Two to the chest and one to the head..blah, blah, blah

[mercop]

Over the last two years and running hundreds of scenarios with airsofts I have not had one person report that they were able to target/aim for the head during a scenario. We also seldom have anyone hit in the head. Maybe 1 in every class or so. And the majority of the confrontations shots are exchanged at well under 10 yards. What we do have is incredible amount of people shot in the groin. To the point where some alumni choose to wear a cup.

Kind of makes sense because unlike the head and legs the pelvic girdle does no move independently. During the draw, your pistol is going to travel past their pelvic girdle so why not engage it.

Knowing at what short distances shootings occur I have to wonder where you are getting the time to check out your handy work on COM and decide that you need to shoot for the head. I mean after all you are probably not facing a slow moving Zombie. Another thing to consider is that counting on hitting the head in response to COM not working is like trying to move across four lanes of traffic to your last exit. You miss it and you are screwed. I would rather get over and try to take the first exit (pelvic girdle).

What will be the bodies reaction to a ballistic ball tap? Most likely the head will come forward exposing the top of the head, subclavian arteries, and eventually the spine the further they bend over. Their head becomes COM. And in a situation that has gone from bad to worse and we are trying to shoot at the smallest part of the human body where exactly are those round going that miss?

Is the "pro way" has been two to the chest and one to the head for all these years where is the supporting documentation that it really happens that way.

1) That people report during a shooting people make a conscious decision to target the head.
2) It results in the attacker bursting into flames as advertised on the box.


Until I found out how seldom some of our long held wisdom gained on paper targets was to reproduce during force on force scenarios I held onto it as well. I feel some who stick with the same old dogma may suffer the same fate as the dinosaurs.- George

 

[g00n24]

This is totally second hand information but it seems credible. A LEO told me they are now told to go 2-to the body, then aim for the groin. He said it has to do with stopping their mobility, which makes sense to me...hit someone in the pelvic region they probably wont be moving around too much and should make for a more stationary target...just what he said

 

[mercop]

Yes, many have moved to it....because it makes sense

 

[bigcraig]

I have had a small bit of training and have read numerus articles and books on defensive shooting. I honestly do not recall any of the instructors nor writers actually beating this shooting routine into their students and/or readers heads.

I know Henk Iverson REALLY advocates what he calls the "triangle of death", I like his reasonings for this method, but even Henk will tell you there a various degrees of combat effective shots. I heard him say in class, "Shoot what you can see," then of course as Henks normal tone and demeaner, " MOVE.....MOVE NOW".

If rounds are to be fired in self defense then any part of the aggressors body is fair game, well to me any way. So, if I draw on a person who is running full speed at me, I may start shooting from the "ground" up, so to speak. (I think Doc Gun affectionally calls this the "zipper".) Meaning of course, that I will shoot my way north, from groin to head, IF necessary.

In other words, I agree with what your saying about pelvic girdle shots, but I also believe that depending on the circustances and scenerio, a head, neck , knee, pinkie toe shot....whatever that can be hit, CAN be effective as well, maybe not result in instaneous stop, but effective nonetheless.

 

[Joe Williams]

This is totally second hand information but it seems credible. A LEO told me they are now told to go 2-to the body, then aim for the groin. He said it has to do with stopping their mobility, which makes sense to me...hit someone in the pelvic region they probably wont be moving around too much and should make for a more stationary target...just what he said

Another issue is that there have been a number of instances of bad guys wearing body armor. The head is a very hard to hit target. The pelvis is as "easy" to hit as the chest, and can be an immobilizer. BG can still fight back, but you are mobile, and can move to cover or disengage. He cannot. The pelvis isn't the preferred target, IMHO, but it's better than the head if the chest doesn't work.

 

[shooter521]

Another issue is that there have been a number of instances of bad guys wearing body armor. The head is a very hard to hit target.

Pat Rogers tells a story that the one time he tried a "Mozambique," he dropped his head shot and hit the guy in the throat. "It worked".

The pelvis is as "easy" to hit as the chest, and can be an immobilizer. BG can still fight back, but you are mobile, and can move to cover or disengage. He cannot. The pelvis isn't the preferred target, IMHO, but it's better than the head if the chest doesn't work.

I have trained with a couple folks who were seriously against pelvic shots, stating that in order to immobilize the BG, the pelvic girdle has to be shattered, and most handgun rounds don't have the ability to do that kind of damage. Other trainers advocate the pelvis over the head shot for a number of reasons, and some teach both head and pelvis as viable alternatives. A lot of it may be situational dependent, and both are good tools to have in the arsenal, as well as others like the NSR, zipper drill, etc.

My

 

[Jack Ryan]

One in the chest, one in the balls, one in the head. Every one happy now?

 

[Tireburner Turner]

Im with bigcraig...i think any shot you have at that split second, is the one you take. It may not be in the chest, or head, or pelvis...but nontheless the BG will feel it. It may not put him down, but atleast you started somewhere, and hopefully after the BG is hit you can find cover and fire a couple follow up shots.

 

[Josh Ward]

A lot of it may be situational dependent,

ding ding ding

You shoot what is presented to you until the threat no longer exists

 

[E5RANGER375]

i think no mater what you aim at, if your training and practice is lacking it doesnt matter where you aim and fire, your probly gonna miss your intinded target area anyways.
so if you put crap in and never practice or get solid training from someone like George or Henk then when you are faced with a life threatening situation your gonna get crap out whe you need GOLD or at minimum bronze.
one thing though is dont count on only having to use 3 shots. you fire until the threat is terminated. That could mean until hes crying for his mommy, or it could mean until hes dead. either way you owe it to yourself to stay alive.

i have my own preferences when i engage, but i use the methods that i know will work FOR ME and have trained with and continue to do so. but that doesnt mean that im not open to new better ideas, as long as i PROPERLY learn them and thoroughly rehearse them as much as possible so im fluid with whatever method i use.

you can have the best firearms, gear, and training, but if you never rehearse with them and become fluid in your methods and then keep rehearsing more after that then you might lose against the bad guy with a hi-point or the AK, he only has to make 1 shot count and isnt worrying about collateral damage like you are. also most bad guys have accepted their fate so they dont have much to lose, and thats the scarriest bad guy you will ever face. I hope all of us good guys have good lives and everything to fight for and keep us alive, as well as the will to do it!!

