Home » Blogs » Question of the Day: Pistol Shooting Stance. Weaver or Isosceles?

Question of the Day: Pistol Shooting Stance. Weaver or Isosceles?

Robert Farago - comments No comments

Over at ammoland.com, NRA Training Counselor Program Coordinator Andy Lander takes on one of the great debates of our time: Weaver or Isosceles? Do you shoot your pistol standing in a boxer’s stance (Weaver) or square onto the target like a tank (Isosceles? FWIW, I say . . .

when you or other innocent life face an imminent, credible threat of grievous bodily harm or death, you should be moving, not standing. Which makes one-handed shooting way more important than your two-handed stationary stance.

That said, if you have time and room to stand still and you need as much accuracy as possible — which you always do — you should adopt a stance that enables your greatest accuracy. Whatever stance that may be.

Mr. Lander takes that a step further, suggesting that shooters should master or least familiarize themselves with both stances.

As Americans we are fortunate to have the ability to learn a wide variety of techniques with the best firearms instructors this world has ever seen. I personally challenge readers to pursue learning alternative shooting techniques, as it will only enhance your abilities and understanding of defensive shooting in general.

Yeah, no. Train as you mean to fight. Pick a stance. So what’s it gonna be: Weaver, modified Weaver or Isosceles?

Photo of author

Robert Farago

Robert Farago is the former publisher of The Truth About Guns (TTAG). He started the site to explore the ethics, morality, business, politics, culture, technology, practice, strategy, dangers and fun of guns.

0 thoughts on “Question of the Day: Pistol Shooting Stance. Weaver or Isosceles?”

  1. There’s far too much “my way is the right way, there is no other way to do it, and every other way is completely wrong and is going to get you killed” BS surrounding this topic. Same thing as the narrow minded idiots that preach that striker fired is the only way to go.

    Reply
  2. Aww, come on …

    Opinion: A compensated gun has an expansion chamber, which forces the expanded gasses through the porting, to push the muzzle in the desired direction.

    Gaston Glock simply pirated the name, “Compensated”. The 19C is NOT a compensated gun. There is no expansion chamber. The 19C is a “Ported” gun. All the ported gun does is bleed off some of the pressure. Practically the same results may be achieved by burning less powder.

    Gaston Glock went to the PT Barnum school for fooling the public. He learned well. But then, we are easily fooled.

    Reply
    • Ported pistols are pretty much standard issue in competition shooting. I don’t think those guys would use them if there wasn’t an advantage.

      Reply
  3. I shoot competition bulls eye matches one-handed both left and right. Not sure what all the fuss is over these two-handed stances. The answer is to shoot with one hand and practice.

    Reply
  4. this again?
    you shouldn’t have a “stance” because that means you are a stationary target. therefore, stances do not matter. if you are shooting on the move, what stance is that? if you fall down and draw, what stance is that?
    the wise choice is to train to fire the gun in the exact same way no matter you position.

    Reply
    • Couple things.

      People get too wrapped around the axle about the phrase “shooting stance.” A stance, such as Isosceles or weaver, is the base from which you adapt to different situations. For example, I can shoot on the move from the Isosceles stance. Instead of having my feet planted, they walk, but my upper body retains the same basic appearance. On my back on the ground? I still shoot with my arms and grip the isosceles way.

      Also,I would much rather be stationary shooting from cover with a smaller portion of my body exposed than shooting on the move. If I have to shoot on the way to cover I will shoot while moving, but it makes more sense to have something between you and the target than not. Ive just seen some comments already saying how they would never stand still during a gunfight, if you have a good position of cover and can fire more accurately than while moving it doesn’t make a whole lot of sense to leave it.

      Also, Isosceles seems to be better for those that wear body armor than the weaver.

      Reply
  5. They are both difficult when you’re drunk and naked.

    But on a more serious note, “you should be moving, not standing.” I find it is difficult to hit a moving target while moving. When shooting rabbits, I stop when they stop. When I stop, I shoot. Therefore, I think move, stop, shoot is probably the best way to hit your target while avoiding being shot. Admittedly, this is theoretical as rabbits don’t shoot back.

    God willing, I’ll never have to test any self-defense theories/opinions.

    Reply
    • “They are both difficult when you’re drunk and naked.”

      Not sure about the nekid, but drunk, ok.

      However, both will be facilitated by a shoulder holster.

      Reply
  6. A “stance” is great for shooting straight ahead on a square range. ANY stance quickly falls apart once you start engaging targets to the side or even rear. Try this, with an unloaded gun or replica, choose your preferred stance and aim straight ahead.

