Wednesday, May 31, 2017

Sights by Heinie

I do not hide that I created the Ameriglo Combative Application Pistol (CAP) sight...I'm proud of them!  They were designed for fast acquisition, a true “flash” front sight picture of the type required in a close quarter pistol fight…if you have the ability to use the sights at all! To align one merely places the front square in the rear square. They were never intended to be used as a precision sight for long shots of 25 yards plus. That said I use mine to hit a 3 x 5 card at 25 yards all the time. You just need to know “what to look for” and where to hold…a process of discovery.

In most every class I teach, the topic of gear comes up…what belt to wear, what holster to use, iron sights or red dots…gear is easy and certainly more fun than building skills.  That said, gear will never replace skill. It can certainly enhance it, but only after the skills are mastered and anchored…a long process to be sure.

In this inevitable conversation, I always get the question “if you couldn’t use the CAP Sight, what sight would you use?” Easy…Heinie. As a matter of fact, I have Heinie Sights on several of my pistols and I have no intention of changing them to CAPs. Heinie Sights are clean, highly visible and accurate across a wide range of uses. Of course, I paint the front sight  for faster acquisition, something easy to do and takes just a few minutes, some finger nail polish and a tooth pick.

I first saw a pair of Heinie Sights on an FBI Browning Hi- Power around 1990. I was President of the Ohio Tactical Officers Association and one of the speakers at our annual conference was an FBI Agent who had recently transferred out of their Hostage Rescue Team.  During a private conversation on pistols, he showed me his Hi-Power (he was allowed to continue to carry it on regular agent duties he told me) and it had a set of sights on it I had never seen. He told me they were Heinie Sights and he preferred them to the Novak Sights that were (then) in use.

Fast forward several years to the 1995 SHOT Show. I ran into good friend Lou Alessi (may he rest in peace!) the master holster maker. Lou was talking to a gentleman in the hallway and he introduced me, “Dave, I would like you to meet Dick Heinie, I make a several holsters exclusively for him.”  I have been friends with Richard Heinie ever since. I have a hard time calling him Dick (I reserve this for those who really are dicks!), though Louie seemed to enjoy it!  I have always used, and continue to use, Heinie Sights to this day. Even as I created my own, Richard and I have stayed friends…though it is only fair to state the Spaulding version of the CAP Sight was greatly influenced by my Heinie Sights with the painted front.

Why do I say this? Because so many people have taken Richard’s basic design and have given him ZERO credit!  While my Spaulding CAP Sights do not look like his, my preferred view from the rear was taken from his sight…colored front, square notch rear with serrations all around.  All one needs to do…if they are capable of true, independent critical thought and not some lovelorn fan boy mode of thought…is look at Richard’s sight, note how long he has been in business (over 40 years!) and then look at the popular sights of today and the similarity is obvious.

I have Heinie Sights on my Smith & Wesson M & P and Unertl MEU-SOC 1911…the Unertl sights were a custom fit Richard did for me himself.  Both of these guns have slide cuts for factory sights, which lowers the Heinie sight into the slide, lowering their profile.  I have never really understood the desire to place a set of tall sights on a concealment pistol. I have seen students go out of their way to get a compact model, have a carry bevel package performed to remove sharp edges and corners and then place a set of sights on their gun that can sit as high as ¾ inch over the bore line!  To each his own, of course…but does this seems to be a bit of a cross-purpose?  I like my sights to be as close to the bore line as possible while also being high visibility, which is why I like the Heine models that fit into existing slide cuts.

Another thing I like about Henie sights is the fact they are constantly updating, testing and adding new products four decades later!  From the Henie web site:

“All HEINIE SPECIALTY PRODUCTS sights have been fully tested on the pistols they have been specifically designed for. For example: Glock, Springfield, H-K, Kimber, Colt, etc.

All of our sights have been tested on newly manufactured pistols. We try to use at least two or more pistols to base our sight specifications/designs on. All sights are tested by at least two qualified people. They are test fired shooting in a standing position and using a bench. We try to obtain as many different loads and bullets as we can for testing.


Your bullet may not strike where you want it to hit, which may be due to many causes. For example: manufacturer's tolerance, ammo or the way you are shooting. Also if you had adjustable sights previously and install a fixed rear sight, it may not be the same POA/POI.
We are constantly retesting pistols on a regular basis. Manufacturers change and do not tell us that there may have been a change.

If you tell us your pistol is shooting 8” or 12” low or high or any extreme variation, Heinie will not replace or offer a sight to correct that problem. When this type of discrepancy happens, it is most likely the way you shoot, the type of ammo, or a different sight was installed instead of what was intended for the sight set.”

