So what do you suggest as an alternative to shooting at the middle of the biggest part of the bad guy that you can see?
Targeting on the body question
- Thread starter hdtwice
- Start date
Rastoff
US Veteran
Do you really think a bullet from a typical self-defense gun is going to go through an average 200lb bad guy and through two pieces of drywall? Even if it does, will it still have enough energy to do any damage?
More importantly, are you willing to take a shot that has a low percentage of stopping because of this over penetration concern?
No less an authority than Wild Bill Hickok had this to say:
"I hope you never have to shoot any man, but if you do, shoot him in
the guts near the navel. You may not make a fatal shot, but he will get
a shock that will paralyze his brain and arm so much that the fight is all
over."
I know that was then, and this is now, but still not too bad advice.
And by the way, the target should not be center of mass. It should
be center of exposed mass. Big difference.
"I hope you never have to shoot any man, but if you do, shoot him in
the guts near the navel. You may not make a fatal shot, but he will get
a shock that will paralyze his brain and arm so much that the fight is all
over."
I know that was then, and this is now, but still not too bad advice.
And by the way, the target should not be center of mass. It should
be center of exposed mass. Big difference.
lawandorder
Member
A very wise, and experienced Lawman told me in 1976 when I was starting out in my LE career,
that if I ever had to shoot someone to aim at the top button on the v of his shirt.
that if I ever had to shoot someone to aim at the top button on the v of his shirt.
AJ
US Veteran
A long time ago I went to Marine Corps Security Force Battalion Schools. We were taught by Instructors who had been trained at Gun Site by Jeff Cooper and his crew. We were taught two rounds center mass and if the bad guy did not go down we were to finish it with a head shot.
Pelvic Shots
Center mass to the heart, lungs and major blood vessels is always the preferred shot. However, if you feel your adversary is wearing body armor or shows no reaction to center-mass hits, the preferred secondary target is the pelvis for the reasons others have cited. Yes, the head is a great target but it is relatively small and almost always in motion.
Also in the pelvic region would be the lower spine and the femoral arteries besides the pelvic joints.
Center mass to the heart, lungs and major blood vessels is always the preferred shot. However, if you feel your adversary is wearing body armor or shows no reaction to center-mass hits, the preferred secondary target is the pelvis for the reasons others have cited. Yes, the head is a great target but it is relatively small and almost always in motion.
Also in the pelvic region would be the lower spine and the femoral arteries besides the pelvic joints.
TomkinsSP
Member
Doug M.
Member
*
The goal is to study and practice so that it is well enough internalized that the target selection process is mostly subconscious.
OP
hdtwice
Member
- Joined
- Jul 12, 2017
- Messages
- 103
- Reaction score
- 74
Originally Posted by cracker57 View Post
...aiming center mass the bullet will be traveling level to the ground and possibly going thru walls into a bedroom occupied by my kid,...
The concern by cracker57 above, is just why I started this post.
I did some experimenting and found out that when shooting at someone towards the lower ab/ hip area, the bullet travels downward at a distance pretty much equal to where you are from the target. Example, If I am 5 yds away, the round will hit the ground approx 5 yds past. etc.
This is if you are shooting from basically your shoulder height and not from the hip.
I have walked my house and thought about distances and walls, and angles, etc. and this is how this idea of shooting at lower ab/hip area originated with me.
Still thinking about it and the jury is still out but I do appreciate all the responses.
As for Rastoff...you are making a large assumption that you don't have any missed rounds....did you think of that?
Sure we all practice so we don't miss but in the heat of the moment,..well... you understand.
Blues7 thank you for posting that vid. I haven't had a chance to carve out two hours for viewing but this holiday weekend I should be able to make it happen.
...aiming center mass the bullet will be traveling level to the ground and possibly going thru walls into a bedroom occupied by my kid,...
The concern by cracker57 above, is just why I started this post.
I did some experimenting and found out that when shooting at someone towards the lower ab/ hip area, the bullet travels downward at a distance pretty much equal to where you are from the target. Example, If I am 5 yds away, the round will hit the ground approx 5 yds past. etc.
This is if you are shooting from basically your shoulder height and not from the hip.
I have walked my house and thought about distances and walls, and angles, etc. and this is how this idea of shooting at lower ab/hip area originated with me.
Still thinking about it and the jury is still out but I do appreciate all the responses.
As for Rastoff...you are making a large assumption that you don't have any missed rounds....did you think of that?
Sure we all practice so we don't miss but in the heat of the moment,..well... you understand.
Blues7 thank you for posting that vid. I haven't had a chance to carve out two hours for viewing but this holiday weekend I should be able to make it happen.
blues7
Member
You're very welcome.
Rastoff
US Veteran
Yes, I thought of that, but I made the assumption that the member I quoted was mostly concerned about over penetration. At least that's what it sounded like. When it comes to missed shots, it's far more likely to miss the smaller target. So, I still think the thoracic is the correct first place to shoot.
AJ
US Veteran
Two torso hits that do not put down the target might mean body armor or high on drugs. Many years ago this was called a "Failure-To-Stop" drill and the third shot went to the head. This calls for good sight alignment and trigger control. We practiced it a lot and almost always in man-on-man competition. Remember practice, practice, practice.....This is also why we trained against the other F.A.S.T. units and the Seal Team at Norfolk. Marine Corps Security Force Regiment - Wikipedia
Last edited:
A gut shot is a wounding shot, on man or animal.
True, but not everyone's proficient with head shots under stress. We trained on it in my unit regularly. It took me a while to consistently make good hits in that small area of the cranium.That's why we practice.
Sent from my SM-N930T using Tapatalk
forrestinmathews
Member
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2009
- Messages
- 1,063
- Reaction score
- 725
What's really being asked here: What's lethal below the vest/body armor line?
