Head Shot...would you attempt it???

[Tim Burke]

Heck, a nose shot if fired at a downward angle can still miss the brain and the eyes/nose triangle is often given as the ideal shot location on the head.

The ocular/nasal triangle is suggested as a target for 2 reasons.

1. For a straight on shot, it provides a path to the upper brainstem.
2. There is little heavy bone to deflect the shot.

As DNS notes, using conventional surface landmarks for deep structures assumes a straight on shot. If the round is approaching tangentially, it may not penetrate to the desired target.
A straight on shot to the mouth is a direct approach to the mid brainstem. The problem is that there is a lot of dense, hard bone in the way, namely, the maxilla, the mandible and the teeth.

 

[OBIWAN]

I am simply not a fan of "planned" responses

I train for the NSR (non-standard-response) with handguns and long guns alike)

As in...shooting until they fall down and don't get up...and moving (hopefully towards cover)

So in training, I vary my round count and assess as I am shooting...yes it is pretty subjective, but I stop at some arbitrary point where I think I have enough nice holes in the target...the point is more to avoid habits.

IMHO "planned responses" can get you killed

Better to plan on needing every round and just be pleasantly surprised if you have some left at the end

You WILL fight like you train and you may find yourself lowering/decocking your weapon simply because you always do it that way.

To me, COM is not a specific region of the body ....it describes the center of available anatomic real-estate. I also try to practice a good deal where the whole silhouette is not visible

(IE. if al that is showing is their head...then shoot at the ceter of their head

On the subject of head shots...Jeff Gonzales had a great point that in some instances it should probably be your first shot...and then follow up to the body if you miss. But in some situations the BG may be more stationary for that first shot...something to think about

 

[Neal in GA]

Maybe we should all have a good pump shotgun and/or a nice semiauto rifle in our car at all times. That way, we can use our CCW to have something with decent power to fight to. Head shots at 30ft or less against a target at full run under the stress of the danger of imminent death with a handgun are certainly going to be a challenge. With a nice 18" bbl shotgun with ghost ring sights and a good load of 1 buck, they're going to be a lot easier. And of course, if your assailant actually gets to you, you'd probably be better off with a quick buttstroke to the head than trying to pistolwhip him. A shotgun would be much better for parrying knife attacks too. I, for one, am going to start always carrying an 870 12ga in a tac-sling so I'll be prepared when the bullet-resistant vest wearing, knife carrying, hopped-up-on-speed criminal comes for me.

 

[yorec]

I've seen and trainned for several methods - zipper, Mozambique, 6 rapidly to COM, most often. I blieve in changing something that doesn't work.

I'd go right to the head in a failure to stop situation, double tap - then to groin area. This because of vests which cover the groin area. After two to each alternate target, if available - center punch him until he goes down or I run outta ammo... Doubt we'll get past the headshots though, even zombies go down from them.

 

[CraigJS]

TB,
If your going to quote someone's post you should at least include the whole post. We as gunners have enough of those problems by anti-gunners. (posts 46&50) Reread it slowly this time perhaps you'll understand what I meant this time.. Rewatch Blazing Saddles again perhaps you misunderstood that also.
If you can hit the "Ocular/Nasal triangle" (aprox.a 3"x5" triangle) under stress, with the BG rushing you, trying to kill you, you sir are truely a force to be delt with...

 

[Tim Burke]

No need for me to reread it, slowly or otherwise. If you think that shooting your own hand is a trivial thing, and not something that you need to train to avoid, then I don't think we can discuss this seriously. So I quit discussing it seriously with you.

 

[CraigJS]

Tim,
I apoligize for being so snide.. My only reason is that if my LIFE is in danger I'm willing (but not looking forward to) sacrafice my hand to SAVE my life. Like I said before I hope none of us ever have to do any of this, on that I think we both agree...
Take care! CraigJS

 

[Tim Burke]

I don't have a problem with the concept of sacrificing the hand the save the life, for example the climber a few years ago that had to amputate his own arm to free himself.
It is certainly possible that you may find yourself in a position where your weak hand is downrange from the muzzle, I just don't think you should plan to put yourself in that position intentionally. At least with the climber, once he'd amputated his arm he was free. If you shoot your hand, in all likelihood you'll still be in a contact range lethal force encounter, but now with an injured hand. Clint Smith mentions this possibility in at least one of his handgun classes, but he teaches a retention position designed to keep the support hand out of the line of fire.

 

[OBIWAN]

Sorry, but shooting yourself seems like a bad tactic...at any range

To those that think only a perfect head shot will stop an attacker

Have someone whack you on the head with a 2x4

Anywhere on your skull...feel free to experiment...who knows...could be the next reality show

Be fair though...target the front of the head

Don't you think that feeling will make it hard for you to continue fighting??

It may not "stop" you...but it WILL mess you up

If nothing else, blood pouring into your eyes will affect your vision

 

[MTS840]

I don't know of anybody who seriously teaches the pelvic shot anymore. Earlier in my police carreer I took a tactical pistol course and the instructor showed us the difference between shooting for the head versus shooting for the pelvis area. The drill was to shoot two COM shots on an anotomical target, then transition to the head or pelvic area to stop the timer. On the head shots, we were taught to aim for the nose area, encompassing a triangle from the upper lip to the eye sockets. On the pelvic shots, we were taught to shoot for either the right or left hip area. The transition times were a little quicker on the shots to the head, because instead of simply moving the gun up from a center axis to the head, you have to traverse the gun to either the left or right hip area.
After the drill, I saw that some of the head shots were peripherial, but so were the pelvic shots.
A peripherial shot on the pelvic area might cause a simple flesh wound and not produce the stop unless it broke the hip joint or leg bone. A peripherial shot to the head would seemingly end hostilities sooner. If two or three to the body didn't stop the threat, we were and are still trained to go for head shots until the threat is over.

