Aiming for Center Of Mass

[luzyfuerza]

We who carried pistols in Nam quickly learned that it was an effective way to stop a man charging you with a bayonet at close quarters.

Was this concept proven through your personal experience? Or learned via "tribal knowledge"?

 

[wayneinFL]

With FoF exercises, one can run though a sufficiently large number of trials to allow meaningful conclusions.

A larger sample size would be better. Sure.

FOF is still way more applicable to law enforcement than to me. If you go to a FOF class, you're expecting someone to use force on you. A police officer gets called to someplace for a reason, and he's expecting someone to use force on him.

Tueller was a police firearms instructor, correct? If someone is running toward a cop with a knife, there was probably not a good reason for it. If a cop pulls a gun, there's a good reason for it.

If someone comes running my direction with a knife in the Walmart parking lot, without saying anything, with no other context, how do I know he's trying to stab me? Knowing my luck, if I do get my gun out, the next thing that happens is some guy behind me who was tying a TV in the back of his car, or cutting a radiator hose or some crap tells me I just pulled my gun on his brother for no reason. And WayneinFL is WayneinJail.

A police officer gets called to a place for domestic violence, for example, he might expect someone to come running out from behind a van to harm someone. And if the cop pulls a gun on the guy and it turns out he was just an idiot running around with a knife, no harm, no foul.

As just a plain old citizen, I just feel like there's less to be lost by running from the guy, trying to get a car between me and him, etc.

 

[Kleanbore]

FOF is still way more applicable to law enforcement than to me.

That would be true for some scenarios, and not for others.

If a cop pulls a gun, there's a good reason for it.

That had better be trure for everyone.

As just a plain old citizen, I just feel like there's less to be lost by running from the guy, trying to get a car between me and him, etc.

Good thinking, if the situation permits!

 

[dweis]

Was this concept proven through your personal experience? Or learned via "tribal knowledge"?

Personal experience on my second tour in Nam. On my first I was Infantry so carried and m issue was an M14. Two years later on ly second tour I was a combat photographer carrying an M1911. We mostly shot with a camera until the SHTF, and then I was in the fight. So without a rifle while being charged by an NVA with a rifle this of us whose primary was a pistol were unable to parry an attack. We had to shoot or get clobbered or stabbed. A First Sergeant who had been in WWII at the end and then in Korea told us about as a method developed fighting off Japanese banzai charges and then Chinese communist charges. It doesn’t take much practice, but it takes near steel nerve to just wait for the close. But, if you shoot too soon a miss or misses are likely. Wait and the target just gets bigger as it gets closer. It is hard to miss a head shot at e feet.

 

[WrongHanded]

Personal experience on my second tour in Nam. On my first I was Infantry so carried and m issue was an M14. Two years later on ly second tour I was a combat photographer carrying an M1911. We mostly shot with a camera until the SHTF, and then I was in the fight. So without a rifle while being charged by an NVA with a rifle this of us whose primary was a pistol were unable to parry an attack. We had to shoot or get clobbered or stabbed. A First Sergeant who had been in WWII at the end and then in Korea told us about as a method developed fighting off Japanese banzai charges and then Chinese communist charges. It doesn’t take much practice, but it takes near steel nerve to just wait for the close. But, if you shoot too soon a miss or misses are likely. Wait and the target just gets bigger as it gets closer. It is hard to miss a head shot at e feet.

At minimum, this is a very interesting story. Though it does make sense to avoid having to deal with recoil control and just wait for the target to get "large enough" that it is easier to hit. And it also makes sense that even if the bullet does not hit the brain stem, if it makes its way into the cranium at all, that's going to shake up a brain severely.

 

[Tinker-S]

I believe you are absolutely correct. I'll continue to do my best to not be in that situation. But if I am, I'll aim for the head. I can get off two shots in two seconds and from a gunslinger's hold I have a better than 50-50 chance of hitting the first shot and an almost certainty of hitting a second shot at half the distance.

But again, I'm not going there.

I am sorry, but, what is a "gunslinger's hold'?

 

[Tinker-S]

I think we all need to bone up on how to avoid our own blood loss first. If somebodies coming that hard and closing fast, you be better be able to dial up some potent hand to hand before trying to quick draw for a "between the eye's" bully shot.

