# Sights are not as important as they used to be



## Handgun World (Oct 28, 2009)

I used to make a big deal about sights on a handgun. Recently I had the opportunity to take Roger Phillips' (Suarez International) Point Shooting Progressions class. What I walked away with is the knowledge that in a reactive gunfight, it's definitely possible to make good hits at up to 11 yards if you're skilled and trained in the art of point shooting.

I know, it's a bad word and many instructors criticize the skill, some go as far as call it a fraud. There are many ways to accurately aim handgun at typical handgun distances and make good hits. By learning to drive your gun to the focal point or using the slide or corners of the slide as an index, it really works.

I think this is a must class for anyone serious about defending themselves with a handgun.

Here's what one student had to say...

"Roger is in another class. Knowledge, charisma, enthusiasm, storytelling are all an integral part of the learning environment and Roger brings that. Not only does Roger explain in detail the mechanics of the drill but situations that may dictate a technique. Along the way the integration of previous drills, grips, stances, presentations, etc., are built upon as the class moves forward. As everyone always says there is so much information provided in the 16 hours that you simply cannot take it all in or drill enough to work out the bugs. But at PSP I did learn about a great glock-esque airsoft pistol to use in the backyard and/or garage to continue working on the lessons learned at home. This class exposed many of my weaknesses, the spacial reality of a gun fight and what I need to improve. This IS a must take class for anyone on the fence. And just for a bit of levity, my front sight came loose just before noon Sunday and I ran the rest of the class with the sight removed. While it was off I shot just as well, if not better. If that is not a testament to point shooting, I am not sure what is! Also it was nice to not be the youngest one there for a change! At 30 not many of my friends take self defense training seriously and waste money on new guns or other toys. Hopefully the skills learned in PSP will challenge their beliefs."

_______________

I'll be doing a podcast review on my experience soon and post a link to it.


----------



## Steve M1911A1 (Feb 6, 2008)

It isn't a fraud at all.
I "slide shoot" at short range, all the time.
And it's a very useful technique to have at hand, in low-light situations.

But I use the sights for accuracy and for the slightly longer shots, and also because I believe in retaining the skill of gaining, and using, a quick sight picture.
I believe that the sights on a defensive weapon are still extremely important—in fact, just as important as they've always been.


----------



## TAPnRACK (Jan 30, 2013)

Point shooting has been around a while, but rarely practiced because it's not as gratifying as tight groups on a ring target... for the recreational shooter.

I don't even use standard ring targets anymore and go with silhouette/photo targets for myself & students... and also train students in point shooting. The company I work for has now integrated steel targets into all of the classes so you get to point shoot from the holster and still get instant gratification of knowing you hit. A moving target system has been introduced this year as well.... and is really nice. Only one other company uses a moving target system in the state. 

I think anyone serious about self defense or surviving a deadly force encounter should seek this kind of training.

Training should be diversified and challenging in every aspect. Try to think of every possible situation you may realistically encounter in the real world and try to simulate it. Whether through live fire or dry fire exercises. 

We also still use the sights too... for longer engagements and more precise hit placement.

Sounds like you took a great course... and learned a lot of usable skills.


----------



## rex (Jan 27, 2012)

I agree,this is something anyone that carries should learn.I've always held the belief that at close range your sights are just going to slow you down.Real point shooting,as in 1/2 hip,takes alot of practice,but doing a sightover (is that what's refered to as index shooting?,I can't remember any more) is quite easy to pick up.

A guy named Brownie in Texas teaches Quick Kill technique,basically the same thing but expands into rifles and real yardage.I've talked to some that have taken his class and he has this down.Dancing golf balls at 50yds and more with a 22 rifle from the hip just seems extraordinary,but it can be learned.I believe Threat Focused is the name of his training buisness and he also has a gun shop with very good prices.He hangs out at Florida Concealed Carry Forums quite a bit when he isn't on the road teaching classes.The man's good with H2H and knives also,he may be old but he can still woop butt.

Mas Ayoob criticized him years ago about the Quick Kill technique,ironically he teaches it now under another name.


----------



## kerrycork (Jan 9, 2012)

I started point shooting at about age 14 when hunting grouse in New England and it workd well and I began to shoot hand gun and rifle the same way and still do it today because it works well for me. I've put on a few years since then and I'm somewhat slower but it still works.


----------



## Gunners_Mate (Feb 17, 2010)

Handgun World said:


> I know, it's a bad word and many instructors criticize the skill, some go as far as call it a fraud.


lol, tell Bob Munden it's a fraud.


----------



## Sandibeach (Apr 30, 2012)

Wow, very interesting technique.,., thanks for sharing your experience...makes me want to take a class like that one.


----------



## Handgun World (Oct 28, 2009)

I guess instead of saying the sights aren't as important as they use to be, I should say, they are still important, but I won't obsess over the type and color, etc., as much.


----------



## Steve M1911A1 (Feb 6, 2008)

Handgun World said:


> I guess instead of saying the sights aren't as important as they use to be, I should say, they are still important, but I won't obsess over the type and color, etc., as much.


Aaaahhh... That's better! :smt023


----------



## all357mag (May 20, 2013)

Sights are irrelevant in real world gunfights for survival!


----------



## VAMarine (Dec 25, 2008)

all357mag said:


> Sights are irrelevant in real world gunfights for survival!


Until you realize that they are still coming at you with 6+ hits in the chest.


----------



## Smitty79 (Oct 19, 2012)

VAMarine said:


> Until you realize that they are still coming at you with 6+ hits in the chest.


Sounds like you chose the wrong ammo or the wrong state.


----------



## VAMarine (Dec 25, 2008)

Smitty79 said:


> Sounds like you chose the wrong ammo or the wrong state.


Tell that to these guys:

* Why one cop carries 145 rounds of ammo on the job*



> In this free-for-all, the assailant had, in fact, been struck 14 times. Any one of six of these wounds - in the heart, right lung, left lung, liver, diaphragm, and right kidney - could have produced fatal consequences&#8230;"_in_ _time_," Gramins emphasizes.
> 
> ----
> 
> ...


* Officer Down: A Warrior's Sacrifice - Below 100 - LawOfficer.com*



> *Resistance to Gunfire *
> Mettinger absorbed nine rounds from Borders' .45-six of which hit him in the torso and two more of which literally severed his right foot-without any significant effect on his fighting ability. This would have been remarkable even if Officer Borders had been firing marginally effective rounds, but he was using .45 caliber Gold Dot ammunition, which is considered by many to be the best man-stopper on the market.
> Unfortunately, such resistance to gunfire is not particularly unusual in police shootings. The human body can stand up to an incredible amount of punishment, especially when fueled by alcohol, drugs, mental illness, anger or other strong emotion. In this case, Mettinger's near superhuman ability to take rounds appeared to have been bolstered by alcohol-induced rage, but sometimes the only identifiable explanation for such resistance to gunfire is sheer willpower. Regardless of the reason, it is alarming and distracting to face an armed assailant who seems impervious to your gunfire.
> 
> ...


Point shooting has it's place and all, getting fast hits on target is always good, but to say that "sights are irrelevant" is fool-hardy and not in keeping with what a lot of people that have been in gun fights say.

FWIW, I've attended Point Shooting Progressions with Phillips and the first thing did was a sighted fire exercise and some of the point shooting methods still incorporates using the sights, just with an improvised sight picture. One of the whole points of that class is to learn where you need to transition from point shooting to sighted fire, even then within 10 yards if you need to make a tight shot, for whatever reason (hostage, limited target available etc.) you're going to need your sights.


----------



## Steve M1911A1 (Feb 6, 2008)

all357mag said:


> Sights are irrelevant in real world gunfights for survival!


At any distance past seven yards, you had better use your sights if you want to make useful hits.
If you ever have to make a quick head shot at any distance, you had better use your sights if you want your shot to be effective. (You also had better know your sights' offset for elevation.)

You will find that trigger control becomes pretty important too, past seven yards and for head shots.


----------



## Glock Doctor (Mar 14, 2011)

(Pistol) failures-to-stop are an interesting phenomenon. Possible cures: Use a larger caliber pistol; fire multiple shots; and, in particular, tighten up your groups. If you're hitting the torso and nothing's happening then allow the muzzle to begin to climb and start hitting the head.

*Point shooting works! So does firing quickly while holding low on COM, and only partially, 'nesting' the front sight.*

Failures-to-stop are most closely associated with pistol ammunition. In comparison to, say, a broadsword many handguns are only marginally useful tools with which to defend your life. The problem involves more than just psychological fear response or less than ideal marksmanship. Handguns that (more or less arbitrarily) throw bullets of less than 140 grains, or travel below a muzzle velocity of 1,200 fps simply do not reliably stop human targets - especially not, 'amped up' human targets!

