Use your eyes

[Fenway]

[FONT=Verdana,Geneva,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]USE YOUR EYES ![/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana,Geneva,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif][FONT=Times New Roman,Times,Serif] [FONT=Comic Sans MS,Verdana,Helvetica,sans-serif]The issue of shooting with one eye or two eyes has been around for a long time. As in much of what we are doing, it is a matter of context and distance.

If you are fighting a bad guy at five feet as you explode off the x and shoot him to the ground, both eyes open works fine. Try the same thing at 50 yards and your results will not be as good.

So...and I know we have used the "c" word before, the Continuum applies here. It fits in the same context as the moving continuum (from stationary to sprinting), the sight continuum (from focus on sights to focus on threat), the rate of fire continuum (from carefully pressing the trigger to machinegun mashing it as many times as needed), and now the eye usage continuum (from both eyes open focusing on the threat to one eye open only and focusing on the sights).

For close range gunfighting, both eyes open makes sense as it is simply a slightly extended hand to hand fight.

For extended ranges...beyond what we would call CQB, I will close the non-shooting eye (notice I did not say the non-dominant eye). This gives me greater clarity of focus on the sights and a greater ability to align them properly on the distant or difficult target.

Who shoots a rifle at 200 yards with both eyes open? If you do you are a rarity as most folks find they need to close one eye. But before you start sending me hate mail, check yourself honestly and I think you will find that you are far more accurate with the non-shooting eye closed. This may be mitigated with some red dot optics, but not with iron sights or traditional magnification scopes.

Another issue is the dominant eye. At basic levels the dominance difference may be great. The more the difference, the more the need to shut off the non-dominant eye for sighted shooting. The less the difference the less important it is. I have never met anyone with equal dominance in each eye.

At advanced levels we seek to train both sides equally as well as both eyes. I do not have a strong side or a weak side...I have a right and a left. When I am shooting in Close Range Gunfighting, I keep both eyes open and don't worry about it. As the distance increases and I find I need the sights more, I seek them and when I see them, my body makes a determination about whether I need to close one eye.

Its automatic. I don't over think it.

If the weapon is in my right hand, I sight with the right eye. If in the left hand, then sighting takes place with the left eye. And by sighting, I don't necessarily mean "use the sights" but rather "process the visual information" with the eye that is in line with the gun. That may be "meat and metal" or it may be an actual marksmanship sighted method.

The use of the eyes, once you understand their role, is like chewing gum and walking. The more you think about it the harder it is.


Gabe Suarez[/FONT][/FONT][/FONT]

 

[rhino]

Mr. Suarez makes some excellent points.

My personal opinion is that the debate over whether or not you can/should close one eye is . . . non-productive.

Along the lines of what Suarez says above, you need to do whatever you need to do to make the shot you need to make when you need to make it. When I read what I just wrote, saying it seems a lot more complicated than just doing it. If you need to close one eye, close one eye. If you don't, don't. Simple.

One of the primary arguments for keeping both eyes open is based on peripheral vision. I think that argument is based on the false premise that a given individual in 2008 is likely to have any significant, functional peripheral vision beyond the vaguest detection of movement. Perhaps we had good peripheral vision and awareness in times past, but it's either been bred or conditioned out of us. All of our lives are focused on one thing at a time, whether it's a computer monitor, a television, etc. It's just been too long since the average person had to constantly worry about a threat coming from any direction at any time.

Some people can probably be trained to develop their peripheral awareness quite a bit, but it would take a lot of time and effort. For most people, it's just not an issue. So the idea that closing one eye will somehow doom you because of a loss of peripheral vision is not compelling.

Again, do what you need to do to make the shot. A huge portion of that is seeing what you need to see, and usually that's your front sight. The more demanding a shot is, the more clearly the front sight needs to be in focus. If closing an eye gets you there, do it.

 

[Cricket Tickler]

I find that at 25 yards or more, my non-shooting eye will just close. I haven't thought to much about this, but you can bet next time I'm out I'll be thinking about it.

 

[abnk]

Mr. Suarez makes some excellent points.

My personal opinion is that the debate over whether or not you can/should close one eye is . . . non-productive.

Along the lines of what Suarez says above, you need to do whatever you need to do to make the shot you need to make when you need to make it. When I read what I just wrote, saying it seems a lot more complicated than just doing it. If you need to close one eye, close one eye. If you don't, don't. Simple.

I asked Louis for his opinion on this and his answer was very similar to yours. Too bad this was after I had a lot wasted time and energy attempting to train myself to shoot with both eyes open with a pistol, which only resulted in frustration.

 

[rhino]

I asked Louis for his opinion on this and his answer was very similar to yours. Too bad this was after I had a lot wasted time and energy attempting to train myself to shoot with both eyes open with a pistol, which only resulted in frustration.

I know you've noticed Louis' influence on my "philosophy," and this is another example. I would credit him each time I post something, but I think people would get tired of the citations.

It's also something I learned along the way from years of practical shooting competition before I met Louis. I think one of the reasons why he resonates with me so much is that he confirms so much of what I believed was "true" from my past experience and intuition. It's not so much about validation, but more about someone reaching the same conclusions while taking a different path. Kind of an "all roads lead to Rome" idea.

I've had some similar experiences with Rob Pincus. There were things I believed, but I wasn't "sure" until I heard his rationale behind his ideas. He has helped me understand why I reached some of the conclusions I have over the last few years, which is a significant confidence booster.

On the surface, the two seem very different in their presentation and methods, but they share some common traits such as a unique ability to analyze and articulate the "whys" to support their "hows."

 

[mercop]

Situations I have been involved in have led me to believe that under stress you cannot close one eye. We are visual beings and our eyes are the first step in the OODA loop. There are no other activities that have use closing one eye under stress or not. So it only makes sense that at the most terrifying time of our life our brain is going to want both eyes wide open in order to gather the most information to base decisions on.