Sights - or No Sights - which is best??

[tire iron]

There seems to be two different schools of thought when it comes to the use – or lack of use – of sights when it comes to handguns. One group states that unless you use the sights – you won’t hit what you want to hit. This group is known as “Front Sight” shooters. Note that this term has nothing at all to do with the “school” in Nevada by the same name. The term predates the school by decades. The other group states the sights are not necessary – that one can hit “instinctively”. This group is known as “Point Shooters” – as they say you can shoot just like you can point your finger. Hmm…I wonder which side is right??

At a shooting match recently – someone asked me if I see a clear sight picture for every shot. I answered that sometimes I do – and sometimes I don’t – it depends upon the distance to the target – cardboard – or real.

He asked me to explain. It was going to be awhile before he shot – and so I started to explain to him when I see a clear sight picture – and when I don’t.

A quarter of the way through he said “Wow! I am surprised! You are a Point Shooter!” (A “Point Shooter” is someone that doesn’t use their sights per se.) “I guess so” was my reply.

Half way through he looked puzzled.

Then three-quarters of the way through my explanation he exclaimed “Wait a second – now you sound like a Front Sight shooter” (meaning I use my front sight – the term Front Sight had no reference to a shooting school of that same name). “Yeah – I guess so” I answered.

“How can that be??” he queried.

“No where does it say that one has to be one or the other” I told him. “It totally depends upon the situation whether or not I see my sights at all. Sometimes it is as if they don’t even need to be on the gun – other times it would be nigh on impossible to make the shot without them.”

So – below I will give the same explanation that I gave to him. Note that the below explanation is for ADVANCED shooters. This is not for beginners. These are ADVANCED shooting concepts. Just like one needs a SOLID foundation with map and compass before one should rely on a GPS – or just like one should master the use of iron sights on a rifle before one relies on a red dot scope – one should master Sight Picture, Sight Alignment and Trigger Control before one delves into the “black arts” that I will explain below. In other words – don’t try this at home boys and girls – I am a trained professional blah blah blah. Seriously – get the fundamentals down FIRST – then practice this stuff – OK?? By getting the fundamentals down first – I mean wait until you are scoring at least Sharpshooter on the IDPA Classifier – not at home – not by yourself – but at an actual IDPA match. Times are always different when it is a match. Only by shooting under match conditions will you know what you can do under stress. Remember - an amatuer practics something until he gets it right - a pro practices something until he can't do it wrong. Master the fundementals FIRST!!!

OK – now lets get down to the meat and potatoes.

I have broken down the “sighting distance” into 5 different levels or distances.

The first level is what takes place from 0 to 3 yards/meters. This is IN YOUR FACE close. There is NO NEED to get a razor sharp front sight picture. What you want/need is HITS ON TARGET – and RIGHT STINKING NOW!!! Your body will be used as an “aimer” and you will not need sights at all. You would do just as well if your sights fell off your gun as you were drawing it. For shots this close sights are nothing more than extra weight on the gun. The gun may be up at eye level – or it may be lower and closer to your body if the target in within “bad breath” range. Trigger control here is “yanking on that trigger to get some dang shots off!” You may find yourself maneuvering while firing. Sight aligment is totally done with the body. TARGET. TARGET. TARGET. TARGET. Note how the sights are fuzzy – they happen to be in peripheral vison – your eyes see the whole gun superimposed on the target. Again - Focus in ON THE TARGET. Breathing control – NONE.
Here is a picture of 0-3 meters:

The second level is what takes place from 3-5 yards/meters. Here – you will be aware that there are some bumps on the top of the slide – but you really don’t see them as being “sights” per se – more of a rough aiming aid. You are still mostly relying on what you body “knows” for shots this close. You have trained thousands of hours – so your body knows what it needs to do to get hits at this range. The scientific term is “body index”. Trigger control here is still doing some “yanking” but with a little more finesse than that above. Focus in mostly on the TARGET. Target. Target. Target. Target. Target. Target. Sights. Target. Etc. You may be maneuvering – and if you are – you’ll probably slow down just a tad to make this shot. If you aren’t moving laterally or fore or aft – you should be moving “up and down” (getting small and then large). Breathing Control – yep – you are certainly breathing! HARD!

