9/22/2011 3:33pm, #51
I don't know if its an issue of having to convince anybody of anything here IMO. I have tried various positions and a bit of a tilt seems to work for ME.
I mentioned Mike Pannone before. He's a pretty respected tactical trainer and he says this:
That said, if holding vertical worked better for me, thats what I would do. I don't think that a little tilt or not is an issue of dogma.
Traditional one-handed Bullseye shooting emphasizes holding the handgun in a vertical position with a more side on stance. However, for some shooters, especially when in a more forward facing fighting stance, holding the pistol vertical can feel uncomfortable or un-natural. For these people rotating the firearm slightly inward so the sights are canted slightly toward the off-side can help. This is not the sideways gangsta grip. The inward cant does not lock the person up quite so much, and is a bit more relaxed and comfortable for the shooter, especially when in a forward facing stance and when moving. This allows the bones and such in the forearm to adopt a more natural alignment without creating significant sighting problems within the normal short-range SD distances that are expected when shooting one-handed.
...point your finger at an object far away from you....is your hand straight up and down or at a canted angle? That's the basic premise to the concept. Your hand naturally angles (vs a traditional straight up/down grip) when it's pointed at something....i.e. one handed point shooting. Not for everyone, but it seems more natural and comfortable for some shooters.
I picked the technique up when I was forced to shoot one handed while wearing a tactical vest with rifle plates. Not being as broad shouldered as some guys, I found that having to face a target square while trying to hold the pistol vertical pinched the chest plate into my shoulder pocket. After a few hundred rounds the pinch started to cause my arm to tingle like it was falling asleep. I tried the cant and have been doing it ever since.
9/22/2011 4:05pm, #52
- Join Date
- Mar 2006
I understand what you're saying, but I can't drink the koolaid.
As far as "the inward cant not locking the person up quite so much" - what does that even mean?
Also, the whole natural forearm bone alignment argument - I've heard the same justification for various martial arts techniques. I think it's a bogus explanation in martial arts and I think it's a bogus explanation in shooting.
The fact that some experienced shooters advocate something doesn't make it right. That amounts to "Because Sensei says so."
I'll stop arguing about it because it's pointless. I suppose we'll have to agree to disagree.
9/22/2011 7:08pm, #53
"Lock up" in terms of having to assume a specific stance/grip in a dynamic environment. I find that when moving and shooting at pistol ranges (one handed that is) is that "canting" seems easier to move and shoot with ....for me.
Personally...while detailed explanations are good, ill take results and "the word" of guys who have btdt with a tad more consideration. Especially on an issue as pedantic as tilting a pistol a bit. If they were telling me that shooting with my middle finger upside down I would be more concerned with the rationale.
As an aside. Im just enjoying the conversation here. Im not intending to seem argumentative.
Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk
9/23/2011 8:23am, #54
- Join Date
- Mar 2006
Do you remember the state of martial arts prior to the UFC? Every martial arts school out there claimed their system was the best, the deadliest, or whatever. There was no real way to disprove them. As a result a bunch of dudes got tons of respect even though they were teaching complete bullshit. You could walk into any class and see the mindless brainwashed robots nodding their heads in agreement as they stared at their instructors wide-eyed and awestruck. Of course, there are still some of these instructors, but they're easily avoided by people who care to know the truth.
My concern is that this is still widespread in the tactical shooting community. Especially pistol shooting. There's no forum to prove or disprove what is being taught, for obvious reasons. There really are VERY few people who have repeatedly faced and killed armed assailants with a pistol. The techniques that are being taught haven't really been tested to the point that we can truly determine what is right and what is wrong. The fact that someone made it back from Iraq alive or survived one or two encounters with a crackhead doesn't validate the technique. It's just not enough information to go on.
I understand the difference between target shooting and tactical shooting. I know there is a need to adapt your technique to the situation. But my concern is that a lot of the stuff that ends up being considered the gospel really caught on simply because it was "tacticool".
Also, a lot of the guys that are out there teaching wide-eyed, head nodding students didn't gain their combat experience with pistol shooting at all. Travis Haley from Magpul Dynamics became famous for his rooftop sniping video in Iraq where he killed a shitload of insurgents. Now he's a pistol tactics guru as well and people are eating it up.
From the information I can gather, Paul Castle, the inventor of CAR has never fired a round outside of training. I'd be willing to bet Mike Pannone who you mentioned earlier has a pretty short list of live pistol encounters as well.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not dismissing these guys' experience. They're much more experienced than I am. Better trained, too. But my point is that despite tons of training and combat experience, I'll never just take someone's word for it because they say so. It HAS to make logical sense to me, otherwise I won't use it. There's just really nobody out there who has tested their pistol technique enough in combat for me to just take their word for it. And in the worst cases you end up with **** like the OP posted.
One of the few guys I can think of who has really had to test himself is Lance Thomas. Look him up on Youtube if you don't know who he is. He's not out there training anyone, though.
I've enjoyed the discussion also. I realize we're splitting hairs.
Last edited by Devil; 9/23/2011 8:29am at .
9/23/2011 11:29am, #55
You know, for many years it was frowned upon to rest one's rifle magazine on the ground as a means of adding stability to the prone position. I remember being give a royal dressing down on a range because I was doing that very thing and, despite the fact it was increasing my accuracy by reducing lateral movement of the barrel (especially when gassing) I was told not to do it because it was "wrong".
Not surprisingly, today, we're now teaching soldiers to rest their magazines *IF* they find it improves the accuracy of their shots because, at the end of the day hitting the target quickly and accurately is pretty much all that counts when in contact.
Bottom line, provided the marksmanship principles are in play, you do what feels right for you to achieve the objective of putting holes in your target. Nothing else matters when someone else is shooting to kill you.
Here's some of my Sqn pistol shooting
Last edited by Rock Ape; 9/23/2011 11:37am at ."To sin by silence when one should protest makes cowards out of men".
9/23/2011 11:43am, #56
- Join Date
- Mar 2006
So you can listen to what the experts say or you can do what is logical and makes sense to you. I vote for logic.
9/23/2011 12:24pm, #57
I think that the magazine on the ground example reinforces MY opinion...LOL.
What advantages are there to holding your pistol strictly vertical? Thats what all the instructors used to teach (dont put your magazine on the ground). Currently, most people who get paid to teach this stuff are saying "tilt your pistol if it helps you".
Last edited by tgace; 9/23/2011 12:30pm at .
9/23/2011 12:28pm, #58
9/23/2011 2:37pm, #59
Devil and tgace, your exchange embodies why Bullshido is probably the best place to discuss anything.
As for live training in pistolcraft, isn't that putting Airsoft to good use? It takes more research to find a decent “full metal” version of your favored pistol which also has a more or less realistic recoil simulation, almost certainly more money as well, but it beats the hell out of paying for Simmunition.
Camp Skeletor has apparently been a successful training exercise twice; why not organize something similar and focus on live testing of technique theories? If you really want to fuel future forum debates, you could have the teams swap techniques at the end of each round and compare effectiveness down to the individual. I would love to see an exercise wherein:
- Each night of camp, one guy is chosen to sleep in the shoot house.
- Meanwhile, someone else was told earlier in the day that he was to infiltrate the shoot house at a designated time.
- The guy sleeping in the shoot house hears a noise (played a set volume and such), and then has to assess the situation and defend his “home.”
- As a nod to Clint Smith, the home defenders uniform will consist of Mickey Mouse underwear and flip-flops.
Just an idea.
9/23/2011 2:43pm, #60
- Join Date
- Mar 2006