Pelvis and inner thighs. Shot is better than hand gun bullets.
Pelvis and inner thighs. Shot is better than hand gun bullets.
It worked on Oswald......
Lee H. Oswald dropped like a rock. I don't think 'gutshot' is that good of a stopper, but there are some big arteries in there behind the intestines.
From Wiki:
Rose's examination found that the bullet entered Oswald's left side in the front part of the abdomen and caused damage to his spleen, stomach, aorta, vena cava, kidney, liver, diaphragm, and eleventh rib before coming to rest on his right side.
Note: I presume that is the descending aorta.
A Navy Seal demonstrated how he began shooting as soon as his drawn pistol got level with a perp's feet and continued as the gun rose. Not a bad idea.
Lee H. Oswald dropped like a rock. I don't think 'gutshot' is that good of a stopper, but there are some big arteries in there behind the intestines.
From Wiki:
Rose's examination found that the bullet entered Oswald's left side in the front part of the abdomen and caused damage to his spleen, stomach, aorta, vena cava, kidney, liver, diaphragm, and eleventh rib before coming to rest on his right side.
Note: I presume that is the descending aorta.
A Navy Seal demonstrated how he began shooting as soon as his drawn pistol got level with a perp's feet and continued as the gun rose. Not a bad idea.
Not picking on you, RW, you were just "unfortunate" enough to say interesting things 
I would point out that I believe that there's a very large difference between shooting somebody who's not expecting it, and shooting someone whose body is in "fight mode".
In fact, I harbor a suspicion that the body undergoes enough of a change so as to affect things like bullet penetration and expansion. In other words, that there's a big difference between tensed muscle and dead meat. But that's an aside, and ethically quite untestable!
One's reaction to being shot is clearly different depending on one's mental state. Many "bad actors" have received mortal injuries that should have been incapacitating, but instead they fled, sometimes as far as a hundred yards, before collapsing due to a punctured heart. Meanwhile, quite a few victims have been thoroughly incapacitated by relatively minor injuries.
That would make for an interesting, if morbid, study: a comparison of dead perpetrators vs dead victims, number of shots to stop, and reactions to various degrees of injury.
All well and good, aside from his world being somewhat different from ours. Our concern for where our misses go is far greater. But I agree with the principle, as laid out by Farnham, wherein he describes an initial point of aim just above the belt buckle, leading your follow-up shots to trace upwards into progressively more important things.
In any case, I believe in the following:
(1) Aim in the middle
(2) Shoot them fast
(3) Keep shooting them until they stop trying to murder you
If somebody is trying to cave my head in with a pipe, I will consider it a success if I can get my gun out and make good hits. Anything beyond that, aiming here or there for instance, I consider to be quite aspirational.
I would point out that I believe that there's a very large difference between shooting somebody who's not expecting it, and shooting someone whose body is in "fight mode".
In fact, I harbor a suspicion that the body undergoes enough of a change so as to affect things like bullet penetration and expansion. In other words, that there's a big difference between tensed muscle and dead meat. But that's an aside, and ethically quite untestable!
One's reaction to being shot is clearly different depending on one's mental state. Many "bad actors" have received mortal injuries that should have been incapacitating, but instead they fled, sometimes as far as a hundred yards, before collapsing due to a punctured heart. Meanwhile, quite a few victims have been thoroughly incapacitated by relatively minor injuries.
That would make for an interesting, if morbid, study: a comparison of dead perpetrators vs dead victims, number of shots to stop, and reactions to various degrees of injury.
All well and good, aside from his world being somewhat different from ours. Our concern for where our misses go is far greater. But I agree with the principle, as laid out by Farnham, wherein he describes an initial point of aim just above the belt buckle, leading your follow-up shots to trace upwards into progressively more important things.
In any case, I believe in the following:
(1) Aim in the middle
(2) Shoot them fast
(3) Keep shooting them until they stop trying to murder you
If somebody is trying to cave my head in with a pipe, I will consider it a success if I can get my gun out and make good hits. Anything beyond that, aiming here or there for instance, I consider to be quite aspirational.
It looks like I need to clear a few things up, the first line of my post, Center mass is not taught in every class as the best target for no good reason. This reads the same as, "There is good reason that center mass is taught in every class." Hope this is clear as Gin.
Second if bullet hits nothing but guts or is a complete miss yes 2 sheets of drywall will not slow it down much, if one wants to see stand on the other side of a wall and have a friend shoot you thru said wall, let us know how that works out for you it will educate us all.
Taking low percentage shots in some circumstances may be your only shot or should I say your only safe shot, I tried to give a couple of examples.
I do believe that center mass is the BEST target however... there may be times when its not you best choice, weapon, distance, ect, ect all have to be considered when shooting someone. Again a lot of decisions to be made in a fraction of a second.
Again hope I made this clear, I have no experience shooting at people so take my opinions for what you paid for them.
Second if bullet hits nothing but guts or is a complete miss yes 2 sheets of drywall will not slow it down much, if one wants to see stand on the other side of a wall and have a friend shoot you thru said wall, let us know how that works out for you it will educate us all.
Taking low percentage shots in some circumstances may be your only shot or should I say your only safe shot, I tried to give a couple of examples.
I do believe that center mass is the BEST target however... there may be times when its not you best choice, weapon, distance, ect, ect all have to be considered when shooting someone. Again a lot of decisions to be made in a fraction of a second.
Again hope I made this clear, I have no experience shooting at people so take my opinions for what you paid for them.
Last edited:
ContinentalOp
Member
- Joined
- Apr 14, 2009
- Messages
- 6,315
- Reaction score
- 12,813
There's no reason to insult people.
Similar threads
- Locked