Note the last sentence…most sighting errors are the shooter, not the sight!  Its easy to blame the object and not the user, but if we are really being honest with ourselves, POA/POI errors are usually us!

There are a lot of sights on the market …which is good as sights are a very personal thing…and Heinie deserves your attention.  Yes, I would like you to try the CAP Sight but if it doesn’t work for you then my next stop would be I know it is for me…

Tuesday, May 16, 2017

The Four “Modes” of Combative Pistolcraft

From Mr. Webster…

Mode: noun
1. A manner of acting or doing; method; way:
“Modern modes of transportation.”

2.a particular type or form of something:
“Heat is a mode of motion.”

3.a designated condition or status, as for performing a task or
  responding to a problem:
“A machine in the automatic mode.”

I have been teaching firearms for 35 years now.  I entered the “art” as trainer for my agency’s newly formed SWAT team. Like many teams of the era, there was not a lot of background information to draw on, so we used Army field manuals, a basic course taught by the state training academy and a lot of phone calls across the nation to get started. Fortunately, we were “saved” by a Prosecutor’s Investigator who had been a Green Beret in Vietnam. This man, along with a local emergency room physician who was a gun enthusiast, got us traveling down the right path.

Command officers knew we needed a “certified” firearms instructor for the team and since I was the youngest member, I was “volunteered” to go. I liked guns, so I didn’t mind the four- week journey (a week for revolver, pistol, shotgun and rifle/submachine gun) to “instructor-hood” and as it turned out, I liked instructing.  I started helping out the regular Rangemaster and as time went by, I moved away from SWAT over to more conventional law enforcement firearms instruction, which meant more focus on the handgun.

After all, the handgun always has been and always will be the primary firearm for American law enforcement. The same can be said for the armed citizen as well. While the carbine and shotgun are certainly more effective, the handgun is more portable and concealable, meaning it will be the gun available when an unexpected incident unfolds. The handgun is a reactive/reflexive style of firearm while the long gun is more responsive…the handgun will be available most of the time while the long gun will be the gun used when one has time and knows what they are responding to such as the military application of a small arm.

As I have gone through this multi-decades long journey of instruction, mostly focusing on the handgun, I have noticed that four “modes” of combative pistolcraft application and training exists and they are a result, mostly, of the background a given instructor comes from.  I spent most of my adult life in law enforcement and when I started to focus on the training of armed citizens, this background “colored” how I taught the subject matter. I know realize I was partly wrong in doing so. Oh, I didn’t endanger anyone, but I could have had a more task specific focus.

What brought me to thinking about the various modes was a pistol course I took from a retired Special Operations Forces member.  As a former member of a high speed, direct action unit, his standards were quite high and I was interested in seeing what he taught and why he taught it. Much to my disappointment, he never really said…it was mostly “do what I say”.  We spent a sizable amount of time shooting beyond 25 yards…50, 75, 100 even out to 200 yards with semi-automatic pistols. While this is certainly doable, I could not help but question why we were spending such a large amount of time on something that was unlikely, even ill advised legally!

At first, I thought it was for marksmanship, but when I asked him about it I was told, “how long is the front hallway of a Wal-Mart, Home Depot, Lowes? What if you have to make a shot to save your family at such a distance?”  The legality of such an action…especially if it were to go astray…filled my head but I decided not to challenge. After all, it was his class and he certainly has the right to teach as he chooses. I left the class thinking deeply about what I had just experienced.  After all, when I entered law enforcement in the mid-1970’s, long distance revolver shooting was emphasized but was stopped after research into armed conflict involving cops showed it seldom happened.  Emphasis was placed on just the opposite…extreme close quarter engagements!

After a bit of reflection, it struck me that every instructor will teach what they know, have experienced and been taught based on their background and one is no more or less relevant than the other…its just a matter if that particular mode fits YOUR real world of work…and only you can decide that. Lets look at these varied modes:

1. Military:  The military does everything they can to KILL THE ENEMY (an important distinction) at GREAT distance. It is the way it should be! If they can kill the enemy (no intelligence value, of course) in Iraq from a trailer in Nevada using a drone, then they should!  Distance favors the trained shooter, so the further away one can be from an adversary when the fight breaks out, the greater advantage we (those trained) have in winning the fight. Shooting at contact distance requires no skill, just tenacity, so trying to engage far away increases survivability.

The problem arises in the fact the pistol is not designed for such long shots. With a short barrel and reduced sight radius long shots become problematic. Yes, with practice they can be made but how many folks who carry a handgun for personal security purposes possess this level of skill? Its one thing to make a 100 yard shot on the square range with little stress, but quite another while under the duress of a real gunfight with non-hostiles running through the battle space in panic, which would be the case at a large box store.

