|
|
|
|
#1
09-09-2009, 01:38 PM
|
||||
|
||||
So handgun training even during WWI and II for the US army was shown with one hand in mind? That does explain why those old training vids I see shows them holding 1911s with one hand,
__________________
 "There's a fine line between not listening and not caring...I like to think I walk that line everyday of my life." Blessed be the LORD, my rock, Who trains my hands for war, And my fingers for battle Psalm 144:1 “It is always wrong to use force, unless it is more wrong not to.” 
|
|
#2
09-09-2009, 06:46 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
If the story takes place before the 1960s and definitely by the 1970s or later, then a two handed stance is common place. But ALL historical material shows shooters using one hand, standing sideways to present the slimmest target to their opponent, arm extended.
I had to argue with an art director once, who had and actor playing SHERLOCK HOLMES take the 'horse stance' two handed with his Webley MK1. It looked like a 70s cop show, except with a Victorian Gentleman. It looked really anachronistic, which it was! 
|
|
#3
09-09-2009, 08:51 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Speaking of Sherlock Holmes, you might enjoy this classic Garry James article:
http://www.gunsandammomag.com/cs/Sat...herlock+Holmes I find with alot of old revolvers it's difficult to grip them comfortably two-handed, the grips just aren't designed for it.
|
|
#4
09-10-2009, 12:18 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
I'm sure they used a two handed grip with all those early WWI era machine pistols.
|
|
#5
09-10-2009, 01:17 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Well, the early WW1 pistols you're talking about weren't really machine pistols, they didn't fire full auto. Those didn't really come around till the 30s. But the correct way to fire one of those is to use your non-firing hand to support the stock with an underhanded grip.
|
 |
|
|
Hybrid Mode