Here is a picture of 3-5 yard/meter range:

The next level is what takes place between 5 and 10 yards/meters. Now one starts seeing the front sight – and one’s trigger control is nice and smooth. No yanking here – cause it will result in a miss. If you are moving – you will slow way down to take this shot. At this range – focus is 50% on the target – and 50% on the sights – your vision is bouncing back and forth. Target. Sights. Target. Sights. Target. Sights. Minor breathing control.

Here is a pic:

Now we come to the next level – which is 10-25 yards/meters. At this range – you have a nice, SHARP focus on the front sight. Trigger control is nice and smooth. Focus is mostly on the front sight. Front Sight. Front Sight. Front Sight. Front Sight. Front Sight. Target. Front Sight. Front Sight. Etc. If you were maneuvering – you have STOPPED and are still. You may have even dropped to a braced knee position. Breathing is under control – you time the shots with your breath.

The last range is 25 + meters/yards. Focus is almost TOTALLY on the front sight. Trigger control is perfect – a clean, surprise break. You are either prone or using a support or rest of some kind. Sight alignment is perfect. Focus is on the front sight. Target is fuzzy. Breathing is under control. The shot is made during a pause in the breathing.

So – as you can tell – I am both a “Front Sight” user – AND a “Point Shooter”!

Anyhow – I hope this helps.

Any questions??


cheers

tire iron

 

[c_yeager]

I suppose that if I only had one eye that your pictures would have some resemblance to what I actually see when I am shooting. Alas, I am cursed with two.

 

[brownie0486]

tire iron;

Knowing both sighted fire and threat focused skills with a handgun is good. It's being well rounded in your skills.

Knowing when one needs to verify some sort of sight picture or doesn't have to solve the problem at hand, is paramount.

The distances either are used are unimportant in reality as to when you use one system or the other. Each shooter who has both skills will determine that for themselves based on their level of experience and training.

Good post.

Brownie

 

[the naked prophet]

If he looks that big at 25 yards, I'm going to grab a big honkin rifle or run away!



But seriously, I just kinda assumed that everybody did this. If you practice enough with your gun, you sould be comfortable enough with the feeling of the gun to be able to aim it at less than 12 feet. And it would be silly to not use the sights at 25 yards. Seems like common sense to me. Are there actually people who argue that you should ALWAYS use one or the other?

 

[SkyGuy]

Very nice presentation!
And you answered your own question; 'both'.

As an aside, point shooting was the easiest skill I ever had to learn. It is simply....look hard at the spot, point and shoot. It can be explained/learned in 5 minutes. After that, just practice.

Just curious as to how you aim and shoot in low light and darkness. That's an extremely critical part of self defense shooting.
.

 

[tire iron]

c_yeager,

So the rumors of you being a cyclops are FALSE??!!??!!


brownie,

Thanks for the kind words - and I agree - the distances will be different for eveyone - and I suspect that they are different for the same individual as they progress along the "skill path".


np,

Sorry if the scale it somewhat off - but you get the idea. And yes - there ARE those that think you should use sights for every shot. I have a good friend that claims that is what he was taught at Front Sight (the school).


SG,

Thanks for the kind words! Re: low light and darkness - if I have my light with me (which is 99% of the time) - then sights are usable. If I don't have my light - my trijicon's can help with indexing - but it really boils down to having the handgun being an extesion of one's hand/arm - body/arm/hand indexing. What are your thoughts on the subject of low light??

cheers

tire iron

 

[brownie0486]

tire iron;

SG is going to tell you you need a laser for lowlight and darkness use. He pushes them every chance he gets here and elsewhere on the forums. Thats why he asked you the question, as a lead in for what is about to come from him, again.

Brownie

 

[SkyGuy]

Re: low light and darkness - if I have my light with me (which is 99% of the time) - then sights are usable. If I don't have my light - my trijicon's can help with indexing - but it really boils down to having the handgun being an extesion of one's hand/arm - body/arm/hand indexing. What are your thoughts on the subject of low light??

