How to demo advantages of gripping the carbine forearm vs mag well

[MistWolf]

The only problem I have with that is yes, that position is tiring, and an alternative may be necessary. I have a hard time teaching cops not to search from that position with handguns, shotguns, or rifles. If I only had a dollar for every time I have had to tell a cop to get the gun out of their face so they could see... Dynamic entries on known single family dwellings, ok, I can see that, with reservations. But target ID is stil the critical first step in the engagement process. And a lower, more relaxed (not relaxed) search position is vital to scan a potential threat: overall, hands, waistband, immediate wingspan and compliance/behavior. To quote Uncle Pat, " it is not about shooting, it is about fighting with a carbine", and fighting requires constant sensory input and thought, followed by appropriate decisions and action.

Slower? Yup. Less tiring? Yup. More time to process and decide? Yup. It all depends on priorities.

pat

I'm not sure what you're saying here, but it has me thinking I should have said

Trying to align the sight with a running rabbit with a rifle gripped under the action was purt near impossible.

What I was trying to explain is that gripping the rifle at or under the magazine makes it difficult to follow a moving target with the sights. Pushing our support hand out as far as we could worked much better.

[UNM1136]

I'm not sure what you're saying here, but it has me thinking I should have said


What I was trying to explain is that gripping the rifle at or under the magazine makes it difficult to follow a moving target with the sights. Pushing our support hand out as far as we could worked much better.

You are right, the farther out on the stock you hand sits the chances of hitting a moving target is greater...grab a water hose two feet from the end, and direct the flow, versus grabbing it at the end. One is more work than the other. This is the difference between holding the gun and driving the gun.

I was refuting the video from a 20 year law enforcement point of view, with 11 years as a high risk tactics/firearms instructor. We should not be running guns from that high a ready position (not discounting the high port positions) as a general rule. Specific situations may require different answers. The video illustrates the real world, if you accept that all searching should be done through the sights. I prefer not to search through the sights, and impose them on a target, or potential target, as necessary, and that is what I teach.

Remember, we are not to put our sights on anything we are not willing to destroy. I can scan a target, without muzzling them (the laser rule). I can cover them, if I deem necessary (requring me being willing to destroy them, at least temporarily) and then I can act, or change my mind.

pat

[MistWolf]

You are right, the farther out on the stock you hand sits the chances of hitting a moving target is greater...grab a water hose two feet from the end, and direct the flow, versus grabbing it at the end. One is more work than the other. This is the difference between holding the gun and driving the gun.

I was refuting the video from a 20 year law enforcement point of view, with 11 years as a high risk tactics/firearms instructor. We should not be running guns from that high a ready position (not discounting the high port positions) as a general rule. Specific situations may require different answers. The video illustrates the real world, if you accept that all searching should be done through the sights. I prefer not to search through the sights, and impose them on a target, or potential target, as necessary, and that is what I teach.

Remember, we are not to put our sights on anything we are not willing to destroy. I can scan a target, without muzzling them (the laser rule). I can cover them, if I deem necessary (requring me being willing to destroy them, at least temporarily) and then I can act, or change my mind.

pat

I see. I didn't think he was advocating always running the rifle at high ready when searching. The reason I posted the vid is because he talked about how shooters tend to grip the rifle closer to the magwell as fatigue sets in. I know I've done it!

[Wake27]

I like the "you don't write with a pencil held by the eraser, do you?" tactic.

Two variations:

1.) Classroom version
Stand in front of a blank cardboard target, sheet of paper, whatever.
Get a Sharpie.
Take the cap off, and put it on the opposite end.
Ask someone to write their name one the target.
Make them do it only holding it by the cap, at the far end.
Laugh at poor penmanship.
Hold it correctly (closer to the tip).
See improvement.
(hopefully) observe lightbulb moments.

2.) Range version:
Same thing, but tape the sharpie to the muzzle of a (cleared and verified, or disabled outright) rifle.
Have them draw a smiley face holding the rifle by the magwell.
Have them draw a smiley face holding the rifle far out on the forearm.
Which one works out better?

That’s pretty good. I just tell people it’s like using a broom so you need to spread the hands out and extend the bottom one a bit. Never had anyone debate me on it though I’m sure someone disagreed and didn’t say anything.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[TGS]

You are right, the farther out on the stock you hand sits the chances of hitting a moving target is greater...grab a water hose two feet from the end, and direct the flow, versus grabbing it at the end. One is more work than the other. This is the difference between holding the gun and driving the gun.

I was refuting the video from a 20 year law enforcement point of view, with 11 years as a high risk tactics/firearms instructor. We should not be running guns from that high a ready position (not discounting the high port positions) as a general rule. Specific situations may require different answers. The video illustrates the real world, if you accept that all searching should be done through the sights. I prefer not to search through the sights, and impose them on a target, or potential target, as necessary, and that is what I teach.