    Now, turn your torso to the left, maintaining your stance as long as you can. At some point, your right arm will bend and your left elbow will drop. You’re in a bastardized Weaver, no matter where you started from. Now, do the same thing to the right – now you’re in a “reverse Weaver.”

    Stance is irrelevant – read Brian Enos, and learn to “float the gun.”

    Reply
    • Based on the question asked, I prefer Weaver, but I agree with you. In a fight, you will not have a stance, you’ll have what I call a position. Best training one can take is just learn how to put the sights on target, not try to death choke the grip, and squeeze the trigger, not finger bang it like it’s their girlfriend.

      Reply
  7. Responding to a very old article here but it’s because Chicago is a city of nine million. This is glaringly obvious. Is the City of London the city of London? You have to be dense to think Chicago fits it’s municipality of the same name better than it’s MSA.

    I don’t know the group you cite but they’re using sound methodology and there’s an argument that Detroit and Philly are even larger than their MSA. The criticism is hysterical. People have lost the plot of what a real city is.

    You’re having a giggle with the geography class claim surely? Extraordinary assertion. The FBI use the MSA concept because it tries to measure a “city” in it’s current state. That’s why they put them there, they’re called an ‘MSA’. it’s another word for ‘city’. That’s all it is. It’s exactly the same thing.

    The author says Joliet isn’t part of Chicago, of which the only logical reason I can see for this is that it would lower Chicago’s murder rate if you included it. Yet the Chicago urban area clearly swallows Joliet. So why would you not include it?

    Urbanologists know how big Chicago is:

    http://www.atlasofurbanexpansion.org/cities/view/Chicago

    Click on Chicago:

    http://www.atlasofurbanexpansion.org/historical-data

    Note that Chicago always has a higher murder rate than the likes of Cleveland, Atlanta or Cincinnati. Any claims saying otherwise should be taken with a grain of salt. These exclamations are based on the same bunk science used in this blog whose distortions I have hopefully cleared up.

    In 2016, Chicago had a higher murder rate than Philly and Detroit. It went up so much it surpassed even those cities. Check table 4 in the recently-released FBI report.

    Thanks very much.

    Reply
  8. Years ago I watched one of the best U-Tube videos on learning how to shoot accurately. For once I completely agreed with everything the poster said. Stance doesn’t matter, breathing doesn’t matter, grip doesn’t matter. Being able to get off an accurate shot is all about site picture and trigger pull. Which stance you use or if you lean forward or not will not affect the accuracy of your shot. Yes, it may affect your ability to get more shots on target faster, but that first good shot does not require all that other crap so many “experts” say is vital. So I learned to just be comfortable and not worry so much about stance. Gee, my groupings got better really fast.

    Reply
  9. Years of hand to hand training has me naturally default to a fighting stance or modified weaver. I shoot well, so I see no reason to fight my other training. It is also easier for me to move from a weaver style stance.

    That’s just me, though, shoot however you want.

    Reply
  10. Knew a police office that investigated police involved shootings. He remarked that the officer, no matter their training, always shot one handed.

    Reply
  11. Philadelphia has the illegal no guns in park law they put that in place as soon as the state said Philadelphia could not pre-empt state law. It stands unchallenged i believe.

    Reply
  12. In reality you’ll find yourself more in some kind of Weaver-ish position. It’s more natural.
    Isosceles is great in controlled environments. Teaching, warming up, accuracy shots, etc.

    Reply
  13. Pffft. Drones and robots aren’t scary. Those flying monkeys from the Wizard of Oz? Now they were scary. If I see a couple of dozen of them coming my way, I’m picking up my little dog and booking, post-haste.

    Reply
  14. The three L’s, Libertarians, Liberals and the Left, have never supported the 1st amendment. In fact they have a warped view of just what the 1st amendment means. The justice department under president Obama never supported the Christian bakers nor did they fight against the lesbian ,democrat, mayor of Houston Texas when she used government force, issuing subpoenas, to get copies of the sermons from local pastors.

    http://www.breitbart.com/texas/2014/10/15/religious-liberty-under-attack-as-houston-subpoenas-church-sermons/

    “the subpoenas seek any speeches, sermons, or communications with church members relating to homosexuality, gender identity, or Houston Mayor Annise Parker, the city’s first open lesbian to hold that office.”

    When president Trump uses government force to stop the speech of an American citizen, let me know. Every President has free speech rights, just like everyone else. If a democrat violates a person’s free speech, its ok????

