One or Two Hands?

[Josh Smith]

Hello,

Two handed shooting by those before the mid- to late 20th Century seems to be a matter of some debate.

Most I've read have the shooter using one hand while indexing the sights (ie, front and rear sights are aligned but held slightly below eye level). Somewhat of a modified dueling grip, maybe. This seems to be a matter of some debate.

Most defensive shooting I teach and have seen taught involves hip shooting at bad breath distances (there is no room to get the pistol up any further), create distance, come up to the grip outlined above, transition to a two handed hold while indexing sights, then, at range, use a full sight picture and two handed hold, Weaver or modified isosceles.

Though the latter two grips and stances are supposedly products of modern gunfighting and Jeff Cooper and friends, I've read accounts of at least a few instances where two handed grips were used on cap'n'ball revolvers. These mostly involved times when the assailant was getting away and/or the hero was wounded.

In SASS and other places where cap'n'ball pistols are used, I see a lot of two handed grips.

Folks, I'm going back and forth on what is really historically correct. For the cavalry, with one hand occupied by a sword, they of course had to go at it one handed. But what about the rest of the time? Those old hoglegs seem to be made to be shot one handed - the way they roll in the hand with recoil, the way the grip is shaped, etc.

But that doesn't mean folks used 'em like that, either.

There is a newer school of thought emerging, having to do with point shooting. It's relatively effective at close to medium range: You draw, and jab out with the handgun, and as it nears the end of the jab, you fire. This seems reasonably effective and also seems like something that someone who is largely self-taught might develop.

What do the books say about cap'n'ball and single barreled muzzleloading pistols being used with regard to grip? Mostly one hand, or two? As I said, I could only find a few references to grips, and the minority were two handed grips.

Some of you may have done more studyin' up on this, though.

What do you think?

Thanks,

Josh

 

[Dave Rosenthal]

I don't have any books on the subject.

I don't have a dog in this race.

I think that folks did what ever they had to in order to survive, conditions permitting. Two handed holds were needed on Dragoons with shoulder stocks! Fanning is a two-handed hold of sorts during close-range point shooting.

Arthritis may have played a role in how folks operated a gun too? And women may have used two hands just to hold the things up?

So now the pandora's box is opened......

Dave

 

Hey! Leave my dog outta of this cat fight. She's a box of trouble anyways.

This is a question with no real way to answer. Going by written accounts, will only give you the opinions of the those educated enough to write.

Standing in such a way that promises your opponent a better shot is in my mind stupid. But, remember, we are talking of an age not to long after a war where hundreds of thousands died standing shoulder to shoulder shooting at each other at fairly close range distances.

This question will not find an answer till we can clearly look back in time.

CP

 

[nkbj]

It depends upon a variety of factors that vary with the individual and circumstance: By example, the pistol or revolver in hand, how long the deer camp poker game lasted and how loud the woodpecker is.

 

[Coot]

Information prior to the 19th c is scarce & not what we would call totally reliable. There are 19c sources (including photos) that support the one hand school of thought. Pictures of army units shooting at targets and instruction manuals are out there. My favorite is (a translation) of a 20th c Polish Calvary manual that teaches recruits to shoot the VIS-35 from horseback. It advises to act as if you were throwing the pistol at the target & at the point in time where you would let go if throwing, to pull the trigger. As a rider & shooter, it makes a lot of sense - you aren't going to get a proper sight alignment & then squeeze off a shot while on the back of a moving horse. Lends support to the popularity of the 1851 Colt as an instinctive shooter.

 

[biliff]

In SASS and other places where cap'n'ball pistols are used, I see a lot of two handed grips.

Yeah, but the SASS category that requires the use of C&B (Frontiersman) also requires that they be shot one handed. It also has no bearing on how pistols were shot in the past.

As has been pointed out, military and police training manuals are available and until recently taught one handed shooting.

Painting of battle/fight scenes seem to show one handed shooting. I do recall seeing pictures of western trick shooters firing from a position that rested the gun hand across the weakside forearm.

And then there's the Duke test. Would John Wayne use a squaw grip? I don't think so.