2. Law Enforcement: Unlike the military, law enforcement does not kill the enemy; they police society and thus, TAKE POEPLE INTO CUSTODY (another important distinction). Great strides are taken to arrest offenders and take them in front of a judge. Even in extreme situations like hostage rescues, the goal is to apprehend the offender, not kill.  Offensive action, like a sniper shot, is avoided if at all possible and is only used if it is the final option.

Because of this arrest standard, law enforcement will always be an activity of close contact. Even in situations that do not involve arrest such as citizen contacts, those involved wish to keep the interaction as private as possible, thus close contact is required. Can you imagine the uproar if a patrol officer stood back 10 yards and yelled to an honest citizen, “HEY! THROW ME YOR INDEINTIFICATION! I DO NOT WANT TO GET TOO CLOSE UNTIL I FIND OUT WHO YOU ARE!  Nope…that will not go over well with the citizenry.

Law enforcement has known for over a century that the single most dangerous moment is when the first handcuff goes on…that is when the fight will start! I have been there numerous times and it is not an enjoyable experience. Four times during my career I fought over my own gun in such situations and all were quite perilous. None ended in death because in those days, we were allowed to HIT PEOPLE HARD, something that is judged as cruel, mean and heartless in the days of the cell phone video.  A punch to the throat or poke to the eyes always ended such attacks. That said, with close contact being a reality, is it any wonder why law enforcement shootings tend to be within double arms length to ten feet?

3. The Armed Citizen:  A distance of six yards seems to be a continuing aspect of armed citizen confrontations. I have seen this distance so many times now, that I have started to incorporate it in my training courses.  It makes sense as armed citizens ARE NOT DUTY BOUND TO APPREHEND, ARREST AND CERTALY DO NOT WISH TO KILL…THEY WANT TO REPEL AN ATTACK AND GET THE ATTACKER TO STOP (another important distinction).  If the attacker flees, that s just fine.

    For this reason, armed citizens create distance between   them and the potential threat, distances like the length of a car, across a parking space, a living room or a public hall way…a distance in which they can converse, issue warnings but also retain a reactionary gap.  Just a few steps can increase distance significantly.  In many cases, their hand is on their holstered sidearm, but it has not yet been displayed.  For whatever reason, the individual could not avoid the situation so they are now trying to evade by creating distance and allowing the potential attacker to move on.  This is a wise move! Engaging in a deadly force situation is life changing and costly!  The armed citizen is not duty bound so they should avoid or evade at all costs.

4. Felons: Their mode of thought is quite simple…THEY WISH TO COMPLETE WHATEVER CIMINAL ACTION THEY HAVE STARTED AND GET AWAY.  In some cases it is violence committed in the act of another crime (robbery, theft, etc.) in others it is the act of violence itself that satisfies the offender. In either case, they wish to flee the scene once the act is completed.  It should be understood that they do not see the world as you do, they do not think like you do and they were not raised as you were. DO NOT APPLY HOW YOU THINK ABOUT A PARTICULAR SITUATION TO THEM!

They are not “trained” in combative pistolcraft per se’ and do not concern themselves with “legalities”, after all they are already committing multiple crimes. Thus, if gun play is involved they will not worry about shot placement, who is hit, where their bullets go and will likely spray the area with bullets in order to assist their escape.  While they may not be traditionally trained, many have been involved in gunfights...some have been shot…thus they will have NO APPREHENSION about shooting at you, your loved ones or anyone in the area.  Fortunately, many choose to flee instead of shoot, but one cannot count on this…some offenders just like violence.

 While you will be worried about such things as legalities and misplaced shots…your mind might be filled with them… as you deploy your handgun, they will not!  Crime is their occupation, violence just a way of life.

As I wrap up this already too long blog, I want to go back to the definitions listed at the beginning.  A mode is “A manner of acting or doing; method; way” and this method or way will certainly be affected by one’s background. In addition, when it comes to training, many instructors have been trained to operate it certain environments…I know I was! It makes sense, why would a war fighter train himself or herself to function as an armed citizen? It’s not their “real world of work and play”.

As we proceed through this “journey of discovery” that is training and preparation, we must all decide what our real world of work and play is and proceed accordingly.  Does that mean we cannot “dabble” in military style training? Of course not, I believe we should seek training for a wide variety of sources. But when it comes building skills, mastering and anchoring same to a level of “auto pilot” (a longer process than many understand), we need to use critical thought and choose wisely…not be sucked into the world of tacti-cool and fantasy.  The reality of conflict SUCKS…you don’t want to make it worse by preparing incorrectly…

Thanks for checking in!