Pelvis Area Hit instead of Chest/Head?

I think this was regarding absence of a suitable target of chest or head because of body armor & helmet/kevlar mask. Next best "bleeder" area is groin.

When taking large/dangerous game, it is quite acceptable to "break them down" by taking out shoulder or hip joints. It anchors the animal making placement of "kill" shots easier and safer for the hunter.

The same will work with people. Taking out a hip/knee/ankle joint will severly limit their mobility if not "anchoring" them in place. This will allow you to either vacate the area or if needed make the "kill" shot.

Not nice to think about, but if you've reached the point you need to shoot someone, niceties are pretty much out the window.

When taking large/dangerous game, it is quite acceptable to "break them down" by taking out shoulder or hip joints. It anchors the animal making placement of "kill" shots easier and safer for the hunter.

The same will work with people. Taking out a hip/knee/ankle joint will severly limit their mobility if not "anchoring" them in place. This will allow you to either vacate the area or if needed make the "kill" shot.

Click to expand...

Right, getting shot in the pelvis/hit area with a handgun rarely actually breaks down the person. You can get a structural collapse with a handgun, but it is going to be by luck rather than by design.

For example, one of the robbers in the Florida internet cafe shooting was hit in the right hip and the left buttock (which is the pelvic area), so hit on both sides and lost his footing briefly, went down, but still managed to get his footing and to get out of the cafe before the old guy shooting at him could get to him.

There was no structural collapse. No major blood vessels were hit. He wasn't anchored in place. His time in the hospital was brief.
http://www.abc15.com/dpp/news/natio...shoots-at-suspects-in-fl-internet-caf-robbery
http://www.amnation.com/vfr/archives/022830.html

As noted, it is a decent target for when torso and head shots are happening. What makes it a good target isn't because of the chances of crippling the guy, but because it is the 2nd largest non-CNS part of the body. As a large target, it presents you with a some room to make a poor shot and yet still land shots on target.

Also, animals rarely shoot back.

At one point, I read a rather detailed article - I BELIEVE the author was Mas Ayoob - about a female police officer who did this to drop a man with a knife. My understanding is that a good hit to the pelvis with a high velocity hollowpoint (something with less mass and more frontal area than a heavy FMJ, and a lot of kinetic energy) may not just punch through a pelvic bone, but 'shatter' it. This may or may not cause fatal bleeding, as it's not aimed at the femoral arteries, but at the hips. The idea is to STOP A CHARGE. On a man (most guys wear their belts around their hips) the idea might be to aim for the belt. This might be a quick way to immobilize an attacker (if it works), but might not neutralize him... he could still shoot back; you're just limiting his movement.

I recently had a conversation with a friend who advocated shooting the pelvis in place of the head in a scenario where COM shots were proving ineffective. His reasons for it were:

1. The pelvis is bigger than the head and doesn't bob around as much.
2. There are still vulnerable/important things in that area you can hit.

I haven't incorporated that drill in to my range time yet but he does have a point and I think I will start practicing pelvis shots.

I wouldn't aim at the belt, you might hit it.

An acquaintance several decades ago was leaving his business one night when he was confronted by a would-be robber. The robber wound up shooting him, and fortunately the bullet struck near his belt buckle where there were three layers of leather on top of each other. It didn't penetrate but it did rattle him enough that he missed the robber with all seven rounds out of the .45 he was carrying.

I'd think it would be better to aim somewhat lower, as some armor covers the lower torso as well.

It was a .38Spl snub, IIRC.

It isn't enough to hit the pelvis. In order to severely effect movement, you must break the pelvic circle in two places or hit the neck or upper shaft of the femur. In addition, people can and do continue to fight after having their pelvis shattered. Read this soldier's description of having his pelvis shattered by what appears to be a 7.62x54R rifle bullet:

""When I was hit I thought it was just a rock or something kicked up by an RPG. I cracked on, but the pain didn't go away. It was like the worst dead leg you've ever had."

I guess if that is the worst I could do to an attacker given the circumstances, I'd take it; but I sure wouldn't make it my first or second choice - and of course I'd be a lot less likely to have even that effect with a pistol.

It is all about probability. The head and the chest have more vital structures in them than the pelvis does and it is easier to disrupt those structures. If I shoot in the pelvis, I must break the pelvic girdle in two places or hit the shaft of the femur or clip a femoral artery. So if you can't hit the upper torso, are you better off taking a shot at a larger, less mobile target area that has fewer actual things worth hitting in it or are you better off shooting at a smaller, more mobile target area that has a lot of vital stuff in it?

Probably falls under the old saying "shoot what's available until something better becomes available". In doing the Tueller drill in LFI-1, Mas' commentary included a story about, IIRC, someone with bone issues starting the drill, taking a step, and their pelvis breaking. They still did the drill in approx 2 seconds (the point of the story).