I am LMAO while reading your post!
Not because it is funny, but because it makes sense!
It is my opinion, that attacks are not " a spur of the moment" thing. The would-be attacker has had success at this, kind of, has trained for it to happen, therefore, a victim would have a very small window of opportunity to react in such a way that a quick draw and "lights out" shot would be almost impossible. And I do not know why every scenario includes a firearm, and people reacting as if they are on a perimeter defensive position.
Yeah, it is a scenario based question, but most posts are Hollywood answers.

 

[Jeff White]

The would-be attacker has had success at this, kind of, has trained for it to happen, therefore, a victim would have a very small window of opportunity to react in such a way that a quick draw and "lights out" shot would be almost impossible.

Most attacks like this are not a robbery attempt, They are most often conducted by an EDP (emotionally disturbed person) and you can't tell what prompted it.

 

[dweis]

At minimum, this is a very interesting story. Though it does make sense to avoid having to deal with recoil control and just wait for the target to get "large enough" that it is easier to hit. And it also makes sense that even if the bullet does not hit the brain stem, if it makes its way into the cranium at all, that's going to shake up a brain severely.

You summed it up in a nutshell. Thanks.

 

[old lady new shooter]

Wouldn’t the shopping cart make a fairly effective obstacle to a stabber?

Yes.

 

[old lady new shooter]

Your understanding of "established doctrine" is incorrect.

A handgun bullet, in a common combat caliber, can only be RELIED UPON to damage the tissues it comes into direct contact with.

It could cause more damage, but it depends on exact circumstances, which the shooter doesn't control and is therefore unreliable to depend upon.

Fackler identified a handful of factors in which the temporary cavity of a penetrating handgun bullet can cause more damage.

One of them is when the tissues involved are constrained, like intercostal tissues (the tissues between ribs). Intercostal tissues are short, connected to the ribs, and cannot stretch very far without tearing. Over the years I've encountered a lot of folks that post handgun hunting photos showing rib entrance wounds, on the exit side of the internal chest wall, that are larger in diameter than the bullet as "proof" that the temporary cavity of a handgun bullet causes greater permanent disruption than simply what the bullet comes into direct contact with.

The temporary cavity from a handgun bullet has the potential to damage (depending on exact circumstances):

• Soft tissues that do not tolerate being stretched
  • Brain, liver, pancreas, kidney, spleen
• Elastic soft tissues that are tightly bound
  • Unable to stretch far enough to absorb strain and tear/rupture
    • e.g., intercostal tissues
• Size of elastic soft tissues being stretched
  • e.g., individual muscles of the heart
• “Local anatomy”

Whereas resilient soft tissues can withstand the stretch of temporary cavity produced by handgun bullets with minimal damage:

• Lung, muscle, bowel, nerve, vessels

A penetrating handgun bullet has two different diameters: 1) its actual physical diameter, and 2) its "effective" diameter.

In elastic soft tissues, a handgun bullet's effective diameter is smaller than its physical diameter. This is because elastic soft tissues stretch and flow around the contours of the penetrating bullet. And as the bullet penetrates it slows, allowing elastic soft tissues more time to stretch and move out of the path of the oncoming bullet. As a result, the permanent cavity decreases in diameter the deeper the bullet penetrates. (The Winchester Black Talon-style bullet, with its sharp claws protruding outward, always has a larger effective diameter than other bullet designs because the claws cut resilient soft tissues that flow around the bullet.)

As for shooting a fast-advancing attacker, the tactic is to move laterally off the line of attack (side stepping) while shooting to stop him/her. This causes the attacker to run past the defender.

The aimpoint is the high upper torso, about armpit high on the attacker. This is where the specific vitals we're targeting are concentrated (heart, great vessels, and spine). Because both the defender is moving and the attacker is moving, this makes the attacker's head a challenging aimpoint to target, and bullets fired at the attacker are more likely to miss the head than the larger torso, and those errant bullets will continue flying until they hit something, hopefully not a person.

Yes, the heart and great vessels can be destroyed and the attacker can continue to attack. This is called post-fatal injury activity. John Lennon and Lee Harvey Oswald had their aortic arch destroyed. Lennon was able to walk into the lobby of his apartment building before he collapsed, whereas Oswald was quickly incapacitated.

On a frontal shot, the spinal column lies directly behind the heart and great vessels. Bullets that pass through these vital structures, or narrowly miss them can continue penetrating to hit the spine to disrupt the spinal cord (concussion of the spinal cord) and cause an advancing attacker to instantly collapse from flaccid paralysis.

