From my vantage point, PK has admitted that his original thought process was not aligned with Glover's. But I don't necessarily see that yours was entirely aligned either, Shawn. So, rather than continuing to attack each other, why not just say "hmm, Glover has made some good points based on experience, likely greater than my own." and move on? The amount of ego and inability to help guide someone to a better conclusion is disappointing.
Best HD option in .223?
- Thread starter popcan
- Start date
PinaKaleada
CGN Regular
- Location
- South of most
I learned more after watching that video. Thank you.
Previously I was rather focused on how people would react right at the first shot. The video made me understand that there can still be fine tuning after you let those first aligned(but not yet aimed) shots fly, before getting your sight picture for the more precise aimed shots later on.
It makes complete sense and I can see how that narrative could very well have came from combat experience. Rifle, pistol and/or 20mm buckshot cannons alike.
Last edited:
I doubt you've ever defended your home with a gun which is what I meant. But hey I get what you're saying. Im mostly referring to the other side of the argument, going in circles.
Gunnerlove
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Vancouver Island
Speak for yourself. Down in front, sum up.
Gunnerlove
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Vancouver Island
People really need force on force training. Lose the gear, ditch the t-shirt lets get it on training. Welts and blood. I will punch out and smash, you can look for that front sight. Dueling, but in a doorway.
Runningfool
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- SW Ontario
I’m pretty sure some people can fine tune after those first not-yet-aimed shots fly. But if you think the likes of you or I are capable of this sort of thing from watching videos and plinking then you are gravely mistaken. I don’t know you and you don’t know me but I’d be willing to wager that if you put either of us in a close quarter gunfight, our groups are not going to tighten up as we make our way to the bottom of the magazine. In fact I would wager the opposite.
Watching a video and “understanding” what happens is so very different than putting it into play. It’s like Shawn’s example of heart surgery, only worse. It would be like being Kim Jong-un’s heart surgeon with your only training being watching YouTube videos! Good luck with that. Without a doubt there is value in watching videos and reading and learning about tactics. But there are limits of course and I do not think knowing something is possible necessarily translates to “now I can do that”.
I understand what you are trying to say but while the Glovers of the world can unleash lead and then dial in, the rest of us would be much more effective finding the sights first when under the stress of a gunfight like others have recommended.
Instead of whipping out my d!ck and showing off my piles of plinking brass I will tell you of the many thousands of times I’ve witnessed the effect of the stress created by the single beep of a timer...with no one shooting back...in a friendly environment...with nothing at stake other than a couple spots up or down on a practiscore sheet that no one really cares about anyhow. Spoiler alert: groups don’t tighten up as the misses accumulate.
Moral of the story for most of us is find your sights and pull the trigger. And hope you’re not up against a guy like Glover.
Last edited:
PinaKaleada
CGN Regular
- Location
- South of most
I watched the whole video. Correct me if I’m wrong, he said
4:40 “...which is how you can derive a basic degree of accuracy shooting a handgun without an aiming method” But he doesn’t advise it as a primary method.
14:11 “point shoot out of a self defense situation, they should be picking lottery numbers”
This is where Mike Glover comes in and tells you point shoot isn’t the primary method, but he will waste no time to point shoot the first 1-3 rounds before getting a sight picture at 4-5 for the precise shots.
If you listen closely Sage isn’t saying don’t point shoot. He’s saying it should not be enough to just know how to point shoot and be done with it like the FBI.
Mike and Sage is actually both correct and there’s no conflict. Mike is just describing the situational side, whereas Sage is focused on making you more capable with your pistol beyond the FBI standard.
Here’s an interesting idea. What if you put Mike and Sage face to face, Mike starts shooting early and let’s say Sage waits for the dot. I wonder who would be walking away alive.
Last edited:
PinaKaleada
CGN Regular
- Location
- South of most
Hey, you are free to bring up some Videotime+Quotes as well to support your view. Don't just say I'm wrong, bring up some quotes to prove me wrong.
Correct. But turns out Mike Glover says point shooting is just the first part. He started aiming by 4th and 5th round. I learned more about what comes after the "point shoot". This wasn't conveyed by anyone in your "aim first" camp.
Don't just say I'm wrong, bring up some quotes, thats how you approach the problem in a logical way. Wait.. aren't you the flat earther guy?
PinaKaleada
CGN Regular
- Location
- South of most
Means do not rely on just the point shoot like what Mike Glover does in his 1st to 3rd shot. Hence he teaches you how to aim. Which Mike says his 4th and 5th shots are aimed.
"doesn't absolutely demand it" itself tells you there are situations that demand it.
Actually relying on external information(just not yours) is what I have been doing and that's opposite of "thinking you know everything"
I'm not arguing any points in either videos. I'm only arguing against your old posts about how you're going to be point shooting anything 5m and less and think you're going to be successful.
PinaKaleada
CGN Regular
- Location
- South of most
And I learned more after watching Mike Glover's video that you can't just point shoot. You can pick up the sights after the point shooting and continue for the more precise shots.
Both videos actually demonstrates you can effectively hit the target without sights. It's like the #1 most obvious thing in both videos....
Close range immediate threat? Mike says you aim first you get shot in the face and die.
Context is key which you have no clue what he's referring to.
And in regards to Aaron about situations that absolutely demands it. He is talking about pectoral index/retention shooting as he explained in the video, but you're too close minded to get any of that.
PinaKaleada
CGN Regular
- Location
- South of most
So let me get this straight. Unless you're a professional, it wouldn't be possible to point shoot 1-3 before aiming? Thats opposite of what he's(mike) teaching. I'd venture to say it takes more skills to aim shoot than point shoot. No one is really emphasizing on the point shoot part, they just do it as fast as possible to get to the aim shoot part. It's not a professional feat during the pointing.
Question to you:
1) What is physically stopping your finger from pulling the trigger while you get your sight picture?
2) Is it difficult to train to point shoot with success? Isn't it a good grip + muscle memory thing?
And look, can we stop with the insults for a second. All the "you're too close minded" "Not plinkers like you" "you have no clue" sounds good to yourself, but makes yourself sound absurd to others, if you care. All I'm focused on is having a discussion on an open forum infront of an audience. Name calling and insults really doesn't do anything for you. Even if I end up to be incorrect in my view.
Last edited:
The only thing you are focusing on is trying to prove that people that do this for a living know less than you. Again notice how not a single person agrees with you. Your opinion is based on, "i think", "I believe". "I watched on youtube" while ours it based on "I have done", "I have been trained", "I have confirmed during force on force", "I have done it for real with real guns against real bad guys with real guns"
Or do you want another pic of brass?
Shawn
Last edited:
