Skip to main content

Mods, please move this post if I've chosen the wrong sub.


      I am looking for actual statistical data relating to the difference in an individual's handgun shooting performance (draw speed/accuracy) when shooting one handed vs. shooting two handed. The specific context is in the use of a weapon mounted flashlight vs a handheld flashlight and pistol. As a firearms instructor, it would never occur to me, either based on my training or on my experience, that a persons using only one hand to shoot (and the other to hold and align a flashlight) could ever out perform a person using a normal, two-handed firing grip, but apparently there are people who need to see the numbers before they can allocate the funds. I call those people white shirts, among other things. 

     Force Science is my first instinct, but if anyone has any hard data or can point me in the right direction, I'd appreciate it. Thanks in advance.

Original Post

I don't have any stats but it would seem quite obvious that given your parameters (low enough light to need illumination to identify threat and starting with a holstered weapon) that one handed with a seperate flash light would be much quicker and two handed with a weapong mounted light would be more accurate and quicker for follow up shots. So the "whats best?" answer would be highly subjective based off distance, type of call, number of advisaries, actual light level, back up etc.  

Having done both in classes, two handed with a WML was at least 200% better.  If you do a lot of practice with the handheld light, you can cut that down a bit.  If you're using a Harris type grip and indexing  back of hand to back of hand, there are still misalignment issues, i.e. your sights and light aren't aligned and you have to grease them in.  That's where a lot of practice comes in to play.  Reacquiring your sights and light alignment after shooting is still slower than the WML.  I have never, ever, seen someone shoot better with a handheld light over a WML, myself included.  Ever.

Doing it is the best way to teach the doubters.  Hit the range at night.  Steel is better, but paper works.  Set up identical target layouts for each man, and if you have the room, set up another set of two, different set up than the first two.  Take your guys two at a time.  One guy handheld, one WML.  Run the first set of targets, then swap weapons and run the second.  The reason for the variation and swapping is to eliminate bias.  Also, have them run it cold, i.e. it's a surprise, they don't get to see the layout first.  I guarantee that if you don't have your number 1 badass with the handheld vs. the total chimp on the WML, the WML will shoot better and faster every time.

No, I don't have stats.

Might be more effective to:

-use a OIS from your agency or nearby as a template course of fire

-have folks from you agency representing a cross section of ability levels shoot for time and score using the template course of fire that you developed in the following conditions: daytime 2 handed and 1 handed, lowlight with different flashlight techniques.  I would throw in some threat discrimination tasks and maybe a stoppage or force a slide lock reload in there as well.  Video the performance and do a interview after each performance.  Allow each user to try several techniques.  Get them in their own words to say why technique A suck and technique Z works much better.  And will also have quantifiable data from your own people as to what works better. 

This type of info should be more easily understood by your admin.  Words on paper aren't nearly as effective in persuading people. 

Not a naysayer as I wrote the paperwork that got WML's approved by my agency some years ago, but the devil is in the details (and this was a concern I had back in the day).  Unless we want people clearing buildings after alarm activations or backyards after prowler calls with pistols aimed  wherever they look, cops are going to have to search with handheld lights.   What is your doctrine when the devil jumps up on one of these "routine calls"?One-handed shooting with handheld? Harries or another technique?  Drop or stow the light and activate the PML?

I agree completely that shooting with a PML is vastly faster and more accurate than any light/gun combination.

Thanks and be safe.


Last edited by Community Member

I will get you the number for the NYPD range. Ask them about SOP 9. Keep in mind that the ordinary troops don't have weapons mounted lights.  I have a few shootings in my time, albeit with revolvers, but in each case it was one handed as the other hand was busy doing something else. It would be nice to have two hands on the gun but sometimes conditions have a say. That said, NO, I'm not advocating one hand over two.

The practical data collection idea being considered. The inclusion of the reload is a great idea.


It seems a bit silly to propose that one handed shooting with a handheld light is ever superior to the alternative. Perhaps the lack of a "study" should indicate that there is no question of the superiority of a WML in this context.  As a matter of policy, we would require all officers to carry a hand held flashlight for illumination purposes when a drawn weapon is inappropriate/dangerous. Indeed, the department in question includes such a hand held light as a part of the individual patrol equipment issued to each officer. 


Thank you, all, for your input. 

This is not a "study", but some measured performance. I wrote this for the IALEFI magazine a few years ago.

One Hand or Two? Instinct or Conditioning?

by Tom Givens

In a recent gun magazine there was an article proposing that drawing a handgun to a one handed shooting position was “instinctive”, and therefore we should be training students to do so as a default technique. Ordinarily, I resist the temptation to respond to this type of article, but this one really irked me.

First, I checked my trusty dictionary. It gives the primary definition of “instinct” as “an inborn pattern of activity and response common to a given biological stock”. Since handguns have only been around 500 years (the blink of an eye in geologic or biologic terms) there is obviously no instinctive way to handle a gun, or any other mechanical device. We have to teach people to drive cars, because there is no instinctive mental model for that activity. We have to teach them how to operate a computer, as there is no instinctive mental model for that activity. The same applies to firearms.