Seems as though you've got it covered reasonably well for low light. You've got a light, nite sights and your point shooting-kinesthesia/muscle memory. Those aids help compensate for degraded visual acuity in the low light......and darkness, too.

I'm comfortable in the dark because I can navigate, hide, surprise, disappear. Light can give away your location and make you a target. It should be used sparingly. My Streamlight TL3 tac light with 211 lumens of white light is great for searching, ID, blinding and sighting. I don't use it cross-handed for obvious reasons.
.

 

[bobaloo]

Read Brian Enos' book a couple of years ago and he kept making the point that "you need to see what you need to see", meaning exactly what you're talking about. Depending on the range and the size of the target the required site picture differs, as does the speed with which you're going to be able to take a controlled shot.

I'm a big believer in front sights, but I still sometimes practice just seeing how fast I can draw and put a couple of rounds center of mass at 3-5 years without using the sights, or another technique for a worst case scenario is to draw and as the gun comes up fire 4-5 rounds. The rise of the barrel causes the gun to continue rising and you end up with a nice line of impacts 6" or so apart in a straight line up the middle of the target in about 2 seconds.

 

[WolfMansDad]

This is similar to the debate among shotgunners as to whether or not you see the bead. The answer to that one, in my experience, is, "It depends."

It depends on a whole bunch of things, not just range. Most of the time in practice I don't even see the gun. I'm completely focused on the clay pigeon. Last summer, I even removed the bead from my shotgun to see what would happen, and my scores did not change. On opening day of pheasant season, I went with a group of people and carried my bead-less shotgun. We warmed up with a few clay pigeons, and I did pretty well. Out in the field, however, I shot very poorly. I found out the hard way that, with actual birds, that I need a bead.

The ranges and target speeds were essentially the same between hunting and practice. The difference was my adrenaline level. In practice it is easy to be calm. When an actual bird goes up, especially something big like a pheasant, your heart rate goes up, your hands shake, and you are MUCH more likely to blow the shot. Slowing down and using the bead dramatically improves your (or at least my) performance.

This is only one example, but it may have something to say about shooting under pressure in other contexts.

 

[esheato]

Just wanted to compliment you on a good post and tell you that I stole your pictures.

Ed

 

[JMusic]

Tire Iron I think that is being called a good shooter.
Jim

 

[Charles S]

tire iron,

Nice post.

I think there are situations that call for point shooting and for utilization of the front sight. I am in the school that feels that the majority of the time the front sight is the best option. There are situations where point shooting is essential.

Great observations, nice illustrations.


Charles

 

[tire iron]

Thanks for all the kind words and for taking the time to post them!

cheers

tire iron

 

[zahc]

Based on many an airsoft battle, I am of the opinion that in a defensive use of a handgun almost nobody will use their sights, regardless of how much they train with them, and that in fact, insisting on using sighted fire in a defensive situation is a good way to die. Since you will not be using your sights, you might as well attempt to train by not using them, at least a little bit. Sights are a useful thing in the event of an atypically long range, atypically unrushed shooting situation.

That's my armchair $.02.

 

[Charles S]

Based on many an airsoft battle, I am of the opinion that in a defensive use of a handgun almost nobody will use their sights, regardless of how much they train with them, and that in fact, insisting on using sighted fire in a defensive situation is a good way to die.

That’s nice. It is good to know that you are basing your opinion on such realistic circumstances and training. If your life were on the line you might feel differently. Next time you play airsoft play this rule. When you are shot you can never play again in your life!

Many experts, who have real life experience, feel differently. Special forces teach the use of sights, the FBI teach the use of sights, LAPD Swat teach the use of sights, as do Clint Smith, Ayoob, Farnham, Cooper, Tailor, and Chapman, as well as a host of other professional instructors. The school of point shooting has become quite small, although most agree that there are circumstances in which it is acceptable and practical.

I have seen people, under stress, miss a target completely point shooting at a distance of 10 feet.

I would be willing to be that you have never had any training, and you have no real life experience. If you are going to carry a gun/and or utilize a gun for self defense get some professional training.

Good luck, stay safe.