When a target won't go down try any of the following in order to correct the problem and effect a sudden stop: Fire in multiple volleys of two or three shots, each. *Tighten up the groups!* This may, indeed, require a pistol shooter to cease point shooting and begin to work with his front sight; AND, after switching to sighted fire, stop taking the time to, 'nest' that front sight.

Instead take a lower than usual hold on COM and continue firing with a slightly elevated front sight. When properly executed, the rate-of-fire should pick up significantly; and, when done right, neither will accuracy suffer. IMO, too many pistoleros automatically assume that they need either more bullets, more powerful bullets, or larger bullets when, in fact, what they really need is to more tightly group the shots they already have.

Personally, I'm not a big fan of JHP pistol ammunition. It's neither a perfect world, nor are there very many ideal solutions for things; and pistol bullets are no exception.

*Once they're, 'in the air' ALL bullets are dangerous*.

Me? I'd rather be keenly aware of: the target, the backstop, and the angles-of-fire than I would be to trusting my fate to a hoped for sudden stop with any sort of (What shall I say?) 'safer' or potentially, 'lower penetrating' JHP pistol ammo. Make no mistake! The potential problems actually caused by over penetrating bullets are minor in comparison to the more realistic and much more frequent problems caused by: clean misses, peripheral hits, thoughtless angles-of-fire, and notoriously poor marksmanship. (Think New York City!) 

Tightly grouping your shots, being practiced and able to fire multiple shots quickly, and using FMJ pistol ammo (especially in one of the larger, '40 something' calibers) is part of my own answer to the problem of failing-to-stop while using pistol ammunition.

The other useful (lifesaving) technique - that while it requires a steady hand and better than average marksmanship - is firing a Mozambique pattern against a stubborn target who remains active, continues to fight, and refuses to fall. Cooper used to recommend firing two shots to COM, pausing to look, and then a third shot to the head BEFORE stopping to assess the effect. I do it a little differently. One day while working my way down a line of, 'pepper poppers' it occurred to me that stopping to look at how I was doing between volleys was reckless and a waste of both time and opportunity.

Do NOT stop to look at how you're doing. Do NOT stop to assess the effect of your pistol shots. Instead of following Cooper's advice I began to simple continue concentrating pistol fire on a target UNTIL it wasn't in front of me, anymore. Two down: 'Bam!, Bam!'. One up: 'Bam!' &#8230;&#8230;&#8230; Two down: 'Bam!, Bam!' One up: 'Bam!' &#8230;&#8230;&#8230; Two down: 'Bam!, Bam!' One up: 'Bam!' Keep on rhythmically tapping that trigger; and continue alternating your sight picture from bottom-to-top, and target-to-target, until there's (quite literally) nothing left standing in front of you.

Remember the maxim, '_Handguns make lousy self-defense weapons!_' Firing a pistol like this virtually guarantees that the shooter's concentration will not be broken until AFTER the threat has been eliminated. Works well on timed, 'pepper poppers'; it should work well on other targets, too. 

NOTE: While the classical use of a pistol's sights might not be as important as it used to be, the necessity of being able to consistently hit the mark remains in vogue. Successful use of the above technique assumes a certain amount of demonstrable competence with a pistol-in-hand.

G-21, 45 ACP, 16 1/2 Yards, Continuous Rapid Fire w/ 'Un:nested' Front Sight ~










G-19, 9 x 19mm, 10 Yards, Continuous Rapid Fire, Point ~


----------



## Steve M1911A1 (Feb 6, 2008)

Broadsword? I believe that I'll pass: They're really hard to swing effectively, in the normal household room or corridor, and the amount of collateral damage in a crowd rapidly becomes both massive and messy.
:yawinkle:


----------



## acepilot (Dec 16, 2012)

I've been struggling with getting good hits at 10 and 25 yards with my SR9c or Sig SP2022. Seems a lot of experienced shooters stress focusing on the front sight. I can't focus that close up anymore. On a whim yesterday, I put on my reading glasses so I could focus on the front sight and my accuracy seemed to improve greatly. I emailed Tom Gresham of Gun Talk Radio and he suggested XS Big Dot sights. Before I spend $120 on a set, wondering if anyone has experience with them.


----------

