I recently read an article that said, one should not shoot center mass to stop a bg. Instead one should go for a pelvis shot as one can still come at you with a bullet to the chest. But it's very difficult to walk forward with a shattered pelvis sound right to me, since the are lots of arteries there and a pretty big target. What thinks you?
Shot placement
- Thread starter taters123
- Start date
- Status
ColtPythonElite
Member
- Joined
- Jan 8, 2011
- Messages
- 10,477
What publication was that in?
moxie
Member
Agree with wisconsin. This issue has been bouncing around the internet for years. Center mass is what most experienced teachers teach.
Bojangles7
Member
Center mass because it's a wider target, and unless the bg is right up on you, good luck hitting him in the femoral artery.
Double Naught Spy
Sus Venator
The problem with the pelvis is that nobody really seems to know where to shoot the pelvis such that it will shatter with handgun ammo. It won't always shatter with rifle ammo either. Moreover, "shatter" makes it sound like it will break like glass. If you consider things with that analogy, then consider than a lot of what will happen will be chipping, not shattering. The largest portion of the pelvis is the ilium and the iliac blade can suffer considerable damage before collapsing.
gbran
Member
I'd guess a hit to the throat would be pretty devestating to a perp also. COM is just bigger and easier to hit under duress.
The pelvic girdle is a legitimate target in the event that shots to higher center mass do not do the job. Compared to a CNS (head) shot it is a bigger target that isn't likely to be bobbing and weaving as much. It also is not covered by typical bullet resistant vests. This assumes you have a pistol that can adequately penetrate.
I wouldn't aim there by default, though. High center mass for that.
Keep in mind that a guy with a compromised (even broken) pelvis can still shoot you from the ground.
I wouldn't aim there by default, though. High center mass for that.
Keep in mind that a guy with a compromised (even broken) pelvis can still shoot you from the ground.
Fishslayer
Member
Practicing "brisk" DA with my wheelguns I get a few pelvis hits.
Not on purpose tho...
Not on purpose tho...
Twiki357
Member
Sorry, but if I HAVE to use deadly force against an attacker, I want the most effective shot placement, assuming that the BG is armed. A wounded BG can still squeeze a trigger and is still a threat. I would only intentionally try for a disabling shot if the attacker was minimally or unarmed.
Last edited:
I've heard that about dangerous game hunting. Frankly, I think that if you can perforate the heart and lungs, that will be your best bet. The pelvis is a smaller and more odly shaped target, so its going to be a harder shot, and theres the chance of some of the lighter rounds glancing off of it. You'd have a decent shot at messing up the guys femoral artery and GI tract, but thats probably not going to do you as much good in an SD situation.
As far as shot placement breaking specific bones to give you an edge, I think I'd still go for center of mass. If I hit what I'm aiming for, the bad guy is going to take a bullet in the heart, lung, vena cava, or aorta. If my aim is off by a bit, I'm going to take out some ribs, which will have an adverse affect on his breathing, or his shoulder. If I had the option of handicapping my adversary prior to the fight, I'd rather it was his arm than his legs. His not being able to run isn't going to do me much good if he has a gun, whereas if I can take an arm/hand out of the game, he may not be shooting as well, and if things get to CQC range (Dear lord, that would be awful) I'd feel better only having to avoid one of his hands.
I'm pretty tired, but that should have made sense.
Chris "the Kayak-Man" Johnson
As far as shot placement breaking specific bones to give you an edge, I think I'd still go for center of mass. If I hit what I'm aiming for, the bad guy is going to take a bullet in the heart, lung, vena cava, or aorta. If my aim is off by a bit, I'm going to take out some ribs, which will have an adverse affect on his breathing, or his shoulder. If I had the option of handicapping my adversary prior to the fight, I'd rather it was his arm than his legs. His not being able to run isn't going to do me much good if he has a gun, whereas if I can take an arm/hand out of the game, he may not be shooting as well, and if things get to CQC range (Dear lord, that would be awful) I'd feel better only having to avoid one of his hands.
I'm pretty tired, but that should have made sense.
Chris "the Kayak-Man" Johnson
coloradokevin
Member
- Joined
- Mar 22, 2008
- Messages
- 3,285
In our police academy the 'pelvic girdle' was taught as a secondary aiming point in case the C.O.M. shots didn't drop the attacker. Same argument was used: they can't walk around with a broken pelvis. Yeah, like that matters if they are SHOOTING at you. Also, though that region of the body is large, it is also complicated, and I'm not sure that any given shot to that area would result in disabling damage to the pelvis. Shooting the bladder may mess them up, but it sure won't be as effective as shooting them in the heart or lungs.
Personally, pelvic girdle shots are only a minor consideration for me. Center of mass and head shots are where I feel things would be most effective. I keep the pelvis in the back of my mind in case I find myself faced with a situation where that shot might be my only/best available option... like a person wearing body armor and a ballistic helmet who I'm trying to anchor with a pistol.
And, I haven't heard the pelvic girdle shots mentioned in my job in the past few years (which either means they aren't teaching that anymore, or they simply aren't being very comprehensive in their current teaching -- not sure which).
Personally, pelvic girdle shots are only a minor consideration for me. Center of mass and head shots are where I feel things would be most effective. I keep the pelvis in the back of my mind in case I find myself faced with a situation where that shot might be my only/best available option... like a person wearing body armor and a ballistic helmet who I'm trying to anchor with a pistol.
And, I haven't heard the pelvic girdle shots mentioned in my job in the past few years (which either means they aren't teaching that anymore, or they simply aren't being very comprehensive in their current teaching -- not sure which).
The load-bearing areas on a pelvis (when considering what you have to hit and break, to disable the goblin) are quite small, and so are the arteries.
The pelvis shouldn't be the primary target, but if that's all you can hit at the time, then it is better than no hits on a more vital area.
The pelvis shouldn't be the primary target, but if that's all you can hit at the time, then it is better than no hits on a more vital area.
Sav .250
Member
Correct shot placement is everything reguardless of direction.
Plus, some shots are best left un-taken.
When you quote something ,try and have your source of information
available.
Plus, some shots are best left un-taken.
When you quote something ,try and have your source of information
available.
Double Naught Spy
Sus Venator
Well, correct shot placement, plus trajectory and penetration are everything. Any shot of the torso may be a correctly placed shot if the trajectory carries the round through the heart, even though the placement may look all wrong. Humans are not always like their perfectly squared up 2D representations at which we often shoot for practice. A shot to the center of the chest when the person is sideways to you results in a glancing wound, for example
Hangingrock
Member
pockets
Member
"Yes your Honor...I feared for my life, so I shot to cripple my assailant."
Hmmmmmmmmmm................Not something I want to say to a judge.
And as others have stated, your assailant may not be walking then, but he could very well still be shooting you quite dead. Then in some states, he might bankrupt your family with a lawsuit to support him for life.
Hmmmmmmmmmm................Not something I want to say to a judge.
And as others have stated, your assailant may not be walking then, but he could very well still be shooting you quite dead. Then in some states, he might bankrupt your family with a lawsuit to support him for life.
Sensai
Member
For me, it's center of mass. If I suspect that my attacker is wearing body armor, then I'd go for the head. Pelvis would be last resort. Just my two cents worth.
doc.lonestar
Member
From what I have read and researched - Center of mass shots are typically what most people focus on as it is the largest target to take aim at in a high stress situation. If we think about it - center of mass gives you the best opportunity to stop a threat under most circumstances. Granted amped up meth head or pcp freak will test that theory - then again they would test most theories - think walking dead too stupid to stop.
Heart, lungs, liver, stomach, intestines, you just poke a hole in the airsack in your chest and your internals tend to want to collapse due to the weight. Let alone actually hit any vital organs or arteries.
Heart, lungs, liver, stomach, intestines, you just poke a hole in the airsack in your chest and your internals tend to want to collapse due to the weight. Let alone actually hit any vital organs or arteries.
Attachments
Of course.
If you know that he is not armed, you most likely had better not be shooting at him, by the way.
Maybe, maybe not. Some 85% or more persons shot with handguns do survive and are therefore wounded. Your objective is to stop them.
Deadly force is either justified or it is not.
One very famous incident, in which a felon, already hit in other parts of the body, and still mobile, was shot in the pelvis by a member of the NYPD SOU, effectively anchoring the felon, has been told and re-told so many times that it became trendy, for a while, to recommend a pelvic shot. Somewhere along the way, the word "shatter" became trendy, in reference to pelvic shots.
More recently, the shatter-the-pelvis shot has been quite thoroughly debunked. This does not mean a pelvic hit cannot disable; it is just that it is not the sure thing that some trend-followers have made it out to be. Of course, there have been plenty of failures to stop with COM hits, too. In documented incidents, some recprded on dash cams, heroic LEOs have blindly followed their training, and poured round after round into the COM, as the felon continued to function like a cinematic Terminator.
The obvious answer, to me, is to be prepared to spread the damage to multiple vital points. See the opponent as a living, breathing organism, not as a target with a ten ring and X ring. My employer, a big-city PD, teaches us to treat the COM as the first target of choice, and to treat the pelvic area and head as alternate targets, either due to opportunity or because COM shots are ineffective.
Because heads bob and weave, in the real world, when I train on my own, I tend to practice putting a lot of shots higher than the geometrical COM, quite high in the chest area and including the neck, in addition to actual head shots. This high chest area is filled with important plumbing, ventilation, and structural bits, and, notably, some training methodologies teach these higher-chest shots rather
than COM.
I would probably be more likely to select the pelvis as a real-world target when armed with a shotgun, than a handgun. Moreover, I will target the actual hip joints, and lower spine, not just anywhere on the pelvis.
More recently, the shatter-the-pelvis shot has been quite thoroughly debunked. This does not mean a pelvic hit cannot disable; it is just that it is not the sure thing that some trend-followers have made it out to be. Of course, there have been plenty of failures to stop with COM hits, too. In documented incidents, some recprded on dash cams, heroic LEOs have blindly followed their training, and poured round after round into the COM, as the felon continued to function like a cinematic Terminator.
The obvious answer, to me, is to be prepared to spread the damage to multiple vital points. See the opponent as a living, breathing organism, not as a target with a ten ring and X ring. My employer, a big-city PD, teaches us to treat the COM as the first target of choice, and to treat the pelvic area and head as alternate targets, either due to opportunity or because COM shots are ineffective.
Because heads bob and weave, in the real world, when I train on my own, I tend to practice putting a lot of shots higher than the geometrical COM, quite high in the chest area and including the neck, in addition to actual head shots. This high chest area is filled with important plumbing, ventilation, and structural bits, and, notably, some training methodologies teach these higher-chest shots rather
than COM.
I would probably be more likely to select the pelvis as a real-world target when armed with a shotgun, than a handgun. Moreover, I will target the actual hip joints, and lower spine, not just anywhere on the pelvis.
I say shoot the best target that is offered to you!
Sometimes criminals will use soft body armor that cannot be defeated without the armor piercing handgun ammo we civilians are denied by law. In that case shoot which ever other target appears best for you. Head or pelvis. And keep shooting until they stop or run away!
Sometimes criminals will use soft body armor that cannot be defeated without the armor piercing handgun ammo we civilians are denied by law. In that case shoot which ever other target appears best for you. Head or pelvis. And keep shooting until they stop or run away!
- Status