Charles

 

[Deaf Smith]

tireiron,

Actually what you are photoing is pretty much what one sees. At very close range the sights are blury in one's peripheral vision. What is more the sight picture will most likelly be in short term memory, and thus many people will not remembering even seeing the sights in any form.

When I shoot at very close range the sights are lower than the ones you picture but the front sight is higher in the notch (it's called 'shooting out of the notch' by Brian Enos) and is very very fast. Pretty much instantionous in speed. And the farther one goes out the less front sight height and the more the gun is brought up till (for me) about 7 yards the sights are almost dead in the cone of vision (but still a slighty higher front sight.)

And the good part is after shooting awile you will be able to do this at night cuase you will just bring the weapon up to were you would see the sights in your peripheral vision if you could see them.

I've demoed that many times with my laser glock.

 

[Charles S]

When I shoot at very close range the sights are lower than the ones you picture but the front sight is higher in the notch (it's called 'shooting out of the notch' by Brian Enos) and is very very fast. Pretty much instantionous in speed. And the farther one goes out the less front sight height and the more the gun is brought up till (for me) about 7 yards the sights are almost dead in the cone of vision (but still a slighty higher front sight.)

Mossad Ayoob calls this his Stress Fire sight point, it is the same concept by a similar name. It works and it is very, very fast.

Charles

 

[brownie0486]

I have seen people, under stress, miss a target completely point shooting at a distance of 10 feet.

If they missed at 10 feet they were not pointshooting Charles. They were likely spraying and praying, not anywhere what a trained pointshooter/threat focused student would be doing at 10 feet.

Big difference between professionally trained threat focused shooters and shooters who, when under stress and time constraints, open up and just shoot in the general direction wildly.

Brownie

 

[SkyGuy]

The school of point shooting has become quite small, although most agree that there are circumstances in which it is acceptable and practical.

You've got it bass ackwards, Charles.
Point shooting is growing exponentially. It 'is' self defense shooting 101.

Charles, learn basic handgun handling and sighting skills and then if your interest is self defense....learn to point shoot.

You said "there are circumstances in which (point shooting) is acceptable and practical". Well, it is 'most' SD circumstances.
The great majority of deadly encounters occur in low light/darkness and at 20 ft or LESS.

Any SD instructor worth his salt teaches and promotes point shooting!
.

 

[Jamie C.]

People keep saying low light/no light....

Seems to me that in a no light situation, you won't see anything...

And in that case, you're going to be shooting by touch or by sound.

As for "sights/no sights", you can put me firmly in the class of "use which ever is best suited for the situation at hand".

In most cases, that would be "sights, when they're far away, point, when they're up close". It also comes down to how much time I have to make the shot, or how small an area I have to hit.

I also don't much care for lasers, for what it's worth, but think all SD firearms should have a good set of tritium night sights. This is a conclusion I came to after 2 years of working the 11 to 7 shift with the S.O. here, and using both.

But, if it'll help you get the holes where they need to be, use whatever you like, or whatever method you like.



J.C.

 

[Charles S]

Any SD instructor worth his salt teaches and promotes point shooting!

Gosh I wonder where that puts these guys.

Clint Smith, Ayoob, Farnham, Cooper, Tailor, and Chapman

SkyGuy,

Please feel free to name all of your instructors (that are worth their salt).

Charles, learn basic handgun handling and sighting skills and then if your interest is self defense....learn to point shoot.

I am well beyond basic skills.

I have taken classes under Jerry Miculeck, Ray Chapman, Clint Smith, John Farnam, Michael Izumi, and Jim Cirrillo. I have been shooting for 23 years. I have shot Second Chance, IDPA and IPSC, and I will be happy to shoot with you to demonstrate my profeciency. If I was not so busy with my Masters program I would be more than happy to shoot an IDPA match with you and we could compare scores. I feel I am competent in the handling of a handgun.

I was first issued a Parrish CCW permit just after 2000 and I have been carrying a gun almost for almost 15 years.

IPSC and IDPA is domintated with people utilizing aimed fire. Point shooter simply cannot compete at that level.

When you see a real shooter, like Miculek, shoot utilizing sights you will realize that there is not benifit to not utilizing sights at any distance beyond contact distance.