The heart, great vessels, and spinal cord are all elastic soft tissues. These are the specific vital tissues we're trying to disrupt. Yes, there are other "vital" organs that are inelastic and can be damaged by the temporary cavity, but they do not hemorrhage in the same rate and quantity, especially if the attacker's sympathetic nervous system is activated, which decreases blood flow to these inelastic organs.

View attachment 1146598

Thank you for the detailed information!

 

[murf]

i was going to say "practice your mozambique drill", but after reading the @dweis posts, i suggest you modify the mozambique drill to: two shots to the "com" and the rest to the head.

by the time you get off two to the com, the bad guy will probably be five feet away anyhow.

luck,

murf

 

[Kleanbore]

i was going to say "practice your mozambique drill", but after reading the @dweis posts, i suggest you modify the mozambique drill to: two shots to the "com" and the rest to the head.

I would not advise anyone to choose a target area on the basis of what someone else claims worked for him at least once a number of decades ago.

by the time you get off two to the com, the bad guy will probably be five feet away anyhow.

That would depend on a number of factors, including how far away he was when you drew, how quickly you drew, and how quickly he was moving.

 

[orionengnr]

Good discussion.

Guess I need o brush up on my Mozambique skills...

 

[dweis]

I would not advise anyone to choose a target area on the basis of what someone else claims worked for him at least once a number of decades ago.

Either would I. I don’t give advice. I just report what I know worked for me. It takes steel nerves to hold your fire until you cannot miss a head shot, that is about 4 feet or closer. If can shoot a 4 inch square at 4 feet under extreme pressure, it could work for you. If you can do that it is an incapacitating shot. That is all I said. If you feel more secure with COM then that is the best course for you. If you get lucky or get enough bullets into the target you could get incapacitation. If not, it most likely will slow the perp down enough for you to divert from the line of attack and get more shots on target.

To be clear, I am not advising anyone to do anything. Never, employ a defensive maneuver that you do not have confidence in your ability to pull it off. Just for fun some day see how many shots you can put in a 4 inch circle at 3 to 5 feet in 1 second. Then imaging the circle is a perp’s face. By the way I am not suggesting shooting from the draw. I am saying get on target as soon as the running attack begins. Then fire at the 3 to 5 feet mark.

 

[Old Dog]

Shucks. Refrained to post in the thread. Thought it'd die quickly. Apparently it's got legs.

My last two departments trained to shoot double-taps, center of mass, and then immediately go to "failure to stop" measures if the threat wasn't down -- head-shots or pelvic girdle. In reality, we trained to shoot 'til slide-lock, but practiced head-shots and pelvic girdle shots at all initial and semi-annual firearms quals.

This thread has become another classic example of internet over-thinking.

It takes steel nerves to hold your fire until you cannot miss a head shot, that is about 4 feet or closer.

I've yet to meet the person who's got "steel nerves." My last two mil deployments, I know I had some damp boxer-briefs after one situation, and clearly remember my front sight dancing wildly as things progressed. Guess I'm not made of as steely stuff as some here are. (Or maybe it was all the coffee and Rip-Its I drank those mornings).

 

[dweis]

Shucks. Refrained to post in the thread. Thought it'd die quickly. Apparently it's got legs.

My last two departments trained to shoot double-taps, center of mass, and then immediately go to "failure to stop" measures if the threat wasn't down -- head-shots or pelvic girdle. In reality, we trained to shoot 'til slide-lock, but practiced head-shots and pelvic girdle shots at all initial and semi-annual firearms quals.

This thread has become another classic example of internet over-thinking.

I've yet to meet the person who's got "steel nerves." My last two mil deployments, I know I had some damp boxer-briefs after one situation, and clearly remember my front sight dancing wildly as things progressed. Guess I'm not made of as steely stuff as some here are. (Or maybe it was all the coffee and Rip-Its I drank those mornings).

That is different from my experience. Maybe “steel nerves” was a poor description. I should have written high discipline and confidence. Most of the Marines I fought with had that. I think we all learned that fearing death will get you killed.

 

[murf]

I would not advise anyone to choose a target area on the basis of what someone else claims worked for him at least once a number of decades ago.

