The "Square Stance": Why?

[fightingquaker13]

Here's a question. It seems that tactical shooting instruction in rifle and shotguns today seems to focus on facing the enemy full on, rather than the more traditional stance of firing from a side position. Why? This seems counter intuitive. You seem to be exposing center mass to the BG as opposed to a narrower target. I suppose one might lose half a second with a more traditional stance, but is it worth giving the BG a bigger target? Also, it just doesn't seem as accurate a firing position, as you are leaning to one side or the other, rather than having everything in alignment. Obviously, guys smarter than I am seem to think its a good idea. I'm not arguing here, just curious.  Help me out.
FQ13

[Ranger Dave]

FQ
I believe I remember hearing the switch to a "square stance" was to take advantage of body amor. Being squared up your body armor is more likely to catch a bullet than when you are bladed away. You have very little body armor protecting your side.

I know there is someone out there who knows for sure and can explain a whole lot better.

[MikeBjerum]

I am open to differing opinions ... especially from "I can kill you with these two fingers Pincus," but I was taught to square up for two reasons:

1.  Solid shooting platform with easiest tracking of a moving target (maximum swing of gun to right and left without shifting body position);

2.  Most mobility for myself when move becomes important (squared up allows for equal ability to move forward, back, right and left).

[texcaliber]

Erik Lund did a few excellent videos for DRTV, some of the first if memory serves me, and he answers your questions in full. I just can not find the videos to provide link for you FQ13. Sorry man.
Tex

[PegLeg45]

I understand it serves to provide better recoil management for quicker follow-up shots, and along with what the others have already posted, makes a better over-all shooting platform.

YMMV

[Sponsor]

[Bic]

Side shot possibly BOTH lungs 

[fightingquaker13]

Side shot possibly BOTH lungs 

One lung would seem to be adequate to the task. And if you shoot like I do, you'd much rather have the BG standing square to you rather than turning all sideways on you. Of course, I'm sure that's just me.
FQ13

[Solus]

If you are being shot at, you will either be behind cover, moving quickly to it or moving out of the target zone, or dying.

If you are behind cover, a bladed stance doesn't work well and if you are moving you are not going to be doing it well bladed.

And body armor does have arm holes allowing for a transverse shot....just like hunters prefer.

[tombogan03884]

If you are going to shoot from a "Bladed" position leave the body armor home. You won't have any of it facing the threat any way so why bother with the weight.
Also, in a squared up position the rifle is not on your shoulder, the Armor is in between, if it will stop a freaking bullet it should help with recoil  
Thirdly,The Squared stance helps, as  someone else mentioned, with keeping full auto weapons on target, that was one of the things Eric demo'd in those clips.
There was something else about indexing gun with body but I'm just to tired to think. Night all.

[Overload]

Same stance for pistol, rifle and shotgun.