Point Shooting

[Brian King]

AzQkr wrote

"Fight to the sights, don't die trying to get to them."

Nicely said

Thanks
Brian King

 

[sgtmac_46]

While I respect anyone who trains hard to learn the art of the pistol......i'm far from convinced that Point Shooting is superior to the Modern Technique.

Threat focused skills aren't superior or inferior to the modern technique [ sighted fire ]. Neither should be trained exclusively over the other. They compliment each other, based on the "time/distance" equation you find yourself in relative a SD situation.

All my carry guns with the exception of two [ used for demonstration purposes in the classes ] have night sights and one has the XS big dot front sight.

When the time is short [ you're behind the curve for some reason ], and the distance is within the scope of various threat focused skills, you are going to be faster to hits on threat using them than any sights verification system.

Fight to the sights, don't die trying to get to them.

Brownie

Good response per MT versus PS.....and clarified a couple things I had misinterpeted from reading your comments. I absolutely agree that threat focused shooting is the answer at close quarters, and it's the way we already train.

But, then that's exactly what Col. Jeff Cooper was training, too......

 

[AzQkr]

I absolutely agree that threat focused shooting is the answer at close quarters, and it's the way we already train.

Please define the distance of "close quarters" so we're all on the same page.

Brownie

 

[Deaf Smith]

The US Army SF 5th Group trained at Gunsite, Blackwater and several other MT schools [ many of these training centers are by THEIR OWN definition MT schools ]as a unit over the course of 6 months before deploying. Ayman came out here with "Front sight press" skills he was trained in at these same schools. Is that MT enough for you deaf?Brownie

And that's the only thing way they trained brownie? And all Blackwater teaches is Cooper's MT. Are you SURE? Weaver stance? Hmmm?

I sure remember three Marine instructors at the Chapman Academy when I trained there. In fact, I've seen military instructors at most places I've trained. And to think the SF never trained for 20 years at any other method except Coopers MT, Weaver stance and all.

That don't compute brownie.

Still sounds like you mix all sighted fire methods with Coopers MT and don't have a clue as to what flash sight picture and the presentation methods of Coopers MT.

Deaf

 

[AzQkr]

And that's the only thing way they trained brownie? And all Blackwater teaches is Cooper's MT. Are you SURE? Weaver stance? Hmmm?


Perhaps you missed this before, let me reiterate it once more for you.

Whether that all inclusive of present day MT or not isn't my concern. What is my concern is that these front sight press trained operators are finding they are faster with the combat accuracy in less than two days over their previous training which is heavily weighed in the MT skills sets so that may have a better chance of surviving with a pistol should the need arise and the skills are warranted based on the time/distance equation they finf themselves involved in.

Perhaps you need to realize that no matter what these guys were trained in at those training centers, whether that was all inclusive of MT or not, included the whole soup to nuts or not, they all have made their AAR statements listed throughout this thread, and then some, and that sir, is THE important message here:

That they've been to these schools, which include the Gunsite courses, and advanced level courses at that, and their opinion, having taken all that training and then the ITFTS course, is that they'll use the skills I train them in, and not the skills these schools offered.

I'm not interested in what they trained at these schools, whether that was all or part of the MT skills, I'm interested in their opinions about which skills are btter capable of keeping them alive.

Your constant straw argument about excatly what they were taught, whether that was all inclusive or not is irrelevant. They trained at these schools extensively, all of them teach MT skills in some form or another, they are ones who state they were taught MT skills, and they are the ones who've decided those skills are not as effective as the skills I teach.

Thats pretty damned simple to understand, so stop trying to complicate and distract from the facts in evidence from their AAR's. Its not going to work here anymore than it's worked at other sites.

Unfortunately, you don't have the benefit of both worlds like they do, having taken the training. Multiple years and multiple schools under their belts, real world do or die, and they've expressed their opinions on which has more value to them when lives are at stake.

Lets stop the dancing, you don't have the knowledge to make an educated/informed opinion, you can only follow me around the net and try to circumvent and confuse the subject in some attempt to justify your own opinions as to what is or is not necessary where SD skills with a pistol are concerned.

Brownie

 

[Deaf Smith]

What you missed brownie was the fact there are many ways of sighted fire and MT is only one. Yet you call all sighted fire MT and claim the SF use 'MT' and claim you have had courses in "MT" which oviously you havn't.

All you can say is some people who had some kind of sighted fire training didn't do as good as point shooting. And these people didn't even know what form of training they had.

That would be like someone here talking about how important and essential high kicks are in Shotokan. That meanly means they have no training at Shotokan.

All this makes what you say suspect. How about ringing up your SF friend and find out exactly where his '20 years' of MT was at and just what did he train in (if at all.)

Deaf

 

[AzQkr]

What you missed brownie was the fact there are many ways of sighted fire and MT is only one. Yet you call all sighted fire MT

What you've missed over an over again is the fact that they've been to the some of the best high level sighted fire schools in the country and have decided the skils I give them are where they want to be after two days, even when they've been training professionally for over 20 years for some of them.

It's no more or less than that, it's quite simple.

All this makes what you say suspect

What I say? The students who've been these other schools are doing the talking, remember the excerpts Deaf, not mine, theirs. Try to stay on course here, and not attmept to keep putting others thoughts into my mouth.

WhatI think is irrelevant, it's what the SF'ers, PJ's and those who've committed to the gunsites of the world as civilians is important. They've spoken based on understanding both sides of ther equation, something you can't speak to.

Brownie