Customer Reviews

Bullseyes Don't Shoot Back

5 star:		(3)
4 star:		(4)
3 star:		(2)
2 star:		(2)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

This book updates the close quarter handgun firing section of "Kill or Get Killed." Point shooting has a couple of advantages over using the sights. Focus on the sights psychologically removes the shooter from the gun fight and can increase accuracy--but the human eye can focus on only one thing at a time. Fratricide (shooting brother police officers) is one of the pitfalls of using your sights. You need target focus if you are to identify your target--and know what your target is doing at the moment you shot. Sight focus is important beyond 25 feet--this varies between people--and target focus is vital at ten feet or less. Most gunfights take place at close range because criminal activity is an anti-social social activity. The book, "Body Language" explains the distances for social interaction and how you can fool almost anybody at 25 feet, but have a lot of trouble doing so at 4 feet. Most of the police officers who died from bullet injuries in the line of duty were shot from distances of less than ten feet--often, by other police officers. Memorizing the grooves in your front sight instead of looking for body language clues when your enemy is close enough to touch is losing situational awareness--you'd have shot already if your target was doing something that justified shooting! The uncertain nature of close quarter encounters is why point shooting must be part of the skill set possessed by every soldier, law enforcement officer, and armed private citizen. Today's handguns have better sights--so low light, stress-induced visual impairment, and the effects of getting a face full of tear gas don't have the same effect as when armed with a M1911A1 issued in 1942. Point shooting is quick to learn, and point shooting skills don't decay as rapidly as using the sights.

It's a choice between target focus and front sight focus. Up close--target focus. At a distance--front sight focus.

Applegate's choice of the Glock automatic may surprise some--he chose that pistol for its grip angle and reliable functioning. Many ranges won't permit the use of Vector "low temperature tracer" ammunition because of a perceived fire hazard--in some areas, all tracer ammunition is prohibited. I don't recall Applegate recommending the use of AirSoft guns (with their low-velocity brightly colored plastic projectiles), but the projectile can be observed and corrections made in grip and trigger control when tracers are impractical.

Fairbairn and Sykes taught Applegate to fire "bursts" in order to make up for the low power of pistol bullets. The two British police officers were using the .45 automatic with full metal jacketed bullets fighting crime in Shanghai about 80 years ago. Applegate developed the two-shot burst as a fire discipline tool--there's a tendancy to shoot only one time and gape when the target doesn't fall down. There's another problem brought on by "cold ranges" (guns only loaded for a firing string, then loaded and cleared upon command) -- the trainee is trained to empty the magazine each time a target is presented. This creates two problems: fifteen or sixteen bullets go down range in a gun fight regardless of what the target does (the law enforcement officer is concentrating on keeping front sight on target blur) and the shooter now has an empty gun.

Point shooting isn't a cure-all. Point shooting is an effective answer to a limited tactical problem. Ignoring point shooting just because you cannot hit a six-inch bull's eye at 500 feet with the technique ignores the fact than most deadly force encounters are within 10 feet and totally ignores the human factors.

"Bullseyes Don't Shoot Back" is an excellent primer for point shooting. Get Rex Applegate's video, "Shooting for Keeps" as a companionn to the book. Don't neglect fire using your pistol sights, but practice point shooting.

I am a recent convert to Applegate.

I have been shooting for some time now, with limited results using frontsite focus, controlled breathing, squeeze trigger, be surprised when the round goes off, blah, blah, blah. The problem is...way to much fine motor skill required. When our heart rate goes to 145 bpm ie adrenilin dump, we enter the gross motor skill zone. All the fine motor skill crap will go out the window...Weaver, Chapmann, Iscosoles, all of it, unless you train for hundreds of hours to create 'muscle memory'. Most of us just don't have time, we will go to gross motor skills, as will most of the 'Experts'.

That's Applegates entire premise, and he is a true WW II combat expert, what is old, is now new, plus it could save your life!

I tried Point Shooting yesterday, fired 250 rounds at 45 feet (beyond the 30' range accuracy of point shooting), it works -BUY THIS BOOK!

PS - Applegate does endorse the Iscosoles stance for distance shooting, only if time allows, or whatever type of fine motor skill stance for that matter, but within 30' - Point Shoot.