My school teaches a large number of private citizens each year. Most have little or no prior experience with handguns before we get them. Each year we have several students involved in defensive gunplay, and they always win. At the National Tactical Invitational a few years ago, I presented a power point presentation on ten shootings involving civilian students. These were simply a representative sampling, showing certain trends. Among other items of interest was the fact that in these ten self defense shootings, against armed criminal attackers, the students fired a total of 38 shots and scored a total of 36 hits. That is a 95% hit ratio. This astonishingly high hit ratio came from two-handed, eye level accurate fire.

One of those shootings is extremely instructional. It occurred inside a convenience store, with the surveillance cameras rolling. The entire fight was captured in good quality color video, from two angles, so there is no guess work involved in seeing what happened and how it happened. In brief, an armed robber entered the store, walked toward the clerk, and as he got near, drew a large handgun from underneath the waistband of a hoodie. The clerk quickly sidestepped to the left, presented a 9mm handgun, in both hands, to eye level, and fired one shot, which struck the suspect in the upper chest. The suspect bent over and hobbled out of the store to a waiting getaway car, again seen on the outside cameras. The thug never got off a shot.

The most interesting thing about this episode to me is the fact that the student involved was a 53 year old Thai immigrant female, who had never touched a gun prior to receiving training here, less than two months prior to this shooting. There is no gun culture in Thailand, and this lady was a blank slate when we trained her. This was a classic, close range, reactive, surprise gunfight, and she did as trained.

I suspect that the “stick it out in one hand” form of shooting is not instinctive, but rather cultural in origin. The Thai lady had not spent her formative years watching people shoot that way on TV, so we had no ingrained mental image to overcome. The other nine students in this ten shooting sample were, however, all American males, yet most of them also went to two hands and eye level, with the exception of two involved in contact distance shootings.

We teach two default responses: two handed eye level sighted fire if the target is beyond arm’s reach, and retention position firing if it is not. One handed shooting is taught strictly as the choice when one hand is disabled or otherwise unavailable.  If we have both hands, we put them on the gun. This simplified training works.

Now, as to the “test” in the original article, I have some real heartburn with the methodology. I have two major gripes.  First, the goal was “a hit anywhere on the IALEFI silhouette target”. By now, everyone should be well aware that peripheral hits with handgun cartridges are ineffective. The second was limiting the firing to one shot. See the last statement. Since handgun rounds are so anemic, compared to rifles and shotguns, several fast hits are often required to incapacitate a suspect.  One of the main advantages of firing with two hands is the increase in ability to accurately place follow-up shots on target.

With these thoughts in mind, I arranged the same range set-up as the one in the article; one IALEFI target at 5 yards. I then put twelve of our staff members through this test. On the first stage, each shooter was to draw and fire 3 rounds, with the dominant hand only, keeping all hits inside the 10” chest circle of the target as quickly as possible. On the second run, each shooter would draw and fire 3 rounds into the chest circle, using both hands. Each shooter went through the one handed firing first, then after everyone had fired, each shooter used both hands. This made a cooling off period between strings, to avoid skewing the results. Each shooter performed the drill three times with one hand, and three times using both hands.

When the test was complete, I had 36 iterations of one handed firing, and 36 of two handed firing. I felt this would be a representative sample. I then averaged the times.

Firing with one hand, the average time was 2.91 seconds, for 3 good hits. Firing with two hands, the average time was 2.23 seconds for 3 good hits. Thus, two handed firing was .68 seconds faster (an almost 25% advantage). This group of twelve shooters represented a broad range of skill development, with some of the shooters more highly trained and experienced than others. To see if the same spread held true for a highly trained shooter, I repeated the test myself.

In my case, I fired five three-shot strings, drawing and firing with the dominant hand only, plus five three-shot strings drawing and firing with both hands. Again, the requirement was to keep all hits inside the IALEFI-Q chest circle. The results were as follows:

    One Handed          Two Handed

        2.39 secs          1.59 secs

        1.97 secs          1.70 secs

        1.86 secs          1.58 secs

        1.82 secs          1.58 secs

        1.85 secs          1.60 secs


        9.89 secs total                 8.05 secs total


Thus, with two hands, I was 19% faster than with one hand. As I suspected, with a highly experienced shooter, the difference was less, but still significant.


Two handed fire allows better recoil management, faster follow up shots, and fewer blown shots (misses). Proper training includes explanation of the situation, presentation of proper technique, dry practice of proper technique, and repetitive practice in live fire. Our cultural predisposition to poor technique certainly can be overcome, as our students illustrate year after year. As Instructors, it is our responsibility to have them do so.


I carry a Surefire Lawman R1 in a HSGI Subgun Taco at 7 o'clock beltline.

I carry a Surefire EAG Fury in a BFG TenSpeed pistol pouch at 2 o'clock on the cummberbund of my LPAAC- patrol and another same location on my JPC-callout. Ideally, the handhelds would be just aft of my pistol mags on belt line, but... real estate is a reality.

That is in addition to the X300U on my pistol and the M600P on my 12.5" carbine.

All handheld lights are easily and quickly accessed. Because of the nature of the carry pouches, the lights are ditched into a cargo pocket if they need immediately secured.

Add Reply

Copyright Lightfighter Tactical Forum 2002-2020
Link copied to your clipboard.