 

[CoyoteJoe]

My Grandfather, born shortly after Mr. Lincoln's war, had a very unusual pistol technique which sounds a bit like what Coot just described. He would flip the revolver up vertically, snag the hammer back, flip the gun downward and fire at the bottom of the swing, no aiming at all, just as if he were throwing the gun. He was about 80 when I saw him shoot a cat which was pestering his chickens. It was 15-20 yards and flip-bang, dead cat. I'm sure he learned that style with a C&B revolver. The cat's owner tried to get Gramps arrested but the one and only local marshal didn't want to push the old man too far. :haha:

 

[Pete Gaimari]

One hand........Men

Two hands......Women

 

[mtmshieldshotmail.com]

The modern modifications came about for a couple o' reasons related to body armor. If you stand in such a manner as to minimize body cross-section, you're exposing the only part of your abdomen that's not protected; your sides. Class 4 armor also restricts arm movement enough that the Weaver is not practical, and thus the isosceles was born.
Cheers,
from Afghanistan
and yes, when i'm at home and looking for minute of hare's head accuracy from my handgun, I hold it with two hands. guess I'm a girl!

 

[Kevin Makel]

The modern modifications came about for a couple o' reasons related to body armor. If you stand in such a manner as to minimize body cross-section, you're exposing the only part of your abdomen that's not protected; your sides. Class 4 armor also restricts arm movement enough that the Weaver is not practical, and thus the isosceles was born.
Cheers,
from Afghanistan
and yes, when i'm at home and looking for minute of hare's head accuracy from my handgun, I hold it with two hands. guess I'm a girl!

Take care over there!
I had the same problem with my body armor when I was in Iraq. I used the weaver stance but that exposed my side where the SAPI plate does not cover and protect. I had to convert to isoceles for both rifle and pistol.

 

[DOUBLEDEUCE 1]

For my two cents, why not use what you have. Two arms and two hands, I use both. The first rule in a gunfight is there are no rules. Cheat to win. :thumbsup:

 

[mingo]

Depends on situation and what day it is.
Two hands is probably more accurate, but takes more time and is a bad idea in a gunfight.

I think the old timers managed to figger most of this stuff out without attending some school.

In my time we called it situational response.

Any cavalryman worth his salt had a pistol in one hand, a saber in the other, and his reins in his teef.
That's why I chose infantry.

 

[mtmshieldshotmail.com]

Depends on situation (yep) and what day it is (nope).
Two hands is probably more accurate (agreed), but takes more time and is a bad idea in a gunfight. (generalization not really in line with your first sentence. It takes longer to use one hand and miss)

I think the old timers managed to figger most of this stuff out without attending some school. (few who lived the life of a gunfighter, lived to be an old timer)

In my time we called it situational response. (nothing's really changed)

Any cavalryman worth his salt had a pistol in one hand, a saber in the other, and his reins in his teef.
That's why I chose infantry. (thank you for your service! :thumbsup:

 

[Pete Gaimari]

For my two cents, why not use what you have. Two arms and two hands, I use both. The first rule in a gunfight is there are no rules. Cheat to win. :thumbsup:

We don't cheat in CAS.

One hand....Men
Two hands...Women

In case you missed it the first time.

Do you get in a lot of gunfights?

 

[poordevil]

One hand........Men

Two hands......Women

Which do you use?

p

 

[Pete Gaimari]

One hand........Men

Two hands......Women

Which do you use?

p

I bet you chuckled when you typed that.

 

[poordevil]

:hatsoff:

 

[loki04]

Sir,

What my grandfather once said to me comes to mind 'the only reason to fight fair is if you are fighting naked with you feet nailed to the floor. any other time, cheat to survive.' If in a gunfight, the goal is to survive, and many of the tactics used for such are not approved by the CAS rulemakers. For those that have not been in gunfights, there is no good reason to train as if your opponent will follow a set of rules. Training specifically for CAS events would dictate training to their rules and safety standards, but the safety standards in any gunfight I have the misfortune to be in will be along the lines of 'last man standing is in the right.'

Loki

 

[Pete Gaimari]

Sir,

What my grandfather once said to me comes to mind 'the only reason to fight fair is if you are fighting naked with you feet nailed to the floor. any other time, cheat to survive.' If in a gunfight, the goal is to survive, and many of the tactics used for such are not approved by the CAS rulemakers. For those that have not been in gunfights, there is no good reason to train as if your opponent will follow a set of rules. Training specifically for CAS events would dictate training to their rules and safety standards, but the safety standards in any gunfight I have the misfortune to be in will be along the lines of 'last man standing is in the right.'

Loki

Since Josh mentioned SASS and how they shot (he got it wrong). My mind was on that.

Of course if you're talking about modern gun fights you would use the method that works the best.

 

[bangfxr]

One hand or two hands it depends on the situation. To get someone to duck down its one hand quick shot for accurate lay em out its two hand shot. When it came to using pistol over there I refused to show them my side becouse the lack of body armor.