John Veit, the point-shooting guy who’d like you to shoot a pistol with your second finger unless it’s a 1911 (see: index finger platform in pictures below), writes: At close quarters, a Halo Luminous Sight is faster and easier to use than the sights. With it you get automatic and correct sight alignment, and automatic and correct sight placement. [Ed: not to mention automatic and correct sight placement.] To use it, the tube is brought to eye level, and aligned left – right – up – down, until the inner walls of the tube are not visible and the halo affect appears . . .
The aligning process is amazingly easy and fast, and is effective when targeting both stationary and moving objects. Note that in the pic showing the halo affect, the front sight is a bit high. But a 21 feet or so, where most all armed confrontations occur, you would still be in the black.
How it works:
The tube is the core of a Velcro hair roller and has a length of about 2.5 in., and a diameter of about .75 in. (6.5 cm x 2 cm), and a wall thickness of about 1/16th inch (2 mm).
The openings in the tube’s wall allow light into the tube, which illuminates the portion of tube’s wall that can be seen when aiming and the tube is not inline with a target.
The light also produces the halo affect when the tube is inline with a target by illuminating the small and uniform portion of the wall that can be seen when the tube is inline with the target.
You can “roll your own” at you own risk and expense. The tube is attached inline with the sights and/or bore, and a strip of double sided adhesive tape can be used for that.
CAUTION !!!
Very High Bond tape, or a stronger bonding material should be used to prevent the tube from coming loose when shooting a firearm with a slide. The plastic is strong, flexible and very light. Test firings should be made to see how it works with your gun. It may be a good idea to have a gun-smith do the install work for you.
Always use common sense and safe gun handling practices.
Instead of the sights installed by the manufacturer, I use the extra wide straws from Mcdonalds. I glue them to the top of the slide and have my holsters custom made with a round sight channel to accommodate the straws.
I find if I flare out the end of the straw it increases my field of view. If the field of view is too restricted I can’t see everyone laughing their ass off at me when I have to draw my weapon at the mall.
That is of course when I shoot with my eyes open. I usually just close them and point with my index finger along the frame of the gun and yell “bang, bang.”
Damn, another 30 seconds of my life spent reading that I will never get back.
Straws, Ralph? Really? What you need are rabbit ears. I hear they get better reception. *punches self in balls*
I use 2 9mm pistols duct taped to both sides of an old football helmet.
These are triggered by belching the letter “F”.
Now, Now guys. You will all be jealous if I can find a glow in the dark curler.
Paul
Night curler… better than tritium!
I’ve discovered that if I glue telescoping unobtanium/aluminum alloy rods onto the frame of my gun and then extend them to the target the bullet will strike between them every time! I wonder if it is legal in USPSA?
I called my gunsmith to ask for a price for installation and now I can’t use him anymore. He’s suing me for medical expenses and loss of business since he can no longer work after breaking his arm when he fell off his chair laughing.
What’s uglier than a Glock? ….This guy’s Glock.
What did the gun do to deserve this?
All kidding aside – Probably couldn’t hit the broad side of a barn with it outside of about 10 yards but this does seem like a great close quarters sighting system. Wouldn’t be surprised if Taurus offers it up on next year’s edition of the Judge.
What’s your point? A little bit of Taurus rage? I’ll put my 24/7 OSS up against anything you got dude. But hey, opinions vary. That’s cool. You don’t like them,I do. I only buy Taurus handguns exclusively. I’ve never had a FTF or FTE using a wide variety of ammo in the same magazine just to try to make it malfunction. It didn’t. Maybe you’re trying to assert that Taurus seems to be a little “gimmicky” to sell products? I know there are alot of different ‘versions’ of the Judge concept,but that allows them to cover a large variety of consumers. You have to at least admit it was innovative and forward-thinking;to the point that was the inspiration for the Smith&Wesson governor.
By referencing John Veit on this website you lower your credibility.
