting one handed.
May be poor by your standards, but that is much quicker 10ths of sec wise, than I can shoot using other PS methods and much less Sight Shooting. And yes, I may be killed, but I still would go with the fastest means, for me, that I can use that gets hits, and hopefully would at least stop the SOB trying to kill me.
Of course it would be better to avoid, but if given no choice, I think one should not surrender, but go with what they got unless facing way way superior odds. That is my opinion and should be considered as such
-
Science says officer's won't use the little nubs on their pistol due to the stress of such situations, as one's survival instinct will demand that they focus their attention elsewhere, or face immediate extinction.
-
As to bean counters and counting, I had a "staff officer" tell me via e-mail, why should they spend more time (and money), than they do to get an officer through a minute or two of their career's life with, and one with an unpredictable outcome. Or that's how I remembered it. Nice to get the Brass's support eh?
-
As to shooting at a perp holding a hostage and having only an inch or so to aim at, I wouldn't try a head shot. IMHO, I would go for the legs and feet of the shooter first and the hostage second, as trying to stand, or hold up a hostage just won't work if you know how heavy people really are and they they can't hold themselves up.
And when the shooter falls down, or the hostage does, shoot the bad one, until the threat is stopped. And again that is just MHO.
I often think that my best adversary would be a range trained sight shooter, as they would be trying to do what they wouldn't be able to, while I stopped them from trying to kill me by doing just what comes naturally.
Not making light of the situation, but what else would one expect one to do. Wait until the killer had their wits about them so that they could kill me. Sorry, but that is not a good scenario for me.
I also disagree with your comment that training will make you better, or words to that affect. They may be true on the one hand, but on the other you say that "Fighting for your life is just plain scary, having done it on several occasions. There is no way to replicate that kind of fear in a training environment."
So what is left for the run-of-the-mill shooter to do.
The obvious answer is that if they can't train up to this and that combat standard, they should hang up their gun, or give it up to the authorities.
Or in other words, those who are not trained up to the rigors and standards needed in real combat (and which as yet are not laid out), should not be allowed to have guns, that is except for crooks and others who don't abide by gun laws.
A better way to my way of thinking, would be for those in charge, to investigate and come up a better solution. The days of blaming officer's for their being shot and or killed, are hopefully beyond us.
-
I totally agree with your comments on FOF.
As to drawing and gripping, Walter did say that: It can take considerable practice before a gun can be drawn from a Safariland SS III holster with the index finger being placed on the take down pivot and the middle finger placed along the trigger guard ready for the shot when on target.
Again, I am not in charge of holsters or their design.
When entering that type of info into digests or write-ups, I usually quote the gun professional word for word, as I am not one.
Thank you very much for passing some of the info along to the Force Science Group.
One of the members, Dr. ... has had favorable things to say about my site in the past.
IMO, it would be a good and fitting tribute to Walter if he was the one who became recognized as the father of modern survival shooting and it's implementation, as well as the savings of many officer lives and injuries due to it's implementation/re-implementation.
If you want more info, or if I can be of service in the investigation, please let me know.
Best regards,
Use your go back button to return to the prior page, or click here for the index.
