Mozambique or failure to stop drill

[David LaPell]

I was asked the other day by a couple of newer shooters about my take on the Mozambique, or failure to stop drill. When we did it during qualifications and training it was always called the body armor drill. Regardless it's the time tested, two shots to center mass and one to the head. How we were taught, was to fire that third head shot deliberately and taking your time so that the rhythm is like this....bang, bang........bang. With a deliberate pause while you are lining up that third shot. I see many shooters taking that third shot as fast as possible.
If you have ever practiced this drill, how have you done it? All three shots as rapidly as possible or that third shot slow and deliberate, or at least slower. Even with our training all three shots were fired in under two seconds from about five to seven yards.

 

[shottist]

Two, center mass. pause. One carefully aimed to the head, (if necessary). This is how I have always done it and if memory serves this was the Mozambique protocol as defined by Col. Cooper, RIP

 

[DR505]

Same here...pause for #3 to ensure a proper shot.

 

[Kanewpadle]

I was taught the same. The head is hard to hit as it is.

 

[Rastoff]

In my training, these are two different drills. The Mozambique (sometimes called a box drill) is always three shots in succession. Some teach to pause and some don't. The Failure-to-Stop drill is completely different.

The way I was taught, and how I use it in my class, is two completely separate actions. First there is a controlled pair to center mass or thoracic cavity. After these two shots are delivered, the shooter immediately moves into "after action" drills. As part of the after action drill, they are supposed to be checking to see if the assailant was really stopped. At some random point, the instructor will call "Head!" and the shooter takes one well aimed shot to the head (preferably in a box defined by the eyebrows, the upper lip and about 1/2" inside each ear).

The idea is not just to create a pause, but to cause the shooter to actually assess the situation. The instructor might not call for the head shot. Maybe the first two did the job.

I don't like the Mozambique drill because it ingrains three shots into muscle memory. It's not the three shots that are the problem, it's the lack of assessment. If the threat has been stopped, there is no need (and no legal justification) for that third, difficult shot.

 

[BAM-BAM]

As I get older..... I wonder if anyone outside of Hollywood .......could survive a real life Mozambique drill...... 3 shooters and 9 rounds at less than 15 yards....... against

three guys wearing body armor.......all unloading on you at close range......if it takes you more than 5 seconds figure the 3rd guy is starting his reload after putting 15-18 rounds in your direction.... w/ good hits on the other two... they are still getting another 15-20 rounds off..........if your reaction time is even 1 second there are 15 rounds inbound...........

A single assailant........ shoot till the threat is neutralized...... 2 assailants ...... 2 and 2..... if one or both is still a threat......... OH c---!!! ......hope you have a hi-cap and not a J-frame

I've given more thought to a third pelvic girdle shot to put the attacker down and in pain......... bigger target...... as I'm going down.......

 

[Kifaru]

It seems the Mozambique drill is becoming outdated in training circles these days. The drill is probably irrelevant because if the threat takes two hits, body armor or not, his head is not going to be where is was when things started. That's probably the reason for the pause, but people often pause by rote without assessing or thinking.

It is interesting to note that in the incident from which Col. Cooper derived the drill, the "head shot" was not delivered to the brain box. The bullet, fired from a Browning Hi Power, actually hit the neck/cervical spine for the stop. So in reality, the shot was a lucky "miss." It's just my guess, but those may be a few reasons why the drill seems to be falling out of favor.

 

[RobzGuns]

The 'Pause' seems to have gotten lost due to practical shooting competitions, where time, as well as accuracy is the focus.
It's too bad that the reasoning behind a drill, gets lost in competition.

I pause, to make sure I don't end up "1 down" (or get a complete miss. )

 

[NJDevil72]

In my training, these are two different drills. The Mozambique (sometimes called a box drill) is always three shots in succession. Some teach to pause and some don't. The Failure-to-Stop drill is completely different.

The way I was taught, and how I use it in my class, is two completely separate actions. First there is a controlled pair to center mass or thoracic cavity. After these two shots are delivered, the shooter immediately moves into "after action" drills. As part of the after action drill, they are supposed to be checking to see if the assailant was really stopped. At some random point, the instructor will call "Head!" and the shooter takes one well aimed shot to the head (preferably in a box defined by the eyebrows, the upper lip and about 1/2" inside each ear).

The idea is not just to create a pause, but to cause the shooter to actually assess the situation. The instructor might not call for the head shot. Maybe the first two did the job.

I don't like the Mozambique drill because it ingrains three shots into muscle memory. It's not the three shots that are the problem, it's the lack of assessment. If the threat has been stopped, there is no need (and no legal justification) for that third, difficult shot.

This is exactly how I learned it.

 

[Protected One]

Bang, bang, pause...bang (if the threat has not gone down).
And I mean GONE DOWN - not just stopped!

 

[Rastoff]

So, you're going to keep shooting until he's dead? Just stopping isn't good enough for you?