    Reply
  15. Love it that Trump is playing these leftist nitwits like a fiddle. He has every lib in America from ABC’s in-house runt George Clintonopoulos to CNN’s pet pervert Don “Nipples” Lemon running off at the mouth over this nonsense. Meanwhile, he gets a breather to do right where most others only do wrong. MAGA

    Reply
  16. I took one of these comics with me to Nam in 1970. I was supposed to have qualified
    with an M-16 before I took my 30 day leave before shipping out. I falsified my 201 (personnel) file to indicate that I had received RVN TNG (Republic of Vietnam) Training before I left Ft. Belvoir, Va., where I was stationed; this would have included qualifying with an M-16. It was easy to do back then, the clerks often used pencil to make notations about things like that, they didn’t type everything onto your 201. After getting there and being issued an M-16, after firing it (that first time on automatic (“rock and roll”) was awesome, I took the weapon back to my hootch, opened up the comic and learned how to strip and clean it. Even practiced putting it back together with my eyes closed a few times, just in case.

    Reply
  17. Well, that’s a realshame, but maybe now her security guards can look forward to a pay raise for defending her at her anti-liberty rallies, since she won’t have to spend so much money on make-up.

    Reply
  18. Not sure what you call it, but it’s the stance Jerry Miculek uses.

    If you want to shoot like Jerry, you need to stand like Jerry.

    Reply
  19. So for a second I thought you guys were being mean by intentionally running a still of her that makes her look like a bunny boiler. Then I click over to the source article and find out it’s the same as the headline pic. I guess that’s just how she looks naturally.

    Reply
  20. “While Colorado has a significant amount of women represented in our state legislature, we need more women in leadership roles like governor and our members of Congress.”

    Amount? Anything that comes in individual units (people, cars, apples) should be referred to with an appropriate term, i.e. number, quantity, etc.

    But Shannon sees women voters as something you get by the pound, obviously.

    Reply
  21. Ugh. This shit just annoys me.

    The problem for me with all of this, for me, is that it’s a bunch of morons on both sides yelling at each other without saying anything useful. The root cause of which is that no one cares to have a useful, in depth discussion on much of anything meaningful these days. The stuff that actually matters is too “boring”. But this kind of bullshit is exciting.

    I seriously worry that we really are on the edge of losing the Republic simply because the majority are too ignorant and too anesthetized by nonsense like the NFL.

    People are more than happy to be at each other’s throats over silly shit like this but start talking about root causes of many of our problems like tax and regulatory policy and eyes glaze over, cell phones come out and the Kim Kardashian Instagram page gets pulled up.

    This is just an extension of that mindset IMHO. The “protest” misguided as I might think it is, is free speech and so long as the owners and the NFL put up with it… Well, not my circus, not my monkey. If the polling on this issue is correct the market will force a change in behavior soon enough.

    Reply
  22. I am looking at this from a bird’s eye view. Trump won. We got the Supreme Court guy, now this other guy in Alabama with his little pocket revolver. I am happy with those victories. Mark my words: The leftist/globalist traitors that desire to hand over our freedoms to very unreasonable and power hungry narcissists are already putting forth plans to undermine everything we have gained. If you think you are exempt from your records being kept or facing future confiscation you are wrong. Seems like we go through this every few decades. The Jews, native Americans and other groups gave up their guns too… if we lose another big election it might be hell to pay.

    Reply
  23. Honestly can say I’ve never met any of the seven types down at the Izaak Walton League. Nothing but cool, down to earth people there.

    Reply
  24. Being the safety nazi that I can be, that was a bit unsafe with that white pickup down range.
    And the final shot, the suv that drives by while they are inspecting the damage..
    Otherwise, that’s some impressive speed out of that heavy slug!

    Reply
  25. You, guys, work way too hard. I’m all for lightening your load by repealing the NFA. Feel free to pass the message to congress critters next time they consult for your invaluable opinion. The people and the ATF for hearing safety!

    Reply
  26. John,

    One victory Trump could win without having to worry about Ryan and McConnell standing in his way is to withdraw from the UN Arms Trade Treaty. The Trump Second Amendment Coalition team really needs to be pushing him on that.

    Reply
  27. David T. Hardy is no “liberal gadfly” as you say in the introduction. He is a staunch conservative and an extraordinary defender of the Second Amendment. You can check him out at his website “Of Arms and the Law”.

    Reply
  28. “Click here to examine 23 pieces of “evidence” that the NRA is racist,…”

    Does TTAG really want to give them the page clicks?

    Reply

Leave a Comment