This man has been banned from almost as many gun messageboards as Gunkid for his intellectual dishonesty and absurd assertions regarding middle finger trigger pulling. I had to chuckle at the time he was trying to lecture Hilton Yam of 10-8 Performance, one of the top 1911smiths in the country, about problems with the 1911.
His middlefinger trigger pulling advocasy is nonsensical.
1. If point shooting is appropriate, the guns slide or barrel is what is used to point. You do not need to have your trigger finger along the gun to point it. The finger curled around the trigger does a fine enough job of pointing it because enough of the finger is pointed forward. The rest of the gun, be it the slide or the barrel (depending on the type of gun) becomes one large pointing finger as controlled by the hand.
2. When pullng the trigger with the middle finger, you do not have nearly as solid a grip or control of the gun since you only have two fingers on the grip. This is important in rapid firing and handling guns that have *any* type of recoil.
3. Using the middle finger is not ergonomic or natural while using the trigger finger is.
4. Keeping your pointing finger along the frame and pulling the trigger with your middle finger means that you must draw the gun with only your last two fingers. This is an extremely weak and fumble prone way to draw.
5. If you need to hold someone at gunpoint, holding a gun with two fingers around the grip is a very weak way to do it.
Of course you have it all wrong about the grip.
It’s a strong 4 fingered grip that provides a strong and level shooting platform. It’s not you sissy range and competition grip where your thumb and index finger don’t press on the gun. Per the literature in combat, you will have a crush grip on the gun. And the P&S grip works with that just fine. Do a little reading.
Your reading is either from 1835 or deliberately misinterpreted texts. Having the trigger finger along the slide does not aid in the grip and results in only two fingers on the grip.
The bottom line is that you know nothing of shooting and jumped into the game based on incorrect information that you got 50 years ago.
I’ve trained with some of the top firearms instructors around, including veterans of Delta, the Navy SEALS, Marines, Australian Special Air Service. Pulling the trigger with the middle finger isn’t even a question.
Not reading from 1835.
You should try it, and then be a critic.
Then you will have info from 2011 about how it works.
Just grip the gun as hard as you like in the natural pincer of the thumb and index finger. Your ring and little fingers will do their job of helping with the gripping and add tenacity to the grip. The base of the middle finger helps 2. That makes 4 fingers + a little help from the stub.
You can use the gun as a crude battle ax, and elbow smashes or front punches can be made with the gun.
You are deliberately misreading any modern manual or documents that you claim advocate pulling the trigger with the middle finger. You have been banned from almost as many messageboards as gunkid for spewing this nonsense.
Every modern trainer teaches pulling the trigger with the trigger finger.
On one hand we have every modern trainer including those with combat experience who train elite units.
On the other hand we have John Veit who has been banned from virtually every credible gun message board and last had training over 50 years ago.
Guess who I am going to believe?
As to the 1911, the US military in it’s first manual on the 1911 and for the next thirty years cautioned about how to shoot it, as it can jam if the slide stop pin is depressed when shooting. And it’s grip angle is an ergonomic disaster. The US Army in WWII trained soldiers to be sure and adjust the angel on it before shooting, and said that after practice that will become second nature. Yea sure it will. You should do some more reading.
You are a towering monolith of misinformation. I cant believe you said “it’s grip angle is an ergonomic disaster.” about the 1911 design. Have you completely lost your mind? Since when does a design “disaster” remain one of the most popular pistol platforms ever created? 100 years and hundreds of thousands of shooters would disagree strongly.
I believe it’s time for your internet privileges to be revoked.
-Will
Well stated
The “well stated” comment was about Ed’s post not Veit’s
Actually, this is pretty similar to concentric ghost ring sights, just with a very short sight radius. The more professionally executed variation is the JP Doublering. The inventor may be a little cracked, but there’s nothing inherently crazy in the idea. It will probably work just fine. I just don’t think it will offer any advantage. But that’s true of a lot of supposedly revolutionary new sighting systems. They work, they’re just not enough faster than old-fashioned Patridge sights to make it worth the expense and time.
Wait, what? Pull my finger?
I Thought hair rollers went out along with wooden spring-type clothespins…
Where are the studies showing this sight will or won’t work? Where are the studies on point shooting with the middle finger? Without studies, it is nothing more than conjucture pro or con.
Saying “if it really worked everyone would use it” isn’t really proof of anything.
I really don’t know anything about either, but the theories are interesting.
Pulling the trigger with the middle finger is ergonomically backward and about as natural feeling as sitting on the toilet backwards.
The person who advocates it is basing his info on some faulty training he received in the US Army 50 years ago.
Here is a link to John Veit trying to convince members of a forum who include vetted military and law enforcement of his nonsensical methodology:
http://www.10-8forums.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=53997&Searchpage=1&Main=5589&Words=John+Veit&Search=true#Post53997
And here we have him trying to explain to one of the top 1911smiths in the country who also happens to be a federal agent and member and trainer of their tactical team: http://www.10-8forums.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=67149&Searchpage=1&Main=7104&Words=John+Veit&Search=true#Post67149
The fact that this web blog seems to seriously entertain his notions is a major detractor to its credibility.
Plus, how do you fit that silly sighting device in a holster.
As to 10-8 wizards, and big name trainers and gun folk, aren’t they the one’s that have brought us the police gunfight accuracy rate of less than 20% via their ideas about, and training in how to shoot.
You may think that that’s the cats pajamas, but I think it stinks.
You are engaging in a logical fallacy, John Veit.
Just because police hit rates in gun fights might be low, there is no proof that your ergonomically backward method will improve things.
Police hit rates are often low as a reflection of the difficulty of a gunfight and shooting under life and death stress when someone is shooting at you, as well as the fact that many officers don’t train or practice as much as they should.
There is no train of logic in your beliefs. Yes, police *as a whole* may miss more shots than they hit in real life shootings. This is a reflection of the chaotic and highly stressful nature of real life gunfights.
There is no indication that your ergonmically backward shooting method will make things better. Those targets that you are displaying prove nothing since they are done on a stationary target that does not move or shoot back on a square range at distances of 10-15 feet. Do you see a logic problem with this?
The fact that your nonsense has received so much criticism including bans from forums should be a clue to you. Given your failure to spot this glaring clue, perhaps you should refrain from speculating about police training methods.
Here’s a link to my page and video of moving and shooting: http://www.pointshooting.com/1ajan7.htm
Here’s one to my page and video of me shooting and hitting aerials with a pistol. http://www.pointshooting.com/1aerials.htm
Try that with Sight Shooting.
Your slander does not change facts.
I get tired responding to ignorance. Do some reading, try stuff yourself, then criticise.
If you have pics and videos of SS ever being used effectively in CQB, bring em on.
Here’s a link to a digest of the late and long time lead firearm instructor of the VSP, paper on what I call P&S. He experimented with it and developed it and says it works. http://www.pointshooting.com/1apands.htm
As to the quoted threads, I have been banned from 10-8 so have had no way to respond to them if I wished 2.
Over the years I have been banned from lots of sites, mostly by those who support FSP and Sight Shooting, as I think it stinks for use in CQB.
Sight Shooting has been proven via scientific inquiries and studies of police combat to not be used, or not be able to be used in CQB situations.
The ALWAYS USE YOU SIGHTS crowd of true believers and lock-step-thinking zealots, don’t much take to smart ass upstarts, but that doesn’t change the facts.
I believe that they should be prosecuted for reckless endangerment of their charges, unless there is proof that what they teach works in CQB situations.
Sight Shooting has been taught for use in CQB for over 100 years, yet there are no pics or videos or films of it ever having been used effectively in CQB. If you know of any, post the links.
