Myth of Center Mass Hits - Article

[kragluver]

I'm not sure if this has been posted before, but I found it very interesting.

http://www.gunsamerica.com/blog/the-cen ... ernometry/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[mrvmax]

Seems like a decentarticle to me.

[fishman]

I enjoyed that read, thanks for posting it.

[speedsix]

...sensibly written...thanks for sharing...

[AEA]

Good info, but hard to read with several uncompleted words in the text.

[Excaliber]

Excellent article.

Note that the author does not project how many hits would be needed to have fair confidence of ending a fight with .380 or .22 ammo.

The obvious answer is: way more than you're likely to have on you or anywhere nearby, or to be able to fire before your adversary ends the fight for you.

Besides giving you a realistic assessment of what it takes to stop someone in a gunfight, I hope this will cause some folks to reevaluate what they carry for self defense.

The focus should be on carrying what it takes to stop a fight, not on trying to figure out how to stop a fight with something so small and light it's no trouble at all to carry.

[paulhailes]

Good read.

[speedsix]

...I have a tiny hammer for driving brads into the wall to hang a picture...a 12 oz. one for the wife to use...a 16-oz one for trim, a 20 oz. for most carpentry, and a 22 oz. for framing...I'd be silly to go out to frame a building with a 12 oz, because I'm tired and don't want to carry a larger one...but we try to convince ourselves that a tiny gun/caliber is enough to stop a determined threat ...something is better than nothing in most cases, but when I think of my wife or granddaughter or one of my sons, my choice of what I have available to protect them and stop someone bent on causing them deadly harm has to be more than just "having" a gun...I don't rely on the perp's being afraid because I produce a weapon...that's foolish...I carry what I believe will smack 'em hard enough to make them stop what they're doing...usually a .44 or .45...9mm is the smallest I will OCCASIONALLY pick out...
...shot placement is important...of course...if you don' t hit them a 12 ga slug's ineffective...and I have had only a .22 at times...and knew that I could hit well with it to kill..but not to STOP someone trying to take the life of my wife...or son...quickly...
...if I knew I would have to have a gunfight..a rifle or shotgun would be my choice...we carry handguns because we're forced to limit ourselves by "society" and "circumstances" to something smaller...good common sense will tell us how much is truly enough...

[kragluver]

You've got to respect the fact that the guy appears to carry two full size 1911's concealed. I guess that's what you do when you own more than one:)

[CC Italian]

Sounds about right after talking to my brother. He is an EMT and firefighter. He has seen a lot of gun shot wounds and he says he has seen guys with 4+ large caliber handgun rounds to the chest and still talking when they get there but he has seen very few with head shot wounds even alive when they arrive on the scene. If they lived or not is another matter but they clearly were conscious in some form when he arrived. He explained to me how long it can really take for a person to bleed out and lose consciousness even if an artery is hit. He said people usually lose consciousness quicker from lack of oxygen then loss of blood.

Like he always says, if someone breaks in your house grab the closest gun possible and hope that it is a shotgun or rifle. These are the gun shot wounds where most are dead when they arrive.

[Jumping Frog]

I have a friend of mine who re-phrases that article using different language.

His view is to "shoot 'em to the ground".

He arrived at that viewpoint after a couple of Iraq tours where he saw a lot of house-to-house urban combat. After talking this though with him, "shoot 'em to the ground" has always stuck in my mind.

[Excaliber]

I have a friend of mine who re-phrases that article using different language.

His view is to "shoot 'em to the ground".

He arrived at that viewpoint after a couple of Iraq tours where he saw a lot of house-to-house urban combat. After talking this though with him, "shoot 'em to the ground" has always stuck in my mind.

If you add "or until the threat has ended" you've got an easy to remember rule of thumb for the nonmilitary environment.

[speedsix]

...it's wise to choose our words so that they don't offend the civilized ears of grand jury members who've never heard the bump in the night...Excaliber's quote is pretty smooth...

[johnson0317]

If you add "or until the threat has ended" you've got an easy to remember rule of thumb for the nonmilitary environment.

After 17 years in the ER, I can add a little insight to this conversation.

First off, center mass take-down is not always a myth, but you have to be sure to hit the right place with the right round. How can you be sure? Simply put, you can not. A hollow point to the aorta or heart will put someone down within seconds as the oxygen supply starts to fail. However, the body does have a reserve supply that can keep the adrenaline/drug fueled zombie walking long after they should be down and out. I think most people, not running on synthetic additives, have the decency to realize they are in big trouble after the first shot, and want to call off the engagement and get medical help.

A head shot sounds great on paper, but not as easy as it sounds. Someone coming at you is not standing still, with their head held in one place so you can get a decent sight picture or point shot off. You, yourself, are also pumping plenty of adrenaline at that moment. Your hands are shaking and you are just wanting to get the shot off. It might be dark. There may be a target-rich environment which is making it hard to focus. You could expend a whole magazine at a target closing on you, and never hit. Have I ever seen a head shot that walked away? I remember a gentleman that was caught cheating on his wife, by his wife. She placed a .38 right between his eyes, literally. I was there that night, this is not second hand. I figured he was well and truly scrambled with a very neat hole in his head. He walked out of the hospital about two weeks later. Not sure what neurological deficits he sustained, but he motored under his own power.

I said all of that to say this...Two and one, two and one. Two to center mass. Slow them down, make sure they are going to pay some significant price. Then, one to the head (at least). Excessive force? Heck no, and there is plenty of evidence to back up the practice, as long as you can prove you had the need to shoot in the first place.

Mas Ayoob has good advice, and I sometimes see this ridiculed on the forums...but it is medically sound advice. He advocates putting a round into the pelvis. I have admitted and consulted on hundreds on broken hips and pelvises. Interesting fact: many people with broken hips actually sustained the fracture and fell, and not the other way around. In other words, the bone broke and they hit the deck. Back to Mr. Ayoob's point, with that knowledge in mind...once you lose the integrity and stability of the pelvic girdle, you go down, and you go down right then, and you go down fast. Chances are that your attacker will live through that, with prompt medical attention, but it will stop the attack.

The above scenario becomes problematic in several ways. First off, it is not the way we are taught, but then neither is two and one. My range does not allow head shots on the targets (because of the possibility of richochets, or so they say). We are taught, and graded on, center mass shots...and not necessarily good center mass shooting (you need to nail the cardiac triangle!). You are going to instinctively go to center mass, and I have no real problem with this. My only advice is that if the BG does not immediately go down, or cease and desist, that you take that head shot, or pelvic shot.

What ever you do, if the time comes that you actually have to do what we train to do, keep shooting until there is a neutral environment. This does not mean you shoot all four bad guys. It means you shoot until your advantage is equal, or greater. Perhaps that means having to shoot two out of four BGs so that the disparity of force does not exist. Perhaps it means having to reload because none of the four is going to stop until your head is on a stake.

It sounds so easy discussing it in here. I pray none of us ever face anything like this, but this is actually what we are preparing for. It is going to happen to one us sometime. I pray that, if it does, that you are wise, that you are well-prepared, that you have no mercy, and that you are thoroughly compassionate. I leave it to you to figure out that last sentence.

Thanks,

RJ

[apostate]

Jim Higginbotham is a good guy, a good shot, and a good instructor. I'm just not sure a coat like that would work for me, considering the temperatures in Houston this Summer.