Although I agree with much of what the authors say, I also believe they fall into the same trap they accuse the "gurus" of, and alternate between valid points and contradictory statements:

1. Gun "gurus" are wrong to emphasize two-handed sighted fire.
2. "Realistic combat shooting technique is a continuum which ranges from extreme close range body point firing to two-handed sighted fire techniques."
3. You should emphasize one-handed point shooting.

A better approach would have been to emphasize statement #2 and then show the benefits of one-handed point shooting without trying to make it sound like the "holy grail" of combat shooting.

Overall a good book that is worth your time to read. If nothing else, it gives some historical perspective on the evolution of combat shooting and offers old/new ideas for consideration.

This book by two noted personalities in self-defense circles gives lots of practical information on practice of using firearms. Inside, you will find discussions covering topics like techniques, tactics, and training.

Due to the deadly seriousness of the subject matter, I appreciate the concise, no-nonsense style of writing and the practical advice presented in the book. The photos and illustrations are clear and add to the usefullness of the book. While I still think Massad Ayoob's 'In the Gravest Extreme' and 'The Truth About Self protection' are the best books on this subject, this book does a fine job as well.

This is a great book on point shooting. Everything you need to learn on point shooting is in this book. It has a little history of point shooting and great illustrations, instructions on how to point shoot. This is a very old,simple, and very effective way of defending yourself. You don't need to do ten steps before you shoot. Point,shoot,effective, what more do you need. This is combat shooting not competition. Im glad I got this book. It has made me a more confident shooter. I am a former combat veteran, awarded among other awards, the Combat Infantry Badge, that should say it all. I am far from a novice and did not just shoot at standing targets.

Here we have a modern update on the concepts of Fairbairn's "Shooting to Live" and Applegates's "Kill or be Killed".

If you are serious about your tactical pistol skills, this book, and the previous two are mandatory reading! Mr. Janich provides a number of excellent books on close-combat, emphasizing the most common defensive weapons: knife and pistol. I have found this book, and all his others, to be very useful as resources to train my own students in these skills.

This book is a guide to enhancing your marsmanship, to enable you to instinctively hit your target as fast as possible, ...without wasting precious seconds. In the beginning, your shots may be scattered all over the "human torso" target, ...but at least you hit it! Thats what matters in a gun-fight. In time, with plenty of practice, you can hone your skills to be able to shoot very tight groups in this manner!

The only criticism, ...I wish the book were longer, incorporating more reaction-drills and the like. Its still excellent!

Having just completed reading this book I found it to be worth reading.

This book explains the author's practical approach to self defense "point shooting" with a handgun. BULLSEYES DON'T SHOOT BACK is written using easy to understand language and plenty of photographs.

The book is a classic in tactical shooting, and of interest on that account.

As far as practical information goes, it's sensible and clearly presented, although repetitious. The old photos are often unclear, and more sketches or photos, giving more detail, would be welcome.

I'd advise anyone to borrow the book, rather than buy it.

This type of shooting will not make you a bullseye shooter. Its not ment for HRTs and their need for aimed/accurate round placement. This system does not make you a spray and pray shooter.

This system is to teach a beginner how to shoot in a stressed situation, the same state that you are likely to use your handgun. The system take practice and does have its limits.

First of all, I think that point shooting is a sound technique on close distance. But if I had to make the decision whether to use point shooting or not based on this book only, I would go for aimed fire.

The authors have hard time establishing a reason for using point shooting, and their reasoning is not waterproof. Additionally, when they try to justify point shooting over aimed fire, they fall victim of double standards. For example, they state that point shooting is superior over aimed fire, because when using aimed fire you have to move your legs to engage targets on your sides. Then they emphasize that in point shooting it is imperative to correct your stance by moving your legs when shooting to your sides! Also, they stress that point shooting is superior to all other shooting styles, because it is more stress-proof. Then they state that when shooting over long distances, you should use Weaver stance. The problem is that Weaver is not very stress-proof (a fact even Jack Weaver, the inventor of Weaver stance, has admitted). Where is the logic on that?

This book is not entirely bad, and it's better to have this book than having no book at all on point shooting. It's just that there are better books around than this.