I guess that you expect that I should cow-tow to them’s that teach that crap just becaue they are FBI or have a big name.
As to the FBI, the recent 2 year study of the FLETS’s training program shows it’s a bust. There’s an article about that on my site if your interested.
Rob’s welcome to post it on TTAG if he wishes to.
You have a lot of experience in close quarters combat, do you? And you disdain the 1911? Since I already know the answer, let me fill you in-when the heat is on, a 1911 is one of those weapons that fits just right into your hand, like the famous KaBar knife, for those gross motor skills when fine motor skills are affected. Your weakened grip technique would allow the weapon to come loose, and is contrary to the fine motor skills of the index finger. As for enabling you to strike with the weapon-do you have much experience in this either? Do you want to risk damage to your fighting implement? Do you not realize with your technique that you are more likely to lose control of it?
It works I tried it.
If you don’t want to rely on that, you can prove it to yourself easily.
Just like P&S, it’s sort of brain dead simple, so try it and look at your targets.
1. Go to the drugstore, buy some of the blue rollers.
2. Cut off the blue Velcro wrapper, and glue the core onto your gun.
3. If the sights are inline when the halo appears, it will work, that is, if having the sights inline works. (It’s just a quicker and easier way to get to that place.)
4. Try it in real time with an airsoft pistol or firearm.
John-
A few things:
1. You say the 1911 design was a reason the US military tossed the idea. Ok, but what about foreign armies that never had the 1911? Like the Russians or Chinese? Why wouldn’t they have tried and liked it, since presumably their guns didn’t have the defect the 1911 had/has? Have you uncovered any research as to whether or not they even tried it? I am not saying a lack of foreign adoption invalidates your ideas, I’m just curious.
2. Competitive shooters tend to be more risk-taking and experimental with techniques and equipment than the military or leo. For example, Norwegian sport rifle shooters do sometimes trigger with the middle finger in rapids as they work a bolt action with their index finger. IPSC shooters are always looking for an edge with speed. Have any of them tried your pointing system, or your huge ghost-ring sight suggestion? I ask because they are the crowd most likely to give your ideas a try, not military or leo trained and minded folks (i.e. the “by the book” folks).
The hair curler sighting system works even better when the curler is actually worn by the intended victim, oops, I mean intended target. You can expect accuracy in the 100% range, but the blowback is a bitch.
As far as this silly thing sticks up from the frame, wouldn’t it make more sense to stick an actual reflex sight on there like Gabe Suarez advocates?
I tried the middle finger thing in dry fire. Every pull of the middle finger caused a tiny shift inwards by the index finger. I can’t see how this goofy grip can hit anything past contact distance. Having tried it, I’ll stick with the tried and true methods.
Actually when the index finger is extended alongside the gun, that helps lock up the wrist, and if you point-n-pull you will more likely hit your target, than when you pull the trigger under stress and shoot low and left as most do.
Not by plan, but by what happens.
Check out the videos of me moving and shooting, and shooting at and hitting aerials.
Why should I try and use a method that is a proven failure over the years, rather than one that is simple and works.
Jack Ruby used P&S to shoot and kill Oswald when both were moving. And yes, it was at pretty close quarters; but, that’s where you’re be most likely to be shot and/or killed. (80% chance at 20 feet or less.)
Wait, you’re saying that gripping with one less finger results in a stronger grip, and that pressing left on the frame with my other finger makes the muzzle less likely to drift to the left? That’s pretty much the opposite results from my little dry-fire experiment. Having tried it, I can safely say it doesn’t work for me. And especially not with my revolvers, I’d burn the tip of my finger off!
By the way, Ruby’s irrelevant to this discussion. As seen here, he jammed his muzzle into Oswald’s stomach. http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/LHO9.htm
“You can use the gun as a crude battle ax, and elbow smashes or front punches can be made with the gun.”
So if I duct tape this sight on my gun, and hold it in some crazy fashion, I can pistol whip people better?
