testtest

This made me think about my training regiment

Trebor657

Operator
Over the weekend I was reading a firearms publication and one of the articles was related to shot placement. Pretty sure that most shooters learn or are taught to place your shots on your target in the biggest mass which naturally is the chest area. There have been countless examples of someone being shot once, twice or even three times or more in the chest and that did not neutralize the threat. Alot of the articles I have read and even folks I have talked to about this think common belief is a follow up head shot. The article I read suggested an alternative to a head shot....

Obviously, the head is a smaller target than the torso. In addition, the assailant can or may be moving his head. With the adrenaline flowing, this may or may not be a good choice or even an option. The article I read suggested this...rather than attempting a head shot which may be at a moving target which increases the chance of a miss which may have consequences depending on where the stray shot goes, if the threat is not neutralized after the torso shots, direct the follow up shot(s) to the groin area.

I got to thinking about this and it makes sense to me. The groin area would be a better choice in my opinion for a couple of reasons. Less movement that the head most likely, a larger target area than the head, and if you do miss, the stray shot has less chance of causing collateral damage which may be problematic for you because you are shooting downward rather than horizontally. And one final thought...as a male, if I am shot in the groin, I am pretty sure the fight will be taken out of me almost instantly...

Anyone have any opinion or thoughts on the "head shot" alternative? Thanks for reading...
 
Over the weekend I was reading a firearms publication and one of the articles was related to shot placement. Pretty sure that most shooters learn or are taught to place your shots on your target in the biggest mass which naturally is the chest area. There have been countless examples of someone being shot once, twice or even three times or more in the chest and that did not neutralize the threat. Alot of the articles I have read and even folks I have talked to about this think common belief is a follow up head shot. The article I read suggested an alternative to a head shot....

Obviously, the head is a smaller target than the torso. In addition, the assailant can or may be moving his head. With the adrenaline flowing, this may or may not be a good choice or even an option. The article I read suggested this...rather than attempting a head shot which may be at a moving target which increases the chance of a miss which may have consequences depending on where the stray shot goes, if the threat is not neutralized after the torso shots, direct the follow up shot(s) to the groin area.

I got to thinking about this and it makes sense to me. The groin area would be a better choice in my opinion for a couple of reasons. Less movement that the head most likely, a larger target area than the head, and if you do miss, the stray shot has less chance of causing collateral damage which may be problematic for you because you are shooting downward rather than horizontally. And one final thought...as a male, if I am shot in the groin, I am pretty sure the fight will be taken out of me almost instantly...

Anyone have any opinion or thoughts on the "head shot" alternative? Thanks for reading...
That’s how I have been trained. Pelvic girdle is a game stopper.
 
If you’ve got a long gun? Go for the pelvic girdle. High-energy rounds in there do massive damage, and there’s a lot of structure that is sensitive to high-velocity temporary cavity effects. Handgun bullets tend not to cause these effects, so…

Handgun, go high. Even if you don’t drill through gray matter, the impact will likely scramble the CPU for a couple of seconds allowing you to place one in the running lights, or GTFO.
 
b09f96631b60491d5040f35cd04f0d78--dalai-lama-gandhi.jpg
 
If you’ve got a long gun? Go for the pelvic girdle. High-energy rounds in there do massive damage, and there’s a lot of structure that is sensitive to high-velocity temporary cavity effects. Handgun bullets tend not to cause these effects, so…

Handgun, go high. Even if you don’t drill through gray matter, the impact will likely scramble the CPU for a couple of seconds allowing you to place one in the running lights, or GTFO.

I have been wondering how the 5.7x28 would be for self defense. I could be wrong, but think it is considerably higher velocity than a lot of handgun calibers/loads.
 
Wish I had the ability (and property) to do more barricade, running and moving, multi target training. Standing square up to paper target is minimum, but one good round anywhere and a pair of follow ups are good measure. Nothing wrong with a powerful load in center mass.

For the sake of legal consequence in punitive stages of litigation, it was explained once that a long, bed-ridden recuperating assailant could be a lifetime of liability whereas a dead assailant is a one-time settlement.
 
Wish I had the ability (and property) to do more barricade, running and moving, multi target training. Standing square up to paper target is minimum, but one good round anywhere and a pair of follow ups are good measure. Nothing wrong with a powerful load in center mass.

For the sake of legal consequence in punitive stages of litigation, it was explained once that a long, bed-ridden recuperating assailant could be a lifetime of liability whereas a dead assailant is a one-time settlement.
There a lot wrong with your assumptions, but I really don’t feel like going down a pretzel-logic rabbit hole with you.
 
Wish I had the ability (and property) to do more barricade, running and moving, multi target training. Standing square up to paper target is minimum, but one good round anywhere and a pair of follow ups are good measure. Nothing wrong with a powerful load in center mass.

For the sake of legal consequence in punitive stages of litigation, it was explained once that a long, bed-ridden recuperating assailant could be a lifetime of liability whereas a dead assailant is a one-time settlement.
I was thinking along the same lines. You destroy a bad guys pelvic girdle, and he somehow comes after you civilly, your future is gone.
 
Back
Top