One thing to keep in mind is that they were not doing what we call precision shooting - they were shooting center mass on a known hostile.

What the TS does is shoot eyes out over shoulders.

CQB is about precision shooting - a lot of people forget that part for some reason. It is discriminatory.

The other thing to remember is that those guys were Innovators. They would kick our collective asses if we stagnated and failed to move forward.

I hadn't seen Guy's post above yours - he makes a great point. Heads move a lot.

Thank you for your input, Grasshopper.

This has been discussed ad nauseam but for you we can continue to beat this dead horse.:rolleyes:

Had the Col attended a recent Special Forces shooting school I’m sure he would agree with how we’re now doing things. In fact I’m sure he’d be impressed. We’ve come a long way from point shooting…….. While I would agree that point shooting had its day that day has come and gone. Some of the Special Forces Vietnam Vet's taught me to point shoot, both pistol and rifle. Those techniques were good but now we've evolved to bigger and better methods.

Here are a few things to ponder, no one in the National Shooting leagues, that wins, point shoots. You will only find about one or two "firearms" instructors that actually advocate or teach point shooting. I know that no one in Special Operations is taught to point shoot, (well cept maybe our doorgunners…..) and the reason is point shooting is not surgical enough when firing into a mixed crowd. While not every SF soldier has attended our surgical shooting schools, many have and those that have teach those that have not.

Many in the US military carry pistols, very very few have been taught to use them offensively and only a handful with tack driving precision.

Please feel free to learn point shooting and I will continue to use the sights, all the time, every time.

I almost forgot, didn't I teach you to shoot a bullet hole through a bullet hole?
You cannot do that point shooting.

Team Sergeant
"Gun Whisperer"

Some training buddies and I took the Hocking College point shooting instructor course a couple of years ago. This is part of the Ohio POST curriculum as taught by Hocking and is the most direct Applegate lineage instruction available (the COL went and met with them, designed the curriculum and taught their first instructors.) I think I was third or fourth in the class of twenty one students.

That said, Sneaky is exactly right. Point shooting is NOT precision shooting and even very skilled and practiced individuals cannot achieve the degree of precision that TS and Sneaky do. When I'm really on my game, have been practicing faithfully and am having a good day, I can hit a beer can two out of three times at ten yards using Applegate's methods. At that same distance, they're putting bullets through the same hole. Something to think about.

Both methods have their place. As Sneaky points out if you're at relatively close proximity to the BG, across an average size room or closer, a saucer sized group in the chest is probably more than adequate.

Among people I know who've really trained in both sighted shooting and point shooting, there is no "controversy" over which method to use. There is unanimity that sighted fire with both hands on the weapon is most desireable for both accuracy and rapid recovery. There is also recognition that there are likely to be times when circumstances make this untenable and being able to get hits shooting one handed without using your sights is a desirable skill to have.

A few interesting data points;

- D.R. Middlebrooks has repeatedly demonstrated that he can hit a plate out to fifty yards using a pistol w/o sights in a sort of Mod-Iso point shooting hybrid.

- In our class at Hocking everyone could get good hits (roughly saucer sized groups COM) at five yards. Perhaps three quarters of the class could do so at seven yards, only a third could consistently accomplish this at ten yards.

- A buddy was in a FoF class where the front sight had fallen off the training gun, he, and several other students, went through several iterations before anyone noticed the sight was missing. In close range confrontations even those who have trained sighted fire extensively may fail to use their sights (though they may think they are doing so.)

HTH

Oooops, cross posted with TS. Not taking issue with anything he posted and no disrespect or disagreement intended.

Thank you, TS. Still trying to grab that pebble . . .

Correct.

Also remember the Col. Rex Applegates book was written on how to take a large number of men, who may have no experience or interest in firearms and give them some proficency to shoot in combat while conducting this training in the shortest possible period of time.

This is also what police departments have to do thus the Col.s work with Hocking College.

Team Sergeant,
I can safely state that Applegate would be thrilled to see the evolution into what is being done today.

None taken.

That was a well written post.

Our missions dictate our level of training. One of our missions is counter-terrorism;

"Hostage or Sensitive Materiel Recovery. These are operations conducted to rescue hostages and/or recover sensitive materiel from terrorist control, requiring capabilities not normally found in conventional military units. The safety of the hostages and preventing destruction of the sensitive materiel are essential mission requirements."


It would not bode well to have an "accident" on one of these type missions.;) And the reason we are taught to shoot surgically....