I think I’ll just concentrate on my front sight Ty.
The concept of replacing the front and rear sight combo with something with quicker acquisition timing has merit, but why not just buy a Trijicon RMR Dual Illuminated sight or something in that category. That way, you will be “faster” and still look kool to boot. 🙂
Sounds like a good plan to me. 🙂
Ooops, just checked Google and the price is about $450.00.
I just used one of my wife’s curlers at no extra cost.
Didn’t Ruby literally shove the gun into Oswald’s stomach?
This comment is not addressed at you.
No, but that’s a carnard that Point Shooter doubters like to bring up. The pics and videos of the shooting are on the web.
Another comment is that Ruby was missing his index finger on his right had so that’s why he used his middle finger on the trigger. Not the case.
His fingerprint record shows the missing digit was on the left hand. That record is on the web. I have a copy of it somewhaere.
And so it goes, on, and on, and on some more.
Misstate, misconstru, obviscate, reiterate, reframe….
Yes, I often look to criminals for guidance.
So we’re supposed to believe this guy knows more than Col Cooper, Jim Cirillo, Mas Ayoob, Clint Smith etc?
No thanks.
It would appear he thinks the burden of truth is on US to prove that his system is wrong/inferior. Someone should tell him that its on HIM to prove his system is better. Watching videos of him aerial shooting BB guns just isn’t the proof i’m after.
I think that if someone has a real concern about self defense, then they should have just a bit of initiative to check out what is, is.
If you think shooting at and hitting aerials in real time in a video is not proof that the shooting method used to do that works, I think you must not think anything is true.
And you are not alone in the world of the gun. Since I began my quest into the world of the gun, some ten plus years ago, I am always taken a bit back, by those who say “Bring it to me on a silver platter,” like you know whose head, “or I won’t believe a word of it.”
That is just a convient sop for them not having to do anything other than follow along in lock-step with established dogma.
Perhaps I have my people mixed up, but I understand that one of the leaders of the MT was a trainer and not a combat veteran. Ayoob has been a long time advocate of Sight Shooting, though he allows that Point Shooting can work. He distinctly points out in one of his books, a dislike for P&S, and uses a very small gun to show that it obiously is a poor method to use and that anyone who would use it would be a boob. Cirillo used the sights as he had the time to do so and under conditions that made it possible. He also believed in and taught Point Shooting.
P&S is the simplest of methods, and it is not a bar to using the sights if there is time to use them and conditions allow for their use.
And ditto for the halo sight, as in the picture showing the halo, the sights are clearly visable and one could switch to them if they wished to, but that would take their eye off the target and the halo framed on the target, and to what purpose since the sights are inline as with traditional marksmanship, but without having to meet its strict and must be followed steps.
Why make a mountain out of a mole hill.
Trick aerial shots just prove that you can make trick shots under a stress-free environment. Let’s see something relevant, like some force on force with simunitions or airsoft against someone using aimed fire and/or Fairbairn style point shooting.
“I am always taken a bit back, by those who say “Bring it to me on a silver platter,” like you know whose head, “or I won’t believe a word of it.”
That is just a convient sop for them not having to do anything other than follow along in lock-step with established dogma.”
No, that’s how logic works. The burden of proof is on the person making the claim, not the person denying it.
“No, that’s how logic works. The burden of proof is on the person making the claim, not the person denying it.”
