Comments on: Whither the Weaver Stance and the 1911 Heavy-Duty Self-Loading Pistol at Gunsite? https://gunculture2point0.com/2017/12/06/whither-the-weaver-stance-and-the-1911-heavy-duty-self-loading-pistol-at-gunsite/ Fri, 06 Dec 2019 16:58:29 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.com/ By: John Hearne https://gunculture2point0.com/2017/12/06/whither-the-weaver-stance-and-the-1911-heavy-duty-self-loading-pistol-at-gunsite/comment-page-1/#comment-23156 Fri, 06 Dec 2019 16:58:29 +0000 http://gunculture2point0.wordpress.com/?p=5462#comment-23156 I’m still working to track it down, but my best guess and the guess of some smart friends, is that the Weaver was corrupted when it gained popularity with the LE world. I doubt that many LE instructors trained at Gunsite so they ended up reading descriptions and trying to replicate it.
As with a lot of stuff, if a little strong side foot back is good, a lot of strong side foot back must be better. If a mostly locked strong arm is good, a completely locked strong arm is better.
If you ask most LE firearms instructors to demonstrate the Weaver stance, they can’t do it consistent with Cooper’s and Gunsite’s work.

Like

]]> By: khal spencer https://gunculture2point0.com/2017/12/06/whither-the-weaver-stance-and-the-1911-heavy-duty-self-loading-pistol-at-gunsite/comment-page-1/#comment-5755 Thu, 07 Dec 2017 22:17:29 +0000 http://gunculture2point0.wordpress.com/?p=5462#comment-5755 In reply to matthewcarberryblog.

Geometry. That’s what I recall from deer hunting days. A shot was a geometry problem unless the deer was at right angles to the hunter. The day I badly wounded a deer and had to follow it down a ravine, I took an angled shot but the round nipped a small tree branch and was deflected from the point of aim, which was an angled shot in the vitals. It hit the deer behind the rib cage and came out through a back leg, shattering the leg.

If one wants to see gun violence in action without going to jail, take a lousy shot at a deer and have to finish it off while it struggles to stay alive.

Liked by 1 person

]]> By: matthewcarberryblog https://gunculture2point0.com/2017/12/06/whither-the-weaver-stance-and-the-1911-heavy-duty-self-loading-pistol-at-gunsite/comment-page-1/#comment-5754 Thu, 07 Dec 2017 21:34:58 +0000 http://gunculture2point0.wordpress.com/?p=5462#comment-5754 In reply to khal spencer.

Most of the numbers I see show that people are either aiming, in which case they can likely still hit or miss a 15″ bladed torso as easily as an 18″ squared, or they are tunneling in on the gun which will always be more or less centered over the torso regardless.

If wearing armor, blading exposes the arm hole and side gap which, along with various stability, body reaction, and “natural point of aim” arguments, is one reason law enforcement and military have gone to more squared off.

One thing Awerbuck used to point out, which hunters learn but defensive shooters shooting on square ranges at squared off target shapes often don’t, is that an angled target means you can’t keep shooting at the same physical surface point on the torso.

You are shooting to get the bullet into the vitals, shooting at the center of the sternum on a target bladed at even 20 deg is likely to have the round skim along the rib cage, not penetrate. He would teach with paper targets stapled to have a rounded profile and set at various angles to show that the “center mass” or “center of what you see” point of aim on an actual 3D target is different than “same place on the target torso you’ve always shot at”.

Like

]]> By: David Yamane https://gunculture2point0.com/2017/12/06/whither-the-weaver-stance-and-the-1911-heavy-duty-self-loading-pistol-at-gunsite/comment-page-1/#comment-5753 Thu, 07 Dec 2017 20:27:58 +0000 http://gunculture2point0.wordpress.com/?p=5462#comment-5753 In reply to khal spencer.

