Close Quarters Combat // Tzviel (BK) BlankchteinThe "Israeli Lean"

Many articles have been written about shooting stances. On one side of the spectrum are the Weaver Stance proponents, pointing to the narrower body (bladed) position, the ability to shuffle step, and the upper-body (torso) mobility, as evidence for the stance’s superiority. On the other side are the proponents of the Isosceles Stance, who point to the stronger base, the fact that the body portion facing the opponent is typically covered by body armor or vest, and the more natural arm position as confirmation of their preferred stance’s dominance as the “best firing stance.” Both stances have advantages and disadvantages, and neither one is superior to to the other. A person should find the one that fits his specific needs, body structure, and comfort.

Over the past few years there has been a movement within the U. S. military and law-enforcement community away from the Weaver stance and back toward the Isosceles. With that came a renewed interest in the Israeli “Point-Shoot” style of handgun combat shooting. The needs in Israel differ from the needs in the United States, but a combat zone is still a combat zone, and military forces tend to adopt techniques that work. Point-Shoot refers to the use of a handgun (although sometimes used with a carbine or SMG in close quarters as well) in an “instinctive” manner and without the use of sights. The argument goes that if you can point your finger at a target, the handgun should merely be an extension of that finger during combat, making reaction time and target acquisition time significantly shorter.

This column, though, is not about Point-Shoot, but rather about the Israeli Lean. It is impossible, however, to discuss the Israeli Lean without first introducing the Point-Shoot concept, or, more specifically, the point-shoot stance.

There are many ways to negotiate corners as well as shooting over or around cover. Law-enforcement officers learn the “diamond” or the “two-files” methods, while military tend to conform to the “single-file” method. Different missions, objectives, and use-of-force regulations are primarily responsible for the differences. Regardless of the method used, when coming at a corner or a doorway, units tend to use one of three methods to find out what is around the corner: when available, the use of mirrors is introduced, as well as the quick-peak and the