2 cents

 

[mercop]

You misunderstand me. If I had time to "aim" at a bad guys head like say maybe the Hollywood Shootout I would. But I do not think it has a very high rate of success when you are moving and so is your attacker.

Here is how I explain it during my classes. I would estimate that around 80% of the shootings I have investigated in real life and seen staged in force on force scenarios had the majority of the rounds that did not strike the hands and forearms actually struck the below the belly button. If rounds strike low the typical result is the head coming down and forward. This brings the top of the head and eventually the spine into your COM. It also would allow rounds to strike behind the collar bone into the subclavian artery and heart/lungs. The hardest part of accessing the vital organs through the front is getting through the rib cage and sternum. By shooting through the top you take the path of least resistance. Vascular/Circulatory hits are the slowest to physically stop an attack even though they are likely to eventually kill. CNS is the fastest but most uncommon. A structural hit is not as likely to cause death, but is very likely to stop the attack. And yes, I agree with Henk..MOVE

.What I use as a basis for what I teach is the people that turn up at courses that have little to no training all the way to those who have been at the “Sites” several times. We have had lots of civilians and coppers. I am looking at what is achieved most commonly vs what is sometimes achieved. By training from that standard we can only increase the odds of the average shooter’s survival. I also want to say that we are not guncentric. We include open hand combatives, impact weapons, and edged weapons. If all we offered was firearms and kept that as our concentration with the same people over and over I agree that a higher amount of head shots is likely to be achieved.
As far as training goes we need to look at application. I am not sure what the breakdown between my readers are as far asmilitary, police, and citizens. One of the huge disconnects I have seen between the military and police vs the citizen is the likelihood of being able to pre-deploy their weapon before a shooting. Few citizens will be in a situation where they have a pistol or long gun deployed and looking for work as police and the military do. They are more likely to have to deploy a weapon spontaneously and engage a target at close range. The same can be said of many OIS. If the attacker is so close that bringing the gun in line with your eyes is either physically impossible or tactically absurd their much more chance of a round to the pelvic girdle by default than an intentional one to the head.
When serving as troop or a police we seldom have any loved ones in tow, as a matter of fact we are on a team where everyone is supposed to possess passable skill sets. This is not the case with the armed citizen. He is unsupported and even hindered by the need to physically control another person. Also unlike those who are duty bound, the citizen is not in a position to initiate the contact. My point is the more defensive and spontaneous a shooting is the more likely a pelvic girdle shot is and the less likely a head shot is. I guess the rule of the day is to train for your most likely application. Now that I am retired from LE their is a better chance of me being robbed in the parking lot of a convenience store while I am armed with a pistol with one of my kids with me, then raiding a crack house with my SWAT team with my M4 on my shoulder. Which one do you see yourself in?
- George

 

[IndyBeerman]

Myself personally I would never target the head unless that was all I had to shoot at, my goal is a 6 inch wide area from the base of the throat to the pelvic area.

I want to put as many shots on target as possible and my opinion of trying a head shot when there are other options available is like trying to shoot the gun out of the hand of a BG, nothing more than wasting a round that you might need to save your life.

 

[Sport69]

Active shooter situations teach you that if the BG is wearing a bomb head shot it is...shut down the computer!

 

[bwframe]

Active shooter situations teach you that if the BG is wearing a bomb head shot it is...shut down the computer!

Where in the head?

 

[sgt.porter]

I fully agree with mercop. The pelvic shot is intended to bring the BG down or at very least double him over. This gives you a better opportunity to take a head shot if you still need to. But in most cases, the BG is done once the pelvis is penetrated (ever had a groinal hernia?)
We were trained that the 3 round burst on the m-16 and m-4's was designed so that you aim the first shot at the pelvis and the other 2 will hit in the chest. With the pistol, 1 in the chest, 1 in the pelvis, then focus on the head.

 

[Eddie]

My training was all police and not military training. I have always heard two different terms: "Mozambique Drill" and "Mozambique Method". The drill was taught as shooting two shots to the chest in rapid succession followed by one carefully aimed shot to the head. I received the majority of my training between 1989 and 1997 and even then the Mozambique Drill was considered to be an out of date technique. When I have heard the term Mozambique Method it was used to refer to more of a type of assassination; shooting someone twice in the chest and then putting a round in their head after they were down to make sure that they died.

 

[Sailor]

I have practiced the zipper drill. Shooting from the bottom up following the spine.

 

[Sport69]

Where in the head?

Best spot I'm told is the triangle from the nose to the mouth area if facing you. I'm sure others have heard of this, how true is this That is just what they teach.

 

[shooter521]

A relevant parallel discussion is taking place over on M4C; some very good stuff there from guys who have BTDT.

Pelvic vs Head Shots Continued - Training Observations - M4Carbine.net Forums

 

[55spartan]

Pelvic girdle shot is a highly effective shot for the first shot on an attacker when pressed for time. Mobility destroyer--- and also what do you think a 9MM or .45 would do to a bladder full of urine, if you connect there?? The concussive force of that energy transfer would have devastating effect on an attacker. I agree totally with the OP on this.