Remember, we are not to put our sights on anything we are not willing to destroy. I can scan a target, without muzzling them (the laser rule). I can cover them, if I deem necessary (requring me being willing to destroy them, at least temporarily) and then I can act, or change my mind.

pat

The video was also presented from the perspective of a combat Marine going into buildings specifically to kill people, not a 20 year law enforcement officer with 11 years as a high risk tactics/firearms instructor. I don't think anything he said needs to be refuted......he wasn't presenting any universal ultimatums that you should be taking issue with.

The topic of the thread is thumb over bore grips.

[LOKNLOD]

That’s pretty good. I just tell people it’s like using a broom so you need to spread the hands out and extend the bottom one a bit. Never had anyone debate me on it though I’m sure someone disagreed and didn’t say anything.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

A broom is a good example.

Another good visualization for folks is a golf club versus a hockey stick. Anyone who’s ever picked up a putter and choked down on the grip like Happy Gilmore should intuitively click on that. You could probably even show a clip from the movie, if in a PowerPoint type scenario.

[UNM1136]

MistWolf and TGS:

Sorry for the lack of clarity and focus in my posts. Been pulling back to back 16 hour days, and too much time had lapsed for me to go in and clean them up. Searching through sights is a sore point with me, and has been for years, and so that is what I seem to have fixated upon. With a bit of sleep and some decent food I can now see where I should have said things differently to better participate. My two posts, had I been able to think a bit more clearly and convey that thinking could have been condensed to just a couple of sentences.

pat

[Redhat]

MistWolf and TGS:

Sorry for the lack of clarity and focus in my posts. Been pulling back to back 16 hour days, and too much time had lapsed for me to go in and clean them up. Searching through sights is a sore point with me, and has been for years, and so that is what I seem to have fixated upon. With a bit of sleep and some decent food I can now see where I should have said things differently to better participate. My two posts, had I been able to think a bit more clearly and convey that thinking could have been condensed to just a couple of sentences.

pat

A few questions if it's okay.

Does searching through the sights:

- improve engagement speed?

- improve target ID time or accuracy?

- improve target detection time?

And for the record, I did not intend my original post to be strictly about C-Clamp or thumb over grips on the handguard. Just using the HG vs the magwell.

[Wake27]

A few questions if it's okay.

Does searching through the sights:

- improve engagement speed?

- improve target ID time or accuracy?

- improve target detection time?

And for the record, I did not intend my original post to be strictly about C-Clamp or thumb over grips on the handguard. Just using the HG vs the magwell.

I don’t have a lot of experience with it but I’ve been taught not to do it, because it’s slower if nothing else and my time on the range has backed that up, whether it’s searching for targets or transitioning from one known target to another. Dan Brokos from Lead Faucet Tactical made a point to say that guys need to stop clearing rooms through their sites in a recent video for SureFire.

https://youtu.be/bHifoAd7ZoE


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[UNM1136]

A few questions if it's okay.

Does searching through the sights:

- improve engagement speed?

- improve target ID time or accuracy?

- improve target detection time?

And for the record, I did not intend my original post to be strictly about C-Clamp or thumb over grips on the handguard. Just using the HG vs the magwell.

SGM Brokos hit it pretty well.

I read Paul Howe's book in (I think) 2009, and started setting up decisional shoots in all the training I was providing. We can actually shoot faster, in a lot of cases, than we can see, or think.

On a square range where you are boring into the target and waiting for the beep, you will be faster if your eyes never come off the sights. But you lose time to observe and decide. In my career I have pointed guns at WAY more people than I have shot. When we started doing FoF we validated some of Paul Howe's observations, and adjusted our scanning methods accordingly. When you get jocked up for a sims run the first few times, you get the adrenaline flowing and you just know some MOFO is about to jump out and try to shoot you, so you are mentally ready and set up to shoot the first thing you see. The trouble is not everything that appears in front of your front sight post needs to be shot.

If you bore in COM you may or may not notice that the target is dressed like you, particularly if you are still looking at the hands first. If you are looking at a target's COM then your muzzle, sight assembly, and handguards may be obscuring the hands that you want to see. So to check the hands you have to zoom out a bit, and maybe come off the sights, or move your muzzle/sights around to see what you need to see, and that costs you some time. A more relaxed ready position keeps my muzzle under control, and gives me a greater field of view. It also keeps me off the magwell, and out on my handguard, because it fatigues me less. Unlike many of my brothers and sisters in blue, I have keys to probably 90% of the alarms I respond to, so I do a lot of building searches.

So yes, by your bullet points searching through your sights is not necessarily faster in the real world, it can make it more difficult to detect the target, ID it, and determine if you have the necessary elements present to use deadly physical force. It is often sold as a "ready position", and on a timer on a square range it is fast, but when What/Who/Why you shoot is just as important as how you shoot, I see real disadvantages.

pat