That would depend on a number of factors, including how far away he was when you drew, how quickly you drew, and how quickly he was moving.

The Mozambique drill already uses that target area for the third shot. I am envisioning a continuation to slide lock.

murf

 

[dweis]

The Mozambique drill already uses that target area for the third shot. I am envisioning a continuation to slide lock.

murf

That makes sense in some situations, which depend on the distance to target at the onset of the attack. Distance determines how much time you have. At 25 feet you have between 3 and 5 seconds depending on the pace of the perp. If you can get out of the holster, onto the COM target, and fire with time to still get another round off it’s a good option. I know I cannot do that so,I am going to wait for the terminal shot.

 

[Kleanbore]

If you can get out of the holster, onto the COM target, and fire with time to still get another round off it’s a good option. I know I cannot do that so,I am going to wait for the terminal shot.

I cannot understand why someone who cannot draw quickly enough to shoot at a large target would want to wait until later to shoot at a smaller one.

 

[Trampstamp]

I cannot understand why someone who cannot draw quickly enough to shoot at a large target would want to wait until later to shoot at a smaller one.

Limited ammunition? Not sure. Put a couple COM and if that didn't work assume body Armor and mag dump the cranial region.

 

[luzyfuerza]

Please forgive a brief deviation from the entertaining hypothetical posturing posted in this thread so far for a trip from the keyboard back to the real world.

The video I've attached below shows three incidents where an attacker approaches a defender on foot. At three different speeds. We see these attacks first from the POV of the defender's body cam, and then as recorded by two different dash cams.

The differences between these perspectives is worth thinking about.

And note that full context comes only from the dashcam footage.

As a bonus, we witness the effects duty pistol rounds can have on a human's willingness to continue the fight.

 

[upptick]

As a civilian who is about to be attacked, my objective is to break contact -- not close with or completely disable the assailant. That essentially means trying to put distance between myself and the threat. That might also mean drawing my firearm and delivering hopefully effective fire but as others have mentioned it's hard to predict how soon the rounds will become effective. So, unless I have no choice but to stand my ground, i.e. my wife and kids are behind me, I'm cracking off a couple of shots in order to buy enough time to put distance between me and the attacker and am not necessarily depending on dropping him in his tracks. I think what this really implies is that anyone's preparation for self-defense includes a heckuva lot more than marksmanship training with your firearm. You are actually preparing for a physical confrontation, a serious fight. Accordingly, even though I'm in my 60s, I still train daily, doing a version of the program I followed when I was on active duty. I do interval training which includes cardio, strength training, and balance / agility exercises. In other words, I don't think simply carrying a firearm is anywhere near adequate preparation for the defense of myself and my family.

 

[dweis]

I cannot understand why someone who cannot draw quickly enough to shoot at a large target would want to wait until later to shoot at a smaller one.

Understandable, so I’ll attempt a cogent explanation. Under civilian and military CQB conditions
the large target while running at you is changing size (abetting bigger) with each step forward. That means the POA will vary from the POI as the range closes. That might mean with lick that change make the POI incapacitating. But the opposite can also happen. A running perp is not only getting bigger as a sight picture, but the torso is also moving up and down and twisting while running. So the POA is not likely to be the POI. It’s a gamble. Real life CQB is not a a drill where the target is stationary and the shooter is moving. The actual situation is the target is moving and the shooter is stationary.

So with the perp moving up and down and twisting (side to side motion) and the shooter stationary the odds are even at best. However, when the perp is just 3 to 5 feet away putting two rounds In him face is more reliable because even though his head is moving up and down it is unlikely that it is twisting because as he closes in his vision will be more fixed, and, even if it is not, and shot to the face is absolutely going to have a severe effect. It is impossible to not feel it and be startled by it. It will slow down anyone even if it does not incapacitate them. The shooter’s goal is to survive and slowing the perp down is the best alternative to incapacitating him initially. Slow,him down and then incapacitate him.

Food for thought ——
Muggers and street fighters ouch at the head and face, mostly the face. Why? Because they know most people are afraid of being hit in the face. It’s psychological. That psychology is innate. That is why unskilled people cover their heads when attacked. The perp is no different. He does not want to be hit is the head, so if you do he is not going to be looking for more. Shooting people is different that shooting paper.

 

[Kleanbore]

The actual situation is the target is stationary and the shooter is moving.

Why would one expect an attacker to be stationary/