To: absalom01
That click bait has been hashed out for decades.
If you’re not visually confirming the sights are on the target, you’re irresponsible.
4 posted on
10/12/2021 3:37:15 PM PDT by
ctdonath2
(All worry about monsters that'll eat our face, but it's our job to ask WHY it wants to eat our face.)
To: ctdonath2
“If you’re not visually confirming the sights are on the target, you’re irresponsible.”
I started plinking about 70 years ago. Call me irresponsible.
8 posted on
10/12/2021 3:48:02 PM PDT by
TexasGator
(UF)
To: ctdonath2
If you’re not visually confirming the sights are on the target, you’re irresponsible. In an encounter at arms-length, or closer, the priority becomes getting some rounds into him before he can stick you.
11 posted on
10/12/2021 3:58:09 PM PDT by
SauronOfMordor
(A Leftist can't enjoy life unless they are controlling, hurting, or destroying others)
To: ctdonath2
“If you’re not visually confirming the sights are on the target, you’re irresponsible.”
If you are four or five feet away and lining up sights on target, you are poorly trained, slow, and probably likely to lose.
20 posted on
10/12/2021 4:36:42 PM PDT by
DesertRhino
(Dogs are called man's best friend. Moslems hate dogs. Add it up....)
To: ctdonath2
No. The situation depends more on any one rule. Point shooting for close range is adequate. You obviously never had anyone within 10 ft that you thought you might need to draw on.
33 posted on
10/12/2021 5:43:25 PM PDT by
wgmalabama
(We will find out if the Vac or virus risk was the correct choice - can we put truth above narrative)
To: ctdonath2; All
Jerry Mucilek clears up the issue.
https://youtu.be/XwC4RL-FpDE
45 posted on
10/12/2021 8:32:55 PM PDT by
Cobra64
(Common sense isn’t common anymore.)
To: ctdonath2
Uh, no. Not in a close in situation. Point shooting is perfectly valid and appropriate then.
47 posted on
10/12/2021 8:58:55 PM PDT by
Magnum44
(...against all enemies, foreign and domestic...)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson