Is shot placement everything

Status
Not open for further replies.
Some thoughts ...

"Stopping Power" is a term best left to the discussion of braking systems.

Stopping the imminent threat of serious bodily injury or death in a lawful, reasonable & appropriate manner is everything. Avoiding being placed in that situation is better.

Discussions of caliber and ammunition, especially when done from a perspective of how someone feels, but lacking in experience, probably isn't a productive use of anyone's time.

Understanding the relevant laws to the use of force, defensive of self & any innocent 3rd party, etc is arguably more important than anything having to do with guns & ammunition. Lots of folks would probably be shocked to learn of the number of people who were mistaken in their beliefs that they were acting lawfully, and ended up justifiably being convicted of criminal offenses because they were mistaken in thinking their "common sense" understanding of the law was sufficient and correct.

Mindset. (I've seen at least my fair share of previous students in both martial arts and shooting training venues were might be "good" within the training environment, but couldn't effectively translate that over into a real world context.

The use of a .22 LR as a dedicated defensive weapon? FWIW, over more than 20+ years of being a firearms instructor and seeing all manner of handguns brought through classes and qualification courses-of-fire, .22 pistols have by far been the most problematic when it comes to feeding & other malfunctions. Mostly it's been related to the unpredictable quality of any particular .22 LR cartridge, but it's also been the guns now and again (mostly related to cleanliness, maintenance, weak recoil & mag springs, etc).

Training. Good training. Good training supported by recurrent training and proper practice of the skillset developed in good training. Luck isn't a desirable substitute for good training and proper practice.

Training & practicing to achieve the level of unconscious competence, accessible under unexpected situations involving physical & psychological stress, is arguably better than a lack of training & practice.

"Belief" in one's choice of handgun make/model, caliber and ammunition may be something that's more hopeful & optimistic than justified by actual experience. If it falls within the Talisman Effect category, might as well carry a lucky coin, rabbit's foot, 4-leaf clover or supplement it with some other superstitious practice.
 
Shot placement is most important. Adequate penetration is also important. Permanent wound channel is also important. (As I understand it, temporary wound channel due to cavitation is not as prevalent with most handgun bullets).

So all 3 of these ingredients are necessary for success. We have all read horror stories of thugs all hopped up on meth or the like, but one a cop related to me about a really fat lady on crack was that the cartridges used on her were blowing up in her adipose tissue and not penetrating to the vital organs, and she had some sort of cutting weapon, with which she was attacking the police that day. It took several rounds to penetrate deeply enough to remove that threat.

Nobody can anticipate all of the variables, but there are probably more similarities in self defense shootings than we would think, such as range, suddenness, fear, adrenaline dump, these things... perhaps it would be best to plan for the most likely events one might encounter, and arm ourselves to best address these most likely scenarios.

For myself only I prefer a 45 ACP, for a defensive situation. Since it is outside the scope of this topic, I would prefer to leave unaddressed the deliberate ambush with a 22 long rifle sidearm.
 
Is shot placement everything
Click to expand...

Nope.

Shot placement will do nothing if the bullet is of such poor design it fails to penetrate.

Shot placement will do nothing if the bullet is of such poor design it does little damage.

Shot placement helps and it is a major factor of stopping power but not the whole thing.

Bullet design, weight,diameter, speed.. all take a part.

But I'd rather be an expert shot with a .32 auto FMJ ammo than a poor shot with a .44 magnum.

Deaf
 
Depends. It's key and if you can't manage to hit within four inches of where your aiming then you need to either practice more or consider a new solution to your problem. My bump in the night gun is a S&W 15-3 loaded with Aguila SJHP 158 grains. From a 4" barrel they'll do between 875 and 900 fps. Aim for the heart which is a bout a four inch grouping more or less and the round will go through the heart and likely hit the spine. If it doesn't, I have five follow up shots. Now granted I have a Bersa 9mm Ultra compact sitting right next to it and I practice shooting one handed and a gun in each hand which most people find odd but in a self-defense situation I want to bring as much heat as I can.

Now granted I could opt for my shotgun and I keep that in my bathroom in the cabinet as it's a H&R 870 clone that I don't mind losing to rust.
 
Got a few typical responses like a perfect shot with a small gun is better than a miss with a big gun, but really? How many people in reality are going to go from perfection to complete failure by upgrading from a .22 or similar to a 9mm or even a .380. I personally know a few guys that carry a .22 that use this argument, and the carry NAA revolvers, seriously if you can make a perfect shot with one of those you would likely be much better off packing something like a P3AT. I carry a firearm to be ready for the worst and hope for the best, carrying a gun that most people justify its use with the hopes of perfect performance on their part makes no sense to me. I don't believe the majority of people would be able to pull off perfect shot placement when stuff goes downhill quickly. While I understand the thought process behind it, why don't we look at it like would a great shot from x be better than a very good shot from y.

I also saw the better than nothing argument, and while eating nothing but twinkies and oreos is better than not eating at all, it doesn't mean that it is a good choice.

One thing that surprised me was a few responses relating to essentially scaring away the bad guy. This I took great issue with. Lethal force is not a persuasive force it is a stopping force, when lethal force is used it is used to make it impossible for a threat to continue to be a threat as quickly as possible, not to change their minds. If a guy pulls a gun on you, do you want to do something that you hope changes his mind, no you want to make it impossible for the trigger to be pulled.
 
I'd agree shot placement is most important,BUT, if it's a less than perfect shot, like arm, leg etc, a 230 grain rnd it going to do much more of a debilitating wound than a smaller/ lighter rnd. That's simple physics.
 
Deaf Smith said:
Nope.

Shot placement will do nothing if the bullet is of such poor design it fails to penetrate.

Shot placement will do nothing if the bullet is of such poor design it does little damage.

Shot placement helps and it is a major factor of stopping power but not the whole thing.

Bullet design, weight,diameter, speed.. all take a part.
Click to expand...

Right on.
Deaf Smith said:
But I'd rather be an expert shot with a .32 auto FMJ ammo than a poor shot with a .44 magnum.
Click to expand...

This is a variation on the "hit with a 22 is better than a miss with a 44" cliche. Like most cliches there is an element of truth in it. What it leaves out is these are not the only two alternatives. A miss with a 22 is no different than a miss with a 44, but a hit with a 44 is best of all.

Unless you have crippling arthritis or some other limiting disability there is no reason that you can't learn to hit with a 38 Special or better. If you're such an expert shot that you can shoot well enough to dream of shots in the eye with a 22, you can learn to shoot well enough to make the center of mass hit with a 45, because a COM shot is likely to be the best one you're going to get in a real gunfight.
 
I started a thread about this a while ago.

Yes and no. Of course everyone should work and train to shoot as well as they can, but some people have delusions of grandeur about how well they shoot under stress. We train to hit the ten ring, hoping that when someone is shooting back, we can put as many as possible in the eight ring. The only hit that GUARANTEES a one-shot stop is to the central nervous system, between the nose and the bottom of the sternum. If you think this is easy to do. try it at ten yards, from a rest. Not so easy, was it? You're not doing that under fire.

Train all you can, because you will sink to your lowest level of training. The tighter that group is, the better. But if you want a realistic example of how you shoot when someone is shooting back, look no further than the NYPD.
 
natman said:
This is a variation on the "hit with a 22 is better than a miss with a 44" cliche. Like most cliches there is an element of truth in it. What it leaves out is these are not the only two alternatives. A miss with a 22 is no different than a miss with a 44, but a hit with a 44 is best of all.

Unless you have crippling arthritis or some other limiting disability there is no reason that you can't learn to hit with a 38 Special or better. If you're such an expert shot that you can shoot well enough to dream of shots in the eye with a 22, you can learn to shoot well enough to make the center of mass hit with a 45, because a COM shot is likely to be the best one you're going to get in a real gunfight.
Click to expand...

Well, just replace .32 with .38. But the idea is to get the most powerful gun/load you can SHOOT WELL and conceal.

And it's that 'SHOOT WELL' that matters most.

Deaf
 
Lethal force is not a persuasive force it is a stopping force, when lethal force is used it is used to make it impossible for a threat to continue to be a threat as quickly as possible, not to change their minds. If a guy pulls a gun on you, do you want to do something that you hope changes his mind, no you want to make it impossible for the trigger to be pulled.
Click to expand...

Lethal force is NOT a stopping force. A person may suffer a lethal wound but not be incapacitated to stop them from doing whatever they intended too..
 
Train all you can, because you will sink to your lowest level of training. The tighter that group is, the better. But if you want a realistic example of how you shoot when someone is shooting back, look no further than the NYPD.
Click to expand...

Pray tell what is the amount of firearms training and live round practice NYPD Officers receive in a year or 5 or even 10 years?

The American Rifleman magazine in the Armed Citizen regularly has stories about citizens stopping a attacker with one shot. Apparently they didn't know they were to look at NYPD shooting to know that it is impossible to stop the attacker with only one shot.