TS

I was fortunate enough to go shooting with the Team Sergeant a few times.

Since then I have run a few FoF evolutions. Most of these evolutions by design put you behind the curve. I now try to use my sights all of the time. Although there have been a few evolutions that I have run where I don't remember if I used my sights or not. But, after looking at my paint rounds on the BG's and reviewing video tapes. I'm sure I use my sights all of the time.

I'm now a firm believer in using sighted fire all of the time. Also I think that you can train to a point where you will either consciously or subconsciously us your sights all of the time. But, I'm still working on consciously using my sights all of the time.

The long and short of it is, using sights = more accurate hits.

However, I am but a Padawan

Most affirmative, Sir. For most people, getting buy works, for those whose missions require more, that will not do. I sometimes feel that what I learned in the Marines is not much different than in the times of the Civil War compared to the professionism and expertise being taught today.

It is almost as though in RVN we faught with buck N ball.

I know that I may be beating a dead horse here, however I just wanted to add something on this subject. Try using the method of keeping the gun in and parallel with your line of sight whether using your sights or not.

If you are being attacked and the "bad guy" is 7 yards in front of you, do you really think you will need to use your sights on his high center chest if there is no penalty for a miss? The gaol is to find YOUR balance of speed and accuracey that is realistic for a fight. Your brain will try to force you to keep both your eyes open therefore using your sights is an advanced mechanical skill.

I'm not by any stretch of the imagination saying that sights are not important. Sights are only important if that's what you need to use to get the hit. If it's a one hole drill you will need them, if it's a high center chest at 7 yards you shouldn't but everybody's competencey is different.

In my classes I get my students to find their personal balance of speed and precision. They do this by shooting at a close distance and shooting at different sized targets and not using their sights. I like the S.E.B. target for this specific drill. High center chest is 4-6 shots and all numbers and head shots are 1 shot only. Always shoot as fast as YOU can while still getting combat accrate hits. Instead of focusing on the front sight, focus on the exact spot in the center of mass that you want to hit. If the gun is in and paralled with your line of sight, you will hit inside that combat accurate target area. Therefore you are working with what happens to you naturally in a fight instead of against it.

As you move back you will slow down and you will get to the distance that you will need to use your sights to get the hit in the combat accurate area. This is not point shooting, the gun is in the same place, the same way every time......in and parallel with your line of sight. There is a lot more to it, but if you just give it a try you may find that this will make you much more efficient in the context of a fight.

And when there is a "penalty for a miss" what do you teach then?

If you teach to "always" use your frontsight you will not miss. Try a "flash" front sight when in close. When in a close fight most will default to training, and if you teach to use the frontsight that will become the default.
This is how Special Forces is taught to shoot, we stopped point shooting decades ago.

Thank you, Team Sergeant - this answers a question I've had for some time.

A CCW holder who hits the wrong target - or, for that matter, misses the target - might face a considerable penalty for a miss.

Not trying to start a debate by any means but "point shooting" can be done with the gun in any position. Again the gun is in the same place whether you are using your sights or not.

I recentley had an SF guy down here in one of the classes and I saw the method you use. I'm not saying that the method is bad. I used to use it myself.

People will naturally slow down or use their sights when there is a penalty for a miss. I let them experience it for themselves in a drill I have.

Unfortunatally this is just one of those topics that is just much easier to demonstrate and teach someone in person. If you want more info just PM and i've got some.

But you have, once again, started the debate and I'll be the first to tell you point shooting is dead.

If you teach individuals to a higher standard they will strive to maintain that standard, and we teach a much higher standard.

Ranger Paul Howe teaches this method, using sights. I actually do not know of any Special Operations instructor that uses or teaches a point shooting method.

And you work for?

I know who Paul Howe is. Great book. I'm a contract instructor. But that is only until March when I leave. I've taught some of his students as well considering i'm in Houston just a few hours away. Haven't had the pleasure to train with him personally yet.

I'm not disagreeing with your method, point shooting aside. Your absolutley correct that the student will default to their level of training. If they have an understanding of their balance of speed and accuracey and believe in their application of that ability they will always get the hit. Misses are not acceptable in our program either. I just don't believe that in Extreme Close Quarters people will look at their sights when being attacked.

I have a link that I think that you would find really interesting but my computer is acting like a shit bag right now. Please go to this website and take a look at this study.

http://www.forcesciencenews.com/home/index.html

Go to transmission #135. I believe the original study is in transmission #134 but #135 sums it up pretty good.