+1 I get so annoyed at people who ignore that fact
So it is not April 1st? Oh for effs sake, I cannot believe this stuff in on TTAG or as I am now going to call it BSAG. Pointing is something we as humanzees have done since our flippers turned into fingers and somehow all of that innateness will translate into hits with a handgun. You see the trouble is when we point naturally the palm of our hand is facing down towards the ground and we sight along the index finger. Like the gangbangers shoot only apparently they have been using the wrong finger on the trigger. This man has nothing to lose and everything to gain by putting this bs out there and he should be shunned by the gunblogosphere. The hair curler as a sighting platform is just contradictory to the concept of point shooting and leads me to believe that this man is the president of the chairborne commando brigade. Dude, front sight- press, repeat as necessary. The very thought of placing my index finger that close to a moving slide of a pistol just pisses me off. I would really like to see what Mas Ayoob has to say about all of this WTFery. If Mr. Veit is for real, he should be able to get him to write a little forum post or maybe a blurb in one of the publications that he writes for. Oh wait, we should ask nutnfancy to do a two hour youtube video on it, then we could pass judgement.
What a bunch of crap, to the point I feel this guy is disturbed. His repeat entries are done in a frantic manner of a man drowning in his own ineptitude. My favorite part is how he tries to hijack true point shooting-the practiced method of quick responsive fire, which takes much practice to be accurate-into his kooky, “I know better” system. He should take the hint, his advice is not wanted and not needed. So go take your hair curlers and your middle finger and go back to your safe room. Take your pills and it’ll all be okay. Really.
I doubt he’s disturbed. He’s really just one of the most prolific and successful internet trolls in the firearms world.
“What a bunch of crap, to the point I feel this guy is disturbed.”
Exactly right. He has some obsessive compulsive disorder associated with his absurd method. The fact that people with way more firearm experience disagree with him, including those who have shot criminals and enemy combatants, should be a huge clue to him. I have trained with the likes of former Delta Operators Larry Vickers, Paul Howe, as well as various other high level combat veterans. I’ve had articles published by various publications such as SWAT Magazine. The fact that this website sees fit to publish this guys methods as anything else but what not to do tells me that it is time to remove them from my bookmarks. I no more want to waste my time reading a message board or web log that promotes or entertains such ludicrous nonsense as I would want to attend a house party that includes mentally ill homeless people among their guests.
I can only assume that the people who run this message board are either inexperienced or lack critical thinking skills to recognize the problems, or they like to stir up contraversy. Either way my bookmark is deleted.
I think John Veit is the Mall Ninja.
Ha ha ha….
As to stress in shooting pop cans in the air.
It’s no trick and not that difficult if you use P&S.
I set the camera and a mirror so that me shooting and the cans falling would be in the cameras field of view. You grab and toss the cans so that they are in the two or three foot area that the camera sees, as fast as you can, and just point-n-pull, point-n-pull. No Trick. Just PDG shooting.
Again, where are “your” pics and videos of Sight Shooting or FSP being used effectively in real CQB situations.
I can handle the stress of seeing the pictures.
Here’s a link to a page on my site that is set aside for just such pics and videos. http://www.pointshooting.com/1april1.htm
And if you point shoot, please explain just how you do it, or do you use some magical force to lure the bullets onto your targets. Pics and videos would be helpful.
What I say works, works. And I have the pics and videos to show that. No brag, just fact.
And you can easily prove it to yourself.
Huffing and puffing, and making noise, doesn’t cut it.
Bye Bye for now.
You can look forward to me coming back. 🙂 🙂
Who was that masked idiot?
Here’s a pic of me receiving an award from outer space via my newly invented alien text & award form receptor that uses the latest MS-AP and CLOUD tecno-advanced stuff.
http://www.pointshooting.com/tinman.jpg
There was an excellent point raised, John. Competitive shooters are much more likely to try something different than military and LE. Preach to the guys likely to listen first, get some people using your methods, then you can get the military and LE guys to listen. Especially after the AMU gets their butts kicked by someone using your methods. In fact, that’s likely the only way you’ll get the military to change what they’re doing.
Personally, I like the ‘Browning grip angle’, but I know a lot of people that don’t. I think it has to do with how your wrist goes together, which makes it different for every person. 1911s and related designs all end up with the sights naturally aligned in a hurry, without me having to adjust my grip. Glocks sit very muzzle-high, and most revolvers sit very muzzle-low.
Comments are closed.