That said, if an armored up aggressor is shooting at you, shooting their pelvic girdle beats taking rounds yourself.

It isn't enough to hit the pelvis. In order to severely effect movement, you must break the pelvic circle in two places or hit the neck or upper shaft of the femur. In addition, people can and do continue to fight after having their pelvis shattered. Read this soldier's description of having his pelvis shattered by what appears to be a 7.62x54R rifle bullet:

Click to expand...

It's not enough to hit the head either. I once saw an EMT educational video about a guy that had shot his face and forehead away and was still breathing. We're told to insert the breathing tube where the bubbles came in the middle of the mess of human mess.

In order to severely effect the movement (top the target), you must hit the central nervous system.

If memory serves, Mr. Ayoob once wrote an article about two cops shooting it out with a drug addict. The cops managed to hit the perp 13 times, most in the head, and he was still fighting.

Nothing is guaranteed in a gun fight.

As most of the posters have comprehended, "shooting their pelvic girdle beats taking rounds yourself." It beats trying to hit the head covered by helmet and body armor.

Now, I've shot a modified El Presidente with only head shots in about five seconds. Would I even try that in a crowded theater in full panic?

DefiantDad said:

(edited for brevity) What are the chances that this will just end up a gut shot that does not immediately incapacitate the attacker? (brain/hands still free to continue shooting). Should a head shot be attempted instead(i.e., is the pelvis shot not significantly easier than a head shot?)

What are the chances that this will just end up a gut shot that does not immediately incapacitate the attacker? (brain/hands still free to continue shooting). Should a head shot be attempted instead (i.e., is the pelvis shot not significantly easier than a head shot?)

Click to expand...

It's not (in my opinion) that a head shot is more difficult than a pelvic shot or center of mass shot. It is that a near miss to the center of mass still hits SOMETHING, which helps some. A near miss to the head is a clear miss and helps not at all.

Lost Sheep

Just on the Florida self-defense event (that's the older gentleman shooting back at the two armed thugs right?) I recall it being a .380. So I am wondering, if a larger caliber is required for actually breaking bones to eliminate mobility? I am not sure how directly relevant this is (the breaking bones part) with all the numerous discussions on wound channel and hydrostatic shock (per se) regarding 9mm v .45 ACP.

Or is it STILL "irrelevant" what caliber is used (barring, of course 22LR).

Click to expand...

The problem is multifold. When people talk about a shot to the hip that incapacitates a person, at least their motion, they are usually talking about damage to the pelvic girdle and upper femur substantial enough to cause structural failure to the extent that the person can't accomplish locomotor function with it, not because of choice, but because it no longer works correctly. The belief often presented is that hitting the hip/pelvis will cause it to shatter and the person will drop, unable to support themselves, much less be able to walk or run.

Strangely, the term of "hip" is rather generic. When referring to bone material, it usually is the lateral edge of the iliac crest, but can include the iliac blade itself which is the large bone of the pelvis. However, it can also refer to the top portion of the femur inclusive of the trochanters and neck of the femur. Often when you hear that grandma broke her hip, either the ball of the femur has snapped off at the neck or the acetabulum which is the meeting place socket of the ilium, ischium, and pubis with the femoral head/ball. Sometimes the acetabulum fails and the ball of the breaks through inwardly. Usually the story is that grandma fell and broke her hip. This is not what commonly happens. What commonly happens is that the hip breaks (femoral head separation) and grandma falls. Sometims, grandmas really do fall and break their hips and that is going to happen when they land on their side and damage their ilium. There are other scenarios, but those are probably the most common.

So when shooting to break a person's hip and stop their locomotor ability with a handgun round, few people have a clue as to where to shoot to accomplish this task. The trick is to cause a failure at points where the greatest amount of structural stresses occur such that even if the shot doesn't actually complete the job that the weakness created cannot endure stresses on the bone during walking or running and the failure is completed.

Probably the easiest terminal ballistic location would be the head, neck, and trochanters of the upper femur and/or puttng a hole through the head of the femur and acetabulum. Unfortunately, that is a very small target with no readily recognized external landmarks, especially for a person who is wearing clothing.

You could shoot the pubis bones, but this is also a small target. If sufficiently damaged, it will cause the pelvic girdle to be weakened and hugely painful, but may not actually collapse the structure.

The biggest target is the iliac blade. It is big in men and bigger in women. However, unlike the bone closest to the acetabulum which is mostly cortical bone that is dence, the iliac blade is mostly cancellous bone except for a thin layer of cortical bone over it. Cancellous bone looks like a sponge. As such, it does not break like cortical bone as easily with those long spiral sharp edged greenstick fractures you find mid shaft in legs and arms. The porous aspect of the controls the radiating impact forces better and keeps them from spreading as much and you may just get a failure only at the point of contact.