 

[Ranger514]

The Mozambique was taught when I was in the academy, but we were also trained to target the pelvic girdle area as an alternative when thoracic hits didn't produce results. Years later, when I took a Reactive Shooting course, a variation of Point Shooting, our instructors trained us in what they called a "Failure Drill" of six rapid fire rounds to center mass when initial rounds appeared ineffective in stopping a lethal threat.

 

[Protected One]

So, you're going to keep shooting until he's dead? Just stopping isn't good enough for you?

DOWN.....as in "on the ground". Down doesn't necessarily mean dead. If the first two put him down, there will be no third shot.

 

[getoff]

i don't do it anymore. the el pres. is a better drill to me. everybody gets one, then if needed go back for seconds and if needed, thirds. to much range training leads to poor tactics. luckily for me, i have a local range that allows holster work, and if not crowded, shooting on the move. when i was on the job, 94-95, it was popular. i think it's time has passed amongst the "tacticool" set...

 

[keith44spl]

When I was on the meth lab raid team and risky warrants...
We practiced two or three in the middle and more if necessary where ever ya can get em.

Hitting a moving bobble head ain't all that easy under a full adrenaline load.

Stactic range is good for shooting at standing still tragets and
hiding behind a piece of plywood and gunnin down paper.


When I attended Response to Active Shooter training, it was all simunitions.

Ya kinda get a feel for being shot at whilst trying to take all
those careful aim shots ya practiced on the stactic range a shootin paper.

Moving and shootin has worked for me, and I's a sticking to it.

In closing, careful head shots work some times too, if'n ya can get em to hold still enough.


Oh, and use enough gun to start with.



.

 

[Fastbolt]

Bottom line?

If a precisely aimed head shot is determined to be required, it's probably desperately needed. A fast miss will not only fail to achieve the desired goal, but will send another errant round downrange to endanger someone else.

Precision (head) aimed shots, if deemed appropriate and necessary, need to be made with the time and precision necessary to achieve the desired goal. Faster/slower is going to be determined by the skills of the shooter, and the circumstances involved in the particular situation which will dictate the needs of the moment.

For example, shooter movement occurring between the COM shots and the deliberate aimed head shot (think lateral displacement) will probably introduce more difficulty in acquiring a proper sight alignment/picture than if the shooter made the transition from COM shots to head shot while standing still. The trained person ought to be able to react to both potential situations, as may be considered necessary.

The distance and lighting conditions will be important considerations, too. Ditto other influences. Shooter injury, use of 1 or 2 hands, non-dominant hand shooting, non-dominant eye use (injured dominant eye), etc.

A threat target standing behind solid cover (dumpster?), with only their head and shooting hand/weapon exposed?

Attention to acquiring and maintaining a solid foundation skillset will help when introducing more advanced techniques and skills.

FWIW, while we may change the cadence and/or number of controlled and deliberate COM shots and other nuances of a training/qual scenario where a failure-to-stop drill is being used, the importance of taking the time needed to make an accurate precision/head shot, within reasonable time constraints (situational context), is still discussed with the people.

 

[Rastoff]

DOWN.....as in "on the ground". Down doesn't necessarily mean dead. If the first two put him down, there will be no third shot.

OK, but there is a legal consideration. What if they cease the assault and start to move away? Not down so, do they still need one or maybe a few more rounds?

You only have to right to shoot as long as there is a threat. Once the threat has stopped, even if they are standing, every shot after that is questionable.

Sure, those extra shots might be explainable. Then again, maybe not. Legally, once the threat has been stopped, the shooting must too.

 

[keith44spl]

OK, but there is a legal consideration. What if they cease the assault and start to move away? Not down so, do they still need one or maybe a few more rounds?

You only have to right to shoot as long as there is a threat. Once the threat has stopped, even if they are standing, every shot after that is questionable.

Sure, those extra shots might be explainable. Then again, maybe not. Legally, once the threat has been stopped, the shooting must too.

Is what yur sayin....

No coup de grâce allowed.





.

 

[Protected One]

When I attended Response to Active Shooter training, it was all simunitions.

Ya kinda get a feel for being shot at whilst trying to take all
those careful aim shots ya practiced on the stactic range a shootin paper.

LOVE that Response to Active Shooter training! Shoot-Don't Shoot training was pretty educational as well. I want one of those 8mm simunition glocks

Rastoff.

I won't shoot a retreating "former" threat, but in most cases two to the chest is probably putting the threat down - not to flight.

 

[keith44spl]

Quote:
Originally Posted by keith44spl
When I attended Response to Active Shooter training, it was all simunitions.

Ya kinda get a feel for being shot at whilst trying to take all
those careful aim shots ya practiced on the stactic range a shootin paper.

Yeah, I got to go head to head with the state's SRT Sgt....
We tide up 1-1 and thought we jest stop there, as the week was coming to a close.

LOVE that Response to Active Shooter training! Shoot-Don't Shoot training was pretty educational as well. I want one of those 8mm simunition glocks

Rastoff.

I won't shoot a retreating "former" threat, but in most cases two to the chest is probably putting the threat down - not to flight.

We all know...Sometimes theys go down and jest play a lit'l opossum on ya.

I don't take my eye or muzzle off'n em.....They might want some more.



.