 

[Capt. Charlie]

I don't know of anybody who seriously teaches the pelvic shot anymore.

Actually, there still is a viable use for the pelvic shot in extreme close quarters combat (less than 3 feet). When a confrontation requiring deadly force occurs within touching distance of your assailant, you do an upward sweep and push off with your weak hand, and at the same time blade your strong side back, speed draw and low tuck to the waist, and fire two into the abdomen / pelvic area. Immediately begin backing while coming to a high point and continue firing COM while backing. The reasoning doesn't so much involve shattering the hip as it does speed on the first shots and weapon retention with the tight low tuck. It works very well and is a great range exercise as well, and is still taught by cutting edge police firearms instructors.

 

[CarlosDJackal]

Capt Charlie,

I beleive he was referring to taking a deliberate shot to the pelvis with the intention of stopping further movement by the BG. The theory behind this is thaat if you were able to hit the hip ball and shatter it, it'll break apart the skeletal system.

Unfortunately, this theory has already been proven to be false. For one thing, the target which you are aiming for is about 2-inches which is about half the size of the cranial cavity. For another thing, if you do manage to take away the attacker's mobilty, he/she/it can still aim and pull the trigger. So why not go for the head shot instead?

One of the best techniques I learned from Jeff Gonzales is the "Zipper" and the "NSR". I always cringe when FIs still insist on 2 to the body and one to the head. I've even trained with some who still teach the shoot twice then assess ohilosophy. Handguns are notoriously underpowered to begin with. So why count on it being effective in three rounds? Why not just keep shooting until the threat is no more? Couple that with the Zipper technique and your last shots should end up in the cranium.

JM2CW.

 

[Tim Burke]

My problem with the zipper and the NSR is that it assumes that you have many rounds per target available to you. Usually I have 8, total, before some sort of manipulation is required.

 

[Double Naught Spy]

Sure folks still teach "pelvic" shots. The problem is that they don't teach anatomy and many don't know the anatomy or biomechanics of the human pelvis. I just love it when an instructor says, "And you shoot them in the pelvis and it breaks their hip..." as he presses his hand against a hip bone above either of his front pants pockets. The problem is, the part of the hip being illustrated is NOT part of the locomotion load bearing aspects of the pelvis. Instead, it is simply a hard attachment for connective tissue of the organs and abdomen. The bone touched is the blade of the ilium. It can suffer a lot of damage without the pelvic structure collapsing or 'breaking' in a manner that physically impedes locomotion.

You may shoot somebody or see somebody shot in the area of the pelvis. The pelvis may or may not get hit and you will likely see the person go down. They will likely be in pain and may or may not immediately get up. Most probably will not. They won't necessarily be incapacitated, but they will be in a lot of pain and movement will hurt. Similarly, a shot to the stomach/gut can produce the same sort of result. The reaction of going down that is often interpretted as a failure of the pelvis from being shot is more of a physciological response. Heck, people can get shot in the elbow and still go down as part of the physiological response.

The problem, of course, with such shots is that they are not as likely to incapacitate. They may stop a person from moving about geographically, but not stop them from doing things like firing from their position where they are down. Of course, that is not why people shoot for the pelvis, to incapacitate, but to preclude movement.

If you think about it, as a target, the "pelvis" area is great. It is sort of like the center mass of the human body's locomotive power plant. There is a good bit of mass in the thighs and while the thighs are not ideal targets, they are a helluva lot easier than trying to shoot knees or ankles. There is big muscle, bone, and fat on the the thighs. Soft tissue injuries may or may not impede locomotion. Hell, a LAPD officer shot in the femur during the North Hollywood Bank Robbery incident managed to run some distance with the broken femur and get to cover behind a tree. He didn't move around any more after that, but he was not immdiately stopped and he most definitely was not immediatedly incapacitatd.

A low center frontal pelvic area shot will ideally produce a hit to the pubic bones and also damage the urinary tract of the person shot. Recovery will suck. Slightly higher could produce lower GI and lower abdominal muscle damage - lots of pain and not much recovery fun with the accessory bags the folks will carry around. Left and Right of the pubic shot may produce the desired hits on the critical socket areas of the pelvis. High of those shot, more GI, kidney sorts of damage. Higher still is more GI spleen, etc. None will be fun, but little of the area is going to produce any sort of counted on immediate incapacitation.

 

[MTS840]

Capt. Charlie:

When a confrontation requiring deadly force occurs within touching distance of your assailant, you do an upward sweep and push off with your weak hand, and at the same time blade your strong side back, speed draw and low tuck to the waist, and fire two into the abdomen / pelvic area. Immediately begin backing while coming to a high point and continue firing COM while backing.

We did the technique as you describe with the difference that instead of firing into the lower abdominal/pelvic area while backing, we fired higher into the abdominal/chest area. As we gained distance, we raised the weapon to eye level to use the sights. It was much easier to transition to shots to the head in this case. At least it was for me.

 

[Double Naught Spy]

I think the method described concerns the fact that one's hand may still be present on or around the chest area when the shooting starts. You may be shooting through your own hand unnecessarily. It can be avoided by the first shots being low in the abdomen. By the time those shots are done, the hand should be back.