Quote:
Originally Posted by 1MOREMOD
Not if wearing armor want to square up so it can do its job
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Tonka
That's pretty much why the weaver stance was developed and taught for years. But with the proliferation of body armor most agencies are teaching isosceles. Most people are aiming at the largest target presented. Standing 3/4 or full frontal presents center mass as the same target. Taking a bullet center mass in a vest is much preferred to the unprotected side of the body.
I personally change stance with situation. The more static i am when shooting, the more weaver i am. The more i move and shoot, the more isosceles i am. It's not an either or for me, it's a transition between them. Most of the time it's a blend of the two that i'm most comfortable with. My upper body is mostly isosceles while my lower body is somewhat weaver. I feel a little more stable with somewhat offset footing. If shooting for accuracy at distance, it's full on weaver, somewhat exaggerated at that.
|
Oh I meant when conceal carrying out in public. Not in actual tactical situations for SWAT, LE and Military. I was referring to the discussion involving sara cause i assumed she wouldnt be wearing body armor to the bar