For example, say you have a loose packed snowball and a hard frozen ice ball and you shoot each with a pellet gun. The pellet passes through the snow ball and does some localized boring damage, but the snowball remains intact. The ice ball ends up shattering from the impact.

So the iliac blade is sort of like that loose packed snowball. Low velocity bullets (as in not fired from rifles) can punch neat holes through the iliac blade and the actual structure of the pelvic girdle can remain completely intact except of a hole. If you are shooting at a person and hit their pelvis, more than likely you are going to hit the ilium because it is the largest bone.

You may hit the illium and break off a large chunk of the hip bone such as if your shot hits the person about at the top of their front pants pockets. Away from the acetabulum where the femur meets the pelvis, much of the job of ilium is to simply help complete the circle of the pelvic girdle and to provide attachment and support for muscles and other soft tissue. So you can break of a chunk of it and it will hurt a lot, but yet still have the circle of the pelvic girdle remain intact and so the person can still walk and run with a lot of pain, but the failure needed to physically stop the person isn't achieved.

Check out this birdshot hip shot with no structural failure...
http://www.shutterstock.com/pic-188...picture-of-the-pelvis-after-the-gun-shot.html

Of course, you have to hit the bone if you want that structural failure. People shot in the hip and/or pelvis area often have bullets that don't hit bone...
http://mondoweiss.net/2012/03/sometimes-they-fall-from-the-sky.html

See cases 1 and 3 here. They were shots in the right area, but didn't do bone damage....
http://www.firearmsid.com/Feature Articles/042002/JohannesburgTraumaUnit2.htm

Check out this set of images. Y'all have probably seen it before, but be warned images are not family/word/or queezy stomach safe...
http://www.defensivecarry.com/documents/officer.pdf
The deceased suffered multiple pistol rounds in the pelvic area not of which appeared to have damaged the pevlis. A .223 round shattered much of the iliac blade, but the girdle actually remained intact in that the full circle was still complete.

This was neat. The shot should have shattered the trochanter region at the top of the femur, but the bullet his cancellous bone of a growing youth and so instead of shattering, it bored a hole through the bone.
http://www.google.com/imgres?hl=en&...&w=600&h=478&ei=qgcKUMDnAZGK2QW_zLX5Dw&zoom=1

Check out 30-38 and 39-44. Note that in the first one, a bullet clipped the iliac crest, breaking it, but really only doing minor bone damage. Be sure to look in the other images of bullets in the pelvis area, but no pelvic breakdown.
http://www.jzimaging.com/RSD_wounded_willy_and_damaged_debbie.htm

Rifle shot that did break girdle...
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19419934/ns/us_news-giving/t/journal-shot-while-minding-my-own-business/

Here is a bullet lodged in the pelvic area, but entry was through the chest. Despite the distance traveled in the body, she was in pretty good shape.
http://globalhealthblog.org/2011/07/18/update-from-afghanistan/

Several gunshot wounds to the pelvic region, but no bone damage (or most with no bone damage).
http://www.ajronline.org/content/177/6/1247.full

So will a shattered pelvis take you out of the fight? Maybe not so long as the fight continues where you are. This is a pretty amazing story...
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...r-fight-Taliban--bullet-shattered-pelvis.html

I prefer the head. And when executed try to lower yourself some before firing.

Just practice head shots!

WHY?

So any missed shots go up and past other bystanders heads and they don't get hit. Practice alot folks cause these nutjobs need to be put down.

Deaf

Remember, there is no magic bullet (kind or make) or magic caliber. Much like lightning strikes having strange effects or near misses, shootings are often unique and unusual in what happens. Ballistics sometimes finds strange things happen to bullets.

Shot placement is well proven to matter the most in self defense shootings. Ask a police officer.

I have seen two femurs shot, one with a .357, one with a .45 ACP, neither broke the femur. Both caused damage to the leg muscles and both victims were ambulatory and capable of fighting.

Now femurs are not pelvises, however, they are both large heavy bones. I would not count on the standard service calibers, including the .357 to break big bones, like the pelvis.

The hunting handgun calibers, say .41 mag and up, with tough, heavy bullets, should break bones nicely, but as others have said, that still may not stop your assailant.

It seems that we must, "Mozambique" them!

What are your thoughts on this?

Click to expand...

It's slower moving than the head and wider so your more likely to hit it. If they are armed it does little to keep them from shooting back but at least you could run from them. In war it would be of more use as at least one other person would have to drag the guy to help.

In the Florida case, the bad guy was indeed hit twice, and fled the scene (attempted to, at least.) Still a success, in my book. These are the situations any of us who may have to crisis-fire will likely be facing, not the one about which we are not supposed to be solely concentrating on here (though I understand the concern.)

We talk about the pelvis being an easier area to hit; but if you take the actual space occupied by vital stuff, I'd bet it is significantly smaller than the head.