The “Center Mass” Myth and Ending a Gunfight -Triggernometry

[BobK]

Nice article on stopping power of various cartridges and how many hits is takes to stop the threat.

The “Center Mass” Myth and Ending a Gunfight -Triggernometry

Reminds me of an old quote: " . . .shoot 'em to the ground. It works for all critters, both two-legged and four."

John Conner expressed a similar thought, "You can't shoot them until you think they are dead, you have to shoot them until they think they are dead."

[Lysander]

He's not exactly bringing to light anything half a dozen instructors haven't covered ad nauseum, and he's also trying to use it to bring back the caliber debate.

At the end of the day most modern hollow point bullets 9mm and above do about the same amount of damage and are all equally terrible for self defense. If you want to incapacitate and guarantee a first shot kill, I'd suggest lugging around a Barrett or something in .338 Lapua. Otherwise, aim for the heart and don't stop shooting until the target stops moving. At that point, whether you want 8 rounds of .45ACP or 17rds of 9x19 it becomes a matter of preference and shot placement.

[tomfolery]

All this guy did was become one of the "self proclaimed experts" he griped about...good article though.

[relic]

He's not exactly bringing to light anything half a dozen instructors haven't covered ad nauseum, and he's also trying to use it to bring back the caliber debate.

At the end of the day most modern hollow point bullets 9mm and above do about the same amount of damage and are all equally terrible for self defense. If you want to incapacitate and guarantee a first shot kill, I'd suggest lugging around a Barrett or something in .338 Lapua. Otherwise, aim for the heart and don't stop shooting until the target stops moving. At that point, whether you want 8 rounds of .45ACP or 17rds of 9x19 it becomes a matter of preference and shot placement.

I often carry a 9mm because I can't comfortably conceal a .45. But although a 9mm might not expand, a .45 will never shrink. I'm not a fanboy. I don't have a caliber agenda. But if a 12 gauge pistol was available and small enough to conceal, very few would argue it's effectiveness. Cross sectional area has been proven as the most effective way to stop a threat. Yes a 9mm can do the job, but every available reference shows a .45 will do better and 12 gauge better yet.

The facts are the facts and, .35 has not bested .45 and has rarely equalled it, and neither has ever bested the. 60 bore shotgun. Let's not let personal aganda distort the facts.

[Whirlwind06]

A couple years ago I read the Book "We were soldiers once and young". It is a true account of the first major battle of the Vietnam war.

There many instances of men on both sides of the battle taking multibile hits from rifles and crew served squad weapons and staying in the fight.

After reading that I knew without a doubt that anything I can carry on my person is marginal at best. And the motivation and determination of the attacker and defender is huge factor in deciding who goes home.

[Mr. Glock]

I love to internet-debate as much as the next guy, but.......

Based on years of reading about this, I think each situation is different...there is no one "true" answer. You can talk to three people who have been shot with big rounds and survivied, but you can't talk to three more that were killed by a 22 LR. There is no common proven thread in caliber selection vs results.

You think about the field of threats you might encounter and your skill level and make your firearms/ammo decisions. You hope that if you get into a real situation that your choices work that day. And train so that if they don't, you can improvise.

Carrying a 45 and deciding that you only need to shoot twice in an engagement can be worse that the 9mm person who is ready to shoot until they stop the threat.

And, for the most part, it is not the "tool" but rather the mind behind the tool.

[pleasantguywhopacks]

I feel extremely comfortable carrying 52 rounds of 147 gr HST. It should at least let me fight my way back to my shotgun or AR in the car.

This debate is about as old figuratively and literally as "which came first, the chicken or the egg?

I eat both no matter what order they are served. .

[Pessimist]

I could be wrong, but I think this guy may be playing a bit loose with his definitions.

He mentions a female officer shot in the heart at point blank range w/ a hollow point .357 magnum who survived. I suppose that's possible, but my guess would be "in the heart" means "grazed the heart. That, or this happened in an operating room after she was fully prepped.

If you blast open a ventricle, I think you'd bleed out pretty fast.

Of course anything can happen.

At any rate, it's a point well taken to consider that people don't necessarily just up and croak from a single hit.

I've read elsewhere that in fact most people go down after being hit mainly because that just "seems like the right thing to do" (ie. from TV / Movies, etc.. ).

[Lysander]

Save this space for long rebuttal

[BobK]

Save this space for long rebuttal

Why?

[P-chan]

I feel extremely comfortable carrying 52 rounds of 147 gr HST. It should at least let me fight my way back to my shotgun or AR in the car.

This debate is about as old figuratively and literally as "which came first, the chicken or the egg?

I eat both no matter what order they are served. .

What state do you live in where you can keep a loaded shotgun or AR in the car?

[BobK]

. . . fight my way back to my shotgun or AR in the car.

What state do you live in where you can keep a loaded shotgun or AR in the car?

Where did he say it was loaded? I wouldn't assume that.

He could easily have a shotgun with a sidesaddle loaded with shells.

[pleasantguywhopacks]

. . . fight my way back to my shotgun or AR in the car.

What state do you live in where you can keep a loaded shotgun or AR in the car?

Where did he say it was loaded? I wouldn't assume that.

He could easily have a shotgun with a sidesaddle loaded with shells.

Exactly this for the shot gun.


As for the AR when it gets car time, it sits in the back seat with a three PMAGS each with a spoon and a Stripper clip in each. I have 30 rounds as fast as I can push them in. Not 30 round in each but I have enough ammo in the car should I have the opportunity to charge them full. In any event I have 30 rounds available but require two mag changes.

[TSiWRX]

^ Took me a sec. to get the orientation of that picture. At first, I thought you had rigged it up as some sort of anti-intrusion device.

[Brian@ITC]

Killing someone with a handgun is EXTREMELY difficult. The method of shooting shown in the video is theory at best.

Everyone needs to realize that if immediately incapacitating someone was as “easy” as what most people teach, the would be many more people dying from being shot.

Only about 20% of people who are shot die. And only about half of that 20% die on the spot. So, if my math is correct, you have about a 90% chance that if you shoot someone they will die instantly.

“..becomes a matter of preference and shot placement.”

Shot placement is theory at best.

You can read the FBI’s Handgun Wounding Factors and Effectiveness report, which on page 2 it says, “A review of law enforcement shootings clearly suggests that regardless of the number of rounds fired in a shooting, most of the time only one or two solid torso hits on the adversary can be expected. This expectation is realistic because of the nature of shooting incidents and the extreme difficulty of shooting a handgun with precision under such dire conditions. The probability of multiple hits with a handgun is not high.”

On page 6 the report states “With the exceptions of hits to the brain or upper spinal cord, the concept of reliable and reproducible immediate incapacitation of the human target by gunshot wounds to the torso is a myth.The human target is a complex and durable one. A wide variety of psychological, physical, and physiological factors exist, all of them pertinent to the probability of incapacitation. Failing a hit to the central nervous system, massive bleeding from holes in the heart or major blood vessels of the torso causing circulatory collapse is the only other way to force incapacitation upon an adversary, and this takes time. For example, there is sufficient oxygen within the brain to support full, voluntary action for 10-15 seconds after the heart has been destroyed. Barring central nervous system hits, there is no physiological reason for an individual to be incapacitated by even a fatal wound, until blood loss is sufficient to drop blood pressure and/or the brain is deprived of oxygen.’

Hitting either target necessary for immediate incapacitation is next to impossible. So, is shot placement possible that is necessary to immediate reduce a threat or threats? I’d say that hitting the head is hard to do when most people aren’t going to land most of their shots on the torso. Not forgetting that hitting the upper spinal cord requires you being behind them. But that’s a whole other thread. If you are relying on the hydraulic pressure to take them out, it could be a minute or more! How much damage can the adversary do to you?

After reading that I knew without a doubt that anything I can carry on my person is marginal at best. And the motivation and determination of the attacker and defender is huge factor in deciding who goes home.

One of the truest statements anyone has made on a forum.

Anyone who relies on their handgun to end the fight is not prepared to survive a confrontation because they have the wrong mindset. Your unarmed skills are FAR more important than your firearms skills.