I think the blading was once explained that way but I don’t see much blading even in a more traditional Weaver

Liked by 1 person

]]> By: khal spencer https://gunculture2point0.com/2017/12/06/whither-the-weaver-stance-and-the-1911-heavy-duty-self-loading-pistol-at-gunsite/comment-page-1/#comment-5752 Thu, 07 Dec 2017 20:26:17 +0000 http://gunculture2point0.wordpress.com/?p=5462#comment-5752 Seems another consideration is trying to minimize yourself as a target. Is there some consideration for presenting the smallest possible target to an adversary, in addition to having a stable firing platform yourself?

Liked by 1 person

]]> By: Gun Culture 2.0 Posts About Col. Jeff Cooper and Gunsite | Gun Culture 2.0 https://gunculture2point0.com/2017/12/06/whither-the-weaver-stance-and-the-1911-heavy-duty-self-loading-pistol-at-gunsite/comment-page-1/#comment-5749 Thu, 07 Dec 2017 14:52:35 +0000 http://gunculture2point0.wordpress.com/?p=5462#comment-5749 […] Whither the Weaver Stance and the 1911 Heavy-Duty Self-Loading Pistol at Gunsite? […]

Like

]]> By: matthewcarberryblog https://gunculture2point0.com/2017/12/06/whither-the-weaver-stance-and-the-1911-heavy-duty-self-loading-pistol-at-gunsite/comment-page-1/#comment-5742 Wed, 06 Dec 2017 19:19:25 +0000 http://gunculture2point0.wordpress.com/?p=5462#comment-5742 I think Ayoob noted* that the arm position holding the gun can and will change depending on where the threat is in relation to you when you have to draw. “Squaring off” is what your body will want to naturally do (if you’ve ingrained “fight” into your reflexes anyway) but is not always possible or desirable given real world terrain and footing.

While when I took his class recently it was an Isocoles fighting stance being taught, he demonstrates treating your upper body as a turret on the lower, like Brittius mentions. If you can’t move your feet to square your shoulders off, just turning your torso and bending your knees to engage to either side or behind will cause your arms to assume the different “classic” positions while the relationship between your crush-gripped pistol and your eyes (the important part) stays the same. “Screwing yourself into the ground” to shoot behind yourself is the phrase that stuck with me from one of the books.

We had a Trooper up here have to drop a charging moose with his sidearm (S&W 40 at the time, iirc) when he was in hip-deep snow facing mostly away from it. There was no way he had the time or ability to move his feet, so he had to “turret” around to shoot and stop it. That’s going to end up looking a lot like a Weaver once you get to about 90 deg off center.

* which means you’ve probably heard it too 😉

Like

]]> By: Brittius https://gunculture2point0.com/2017/12/06/whither-the-weaver-stance-and-the-1911-heavy-duty-self-loading-pistol-at-gunsite/comment-page-1/#comment-5741 Wed, 06 Dec 2017 14:06:25 +0000 http://gunculture2point0.wordpress.com/?p=5462#comment-5741 Reblogged this on and commented:
There’s no, one stance fits all. With semi-auto pistol, I like a Modified Weaver stance. With the service revolver, we were trained in turret stance.
In shooting event #1, I used the sitting behind the steering wheel stance. In shooting event #2, I used (a)perp #1, (b) perp #2, the Wild Bill Hickok draw from the holster and fire, (c) perp #3, kneel behind cover stance. In shooting event #3, that was in darkness, looking at motion of dark figures/shadows, fired from turret stance.
Nothing in life is perfect. Get a strong foundation, then build up, from there. Different events could have different sets of variable factors. The one thing I have noticed, is that I never thought about, what stance. I do not recall ever seeing the sights. Practice is important, so that instinctively, the shooter can employ whatever the situation requires, in stance, and shooting, without ever hesitating to think about it. You just know, and do it. That is why, you train the way you fight, and fight the way you train. Try to keep it simple, and quick paced.

Liked by 2 people

]]>