You seem to be a authority that all the skills learned and practiced on the firing line will be forgotten. Could you share your qualifications and research into this matter?
 
Last edited:
The American Rifleman magazine in the Armed Citizen regularly has stories about citizens stopping a attacker with one shot. Apparently they didn't know they were to look at NYPD shooting to know that it is impossible to stop the attacker with only one shot.
Click to expand...

;) Let's not be too absurd. It is POSSIBLE to stop someone with one shot. In fact it happens fairly frequently. Heck, it is even more likely that you'll stop the attack with no shots fired at all.

But you can't expect that. Skill DOES degrade under stress. It isn't that it will "be forgotten" but that the physiological factors that start kicking in when your adrenaline is spiking (fear, tunnel-vision, shaking, hands sweating, rushing harder than you've ever rushed to get off a shot before the other guy, while moving erratically, shooting at someone else who's moving erratically, probably at night, probably with multiple attackers) rob you of your best -- or even your "average" -- skill with the gun.

You MIGHT get a one-shot-stop. You MIGHT scare the guy off without firing. You'd better expect that you'll have to fire multiple shots under the worst conditions ever, and keep fighting until either you're dead or the attackers have stopped.

If those things weren't factors, if you could draw and place one cool shot into the spinal cord of your attacker on demand, then all the training anyone would ever need is the bulls-eye practice to be able to cut out a 10-ring on the square range.

And we all know that has about ZERO to do with fighting with a firearm.
 
It's certainly not everything but it is definitely in the top three.

Here is the list in descending order of importance:

1. Have a readily accessible firearm when you need it.
2. Make sure it's a working/reliable firearm.
3. Be able to make accurate hits under real-world conditions.
4. Other stuff.
5. More other stuff.
.
.
.

We like to argue about the "other stuff", but the reality is that Items 1 & 2 on the list will successfully resolve more than 90% of civilian deadly force encounters.
Shot placement will do nothing if the bullet is of such poor design it fails to penetrate.

Shot placement will do nothing if the bullet is of such poor design it does little damage.
Click to expand...
In the real world, if you shoot someone in the face, the vast majority of the time your emergency is over even if the attacker is not seriously injured.

I understand where you're coming from, but reality is that shot placement can be extremely effective even if the bullet doesn't penetrate or do significant damage. That's because in the majority of shootings where the attacker is hit, the attacker stops because he is hit, not because he is "stopped" or even because he is seriously injured.

I'm not saying people should plan to rely on psychological stops, for obvious reasons. I am saying we need to keep some real-world perspective in these discussions.
 
Last edited:
I personally believe shot placement IS everything, at least when it comes to handguns.

I also think penetration is more important than expansion or caliber. Also, capacity and low recoil are huge IMHO.

These are some of the reasons why I'm currently looking into a Kel-Tec PMR-30, which is a lightweight semi-automatic .22 magnum pistol that holds an astonishing 30 rounds in a flush-fit magazine. There are some very respectable .22 mag loads out there now, even Speer makes a .22 magnum Gold Dot.

30 rounds of low-recoil but effective firepower as fast as the trigger can be pulled in a 20 oz. LOADED package?

Yes! Me me wanna PMR-30!
 
1. Have a readily accessible firearm when you need it.
2. Make sure it's a working/reliable firearm.
3. Be able to make accurate hits under real-world conditions.
4. Other stuff.
5. More other stuff.
Click to expand...
This ^^ is all true.

While I wouldn't carry a .22 for self defense, I do like pocket pistols as they're so easy to carry.
But with a small pistol you can only go so high in caliber until the recoil and muzzle-flip becomes too difficult to manage.
I love the Ruger LCP in 380 Auto, but I wouldn't want to shoot 9mm Para or greater from such a small and light-weight pistol.
 
There are many truths on both sides of the fence. The caliber debate will rage until the end of time but it boils down only to a couple of issues for me. You can 'what if' scenarios to death but you realistically can't prepare for every possible situation. The fact of the matter is this, if it isn't a centerfire rifle or a shotgun with buckshot, it doesn't have reliable 'stopping power'. A handgun in and of itself is a compromise. Since you can't walk around with an AR-15 everywhere you go, you compromise by carrying a handgun.

When it comes to handguns I can honestly say I don't think caliber makes too much of a difference. Any centerfire handgun cartridge will produce similar results. The only part of the debate I will bite on is centerfire vs rimfire. The only thing I can hate on with rimfire weapons for self defense is reliability. Rimfire cartridges are going to fail more often than centerfire. Rimfire autos are also going to be less reliable than their centerfire counterparts. I'm sure somebody will want to argue this point and I don't care if you do, that is my personal opinion that I've gathered from firing many tens of thousands of rounds through many different weapons systems.

The only real advantage I can say a centerfire round is going to have over rimfire is with non lethal hits. Many people discount shooting at the pelvic area in training. I believe this is a critical mistake. If a hammer pair to the torso doesn't drop your attacker then something is wrong. The Mozambique method of engaging is extremely popular now-a-days. The good ole' 'two to the chest, one to the head' philosophy works great on paper targets. I can shoot box drills all day and make it look pretty sexy. Hammer pair to torso of target one, hammer pair to torso of target two, head shot to target two then back to a head shot on target one. I'll achieve 100% accuracy on this drill every single time. Hitting a head shot on a moving target when your life is in danger is another story. If two to the chest doesn't cut it, put a couple in the pelvis. You can't run anymore once a bullet has broken your pelvis. A centerfire round is going to do this more reliably than a rimfire.
 
Before one forms any preconceptions about one's likely ability to execute effective "shot placement" in a real SD situation, one should reflect for a moment on the following:
  • the event can be expected to develop unpredictably and unfold very quickly;
  • the target(s) will no doubt be moving very rapidly from, and into, close distance; and
  • the defender will likely be under great stress.

Under those circumstances, it is unlikely that the defender will really have much to say about just where his shots will be placed--what will be will be. And the shooting will bear little resemblance to range practice.

We can add one more accepted truism: handguns are not great stoppers. None of them are.

I recommend against selecting a handgun and relying upon it until one has availed oneself of a least some realistic defensive pistol training from a qualified instructor. Some competition shooting would not hurt, either.

So, let's assume that one has acquired some skills in drawing, presentation, shooting, and hitting a couple of rapidly moving attackers very rapidly, each several times, while moving, and has selected and learned to use a firearm that will serve that need.

Is that enough?

Not really. That just takes care of John's second and third points:

2. Make sure it's a working/reliable firearm.
3. Be able to make accurate hits under real-world conditions. [emphasis added]
Click to expand...

One still has to ensure that the first one is met:

1. Have a readily accessible firearm when you need it.
Click to expand...

Your firearm has to be one you can carry, and you have to do it.

Generally speaking, the bigger and heavier it is the harder it is to carry, and the smaller and lighter it is, the harder it will be to use effectively. And don't forget capacity.

Now we have to address this one:

4. Other stuff.
Click to expand...
Realistically seeking, the most important of the "other stuff" is probably keeping oneself sufficiently alert to what is going on to avoid being taken by surprise. Personally, I'll rank that one first.

If I learn anything relevant in my next class, I'll pass it on.
 
You can't run anymore once a bullet has broken your pelvis.
Click to expand...
This is not true.

I'm a radiologic technologist and I've X-rayed plenty of folks who had a broken pelvis, and depending upon the severity and area of the fracture, many of them can walk just fine.

If they take two in the chest and continue to attack, forget the pelvic region, just keep putting more rounds in to the chest.
 
i'll second kleanbores new no.1 ranking of "other stuff". whether you have a gun, a knife, or no weapon at all, situation awareness is, and will always be, number one in my book.

murf

p.s. keep it "yellow"!
 
Last edited:
shot placement is not everything but it is primary. the ability to operate under extreme stress is a large part of being able to place your shots effectively. ability to stay on target for a follow up shot is important as well. the round you used comes after these. I have been in extreme stress life threatening situations a few times in my life. Sam 1911 is correct your focus narrows and your fine motor skills degrade. These are some of the reasons i prefer to carry 32 h&r magnum in a j frame rather than 38+P or 357 as a concealed carry. an effective round with less recoil resulting in the ability to stay on target to get a well placed follow up shot.
 
Methinks skiking is just trolling. Plenty of people more experienced, and smarter have used a .22 effectively. I carry .25's and .32's sometimes and don't feel undergunned when I carry them.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

G
  • Locked
Shot Placement!!! Blah, Blah, Blah
2
Replies
34
Views
2K
Missouri Mule
M
B
  • Locked
Define Shot Placement
Replies
19
Views
2K
junyo
J
J
  • Locked
"Shot placement"
2
Replies
34
Views
2K
Fred Fuller
F
N
  • Locked
Shot placement, shot placement, shot placement..
2
Replies
27
Views
1K
Jeff White
J
J
  • Locked
Shot placement is key!
2
Replies
29
Views
2K
James T Thomas
J
Back
Top