SkyGuy,
You are welcome to list your experience and credentials. I am interested.

As I stated before, there are circumstance in which point shooting is acceptable.

Next time you get a chance to talk with a real shooter in the Special Forces, FBI, LAPD, or other elite orginization, why don't you ask them if they use their sights. I tend to rely on people who have been there, done that, and survived. Basesed upon the experience of others (I hope I never gain practical experience in defense shooting) I belive sights are the best option.

I am still a student of shooting. I am willing to learn, and am open to new ideas. The new ideas must sound and founded in real life experience. Just because an individual can reproduce a skill time and time again means little. To be able to utilize the skill under stress is something else entirely.

Good luck, stay safe,

Charles

 

[Deaf Smith]

Carefull Charles,

When one says 'if they miss, it's cause they ain't pointshooting' would be like saying 'if they miss, they wern't using sighted fire'. Amusing, no?

And yes, I guess Clint Smith, Ayoob, Farnham, Cooper, Tailor, and Chapman are idiots. What would they know? Oh, Cooper was real good at hip shooting.
His first books did have point shooting in it, but as time went on and experiments were done, he came up with his MT.

What is more, the manuel in 'The Modern Technique', Gunsite Orange manuel that is, actualy states that when you cannot see your sights caused of darkness, they you still bring the weapon up just as you would IF you could see the sights and fire. I've demoed that at local indoor ranges with timer and yes at ranges past 10 yards you can get fast good hits that way, IF YOU PRACTICE. Of course, if you never practiced at a darkend range you woudn't know.

The manuel also has a section on the speed rock, their form of hip shooting. So it's not purely sighted fire for all occasions.

 

[Charles S]

When one says 'if they miss, it's cause they ain't pointshooting' would be like saying 'if they miss, they wern't using sighted fire'. Amusing, no?

Deaf Smith,

Please find where I stated that.

The group in question. There were 3 of them were at Mr. Jerry Miculeck's night shooting course. All three stated that they were students of point shooting. Furthermore, the oldest of the group had actually shot with and spoken with Bill Jordan (A man I respect greatly).

When we shot at night (about 11 pm) without any illumination at all (we were in a large, tall 3 sided berm) all 3 point shooter completely missed their IDPA silhouette at 10 feet. What training did they have, I do not know.

I have never completely discounted point shooting. As I stated there are situations where it is entirely appropriate. The speed rock is appropriate, contact separation shooting is purely point shooting. Again there are situations where it is appropriate.

Go back and re-read my post. I never stated that I have no use for point shooting. I stated that point shooting is better under certain circumstances. I also stated that aimed fire is fast, accurate and appropriate for most situations.

Once you have re-read my original, and second post. I think you will see that I believe both point shooting and aimed fire have their place in self defense.

Charles

 

[brownie0486]

When one says 'if they miss, it's cause they ain't pointshooting' would be like saying 'if they miss, they wern't using sighted fire'. Amusing, no?

Deaf, my little amused poster

Find one trained threat focused shooter who misses at 10 feet for me. Lets see, that would be people like Askins, Jordan, Bryce and a slew of others. They didn't miss.

Now take a look at the students we have trained. See anything in any of the aar's that suggest it is not 100% reliable at 10 feet, let alone 15 feet? Didn't think so. How about Bobby Munden? Think he misses at 10 feet?

No, it would not be the same as "'if they miss, they wern't using sighted fire'." Plenty of documented cases of people missing who were trained to to exclusively use their sights and were TRYING to use their sights and didn't use them for various reasons. Those circumstances, of which there are many, have been repeatedly excused as they were pointshooting, which is not only a fallacy but a disservice to the men and women who are trained to hit without using them. Should not have expected any less from you here though based on your past untrained in these skills opinions on the subject.

Cooper also stated the Weaver stance was superior to other stances as well, and had alot to learn in the final analysis didn't he?

WHEN you have been formally trained in some form of threat focused shooting skills and not just another one who has an uneductated opinion based on self study your opinion might be worth something, until then, it's worth little at best on a subject you know little about in reality.

Edited to add: Charles, Deafs quote was from my post, thats why I replied directly to the little "amused" commenter.

Brownie