2 to the chest, 1 to the groin...

Status
Not open for further replies.
Yes, that's what I'm going to do. Beg for my life, beg for wife and loved ones lives!!

Me and my family would look like a covey of quail being spooked by a hunting dog. Everyone run for your lives, in different directions. Let the bad guy choose who he wants to robb, molest and kill.

Sorry pal, not on my watch!! I will take the fight to him or them if my family is in danger. Gun or no gun and the courts can bite me! :mad:
 
Well maybe where you all live BGs don't wear BP proof, but they do around here. Iv'e seen it and read about it.

I've thought about this, and have so practiced this. Take all the time needed as fast as it takes to hit him between the eyes. He can shoot at me quickly, but I'm sticking to my strategy.
 
Failure to stop drills

When attempting to stop a threat, you must use lethal force, if deadly force has been applied, as best as you are trained, than continue to employ until it works. If you has fired a pair to the chest and the threat does not stop his movement, you should be moving to cover, preferably backward, to build a reactionary gap. A drugged up meth-head "may" not stop his movement until something is incapacitated. This is where the pelvic-gertal shot comes into play. It is a viable means of stopping the forward movement of an attacker but as stated before,"IT IS NOT AN ALWAYS THING" nor does it replace the the need to train hard and train right.

I am not a lawyer, CC instructor nor am I a EMT or MD/DO.

Failure to stop drills are taught many ways by many juristictions. You need to learn what your local laws state. Any one who says that the Pelvicgertal shot is not taught or should not be taught might have a bit of tunnel vision. remember that the low shot is not the first round or rounds employed just another way to stop the threat from closing the gap and getting with-in arms distance.
 
So you're at 15 yards and he's wearing body armor. Two to the chest didn't work. What's your next course of action? You're really going to try a head shot on a moving target at 15 yards? you said it yourself. 7 yards and in. No problem. The pelvic girdle shot is just an option. Although he still may be a stationary threat Trigger, he's not moving around anymore and it gives you options. Like Trio said, it's a tactic that can be utilized. Two to the body, one to the head is always taught first. There is no right and wrong. On the east coast we train with shields constantly. I took classes instructed by LAPD Swat and they weren't crazy about the amount of shield work that we do. NYPD ESU swears by them. It's just different schools of thought. East coast. West coast. Out here we teach the pelvic girdle as an option that's all. The bottom line is that we win the gunfight.
 
you should be moving to cover, preferably backward,
Click to expand...
No, I wasn't designed to move backward.

I'll be moving offline at an angle from the target, and firing the entire time until he is no longer a threat.

COM, head, pelvis, multiple rounds or magazines, even beating him with an empty gun-whatever works to stop him/them.
 
+1 center of mass for initial shots. Most of the delicate, fragile stuff is here; lots of blood vessels, blood resevoirs. Under stress, it will be the easiest target to hit, and bad guys almost never wear body armor. The head is a very difficult target to hit with a sidearm unless it's sitting still, especially during an adrenaline dump. The pelvic girdle is a very effective target area, as it is large, full of blood and nerves, and supports mobility. Even someone hopped up on anything you care to mention cannot stand or move effectively with no physical support.
 
The head is a pretty small and mobile target to hit. I believe in aiming center mass working down to the pelvic region and to keep firing until the threat stops. People have been now to take multiple bullet hits to the torso without effect but a broken pelvis, hop socket, or other support structure shouild immobilize him. I do train for headshots too for the "Hostage situation" but I think if the person was attacking me a headshot would be very, very difficult.
 
If someone is coming in my front or back door, a head shot is going to be in line with a front or back neighbor's living-room. A shot to the pelvis, if it misses, is most likely going into turf.

My home defense first shots are going to be aimed at the pelvis.
 
Interesting idea...

So, how about one with the baseball bat to the chest,

then maybe mix it up, one to the groin to try to keep the target from

collapsing before shot #3 back on mass...
 
If someone is coming in my front or back door, a head shot is going to be in line with a front or back neighbor's living-room. A shot to the pelvis, if it misses, is most likely going into turf.

My home defense first shots are going to be aimed at the pelvis.
Click to expand...

Interesting idea...

So, how about one with the baseball bat to the chest,
Click to expand...

I do keep a short staff by the front door, but there is no room to swing a bat. I would be limited to thrusts and "butt strokes."

In Michigan, one may shoot as the BG is in the process of breaking in. I intend to shoot before they have complete access. :)
 
You want to tell me where I said that? I think I was clear enough.
Click to expand...

What you were saying is that when protecting one's loved ones, one should act in accordance with your personal morality---even though one would otherwise be acting within the law.

Your statement was a condemnation and severe admonishment of those who see things differently---especially when it comes to having the proper mindset necessary to win the fight and protect themselves and loved ones.

Yes, I'm for retreating and avoiding the problem--just not voluntarily placing myself in the context of being a criminal's intellectual and physical inferior (in his eyes) to meet standards as strict as yours. So strict that even the justice system doesn't impose them. :cool:

I imagine that being in a potentially lethal situation would be problematic enough without someone, at the bureaucratic level, placing the added burden of retreat, begging, and "everything possible" (by bureaucrat standards) upon an already highly stressed victim. Don't you? ;)
 
Last edited:
You guys are a bunch of bad dudes! No “BG” is going to stand a chance against y’all. Do you think it might even be fun to see what your beloved 357/40/45 would do to a “BG”? Personally, I don’t even want to contemplate where I would shoot another human being if I was forced to do so. And I suspect that if any of you do have the supreme misfortune of having to defend yourself with lethal force, you won’t stand there coolly and surgically aiming your shots as if you were James Bond. So what exactly is the point of this thread? If you want to shoot “BGs”, as WildAlaska said, go join the Army.
 
If ya don't want to find out, don't roust me.

I probably won't want to waste my range ammo on some BG's mangy @$$.

He'll probably wish he got shot, if I don't teach him a lesson he'll never

remember.

I don't do tired, cranky, and just got woke up well.
 
Try vertical tracking next time you are at a range where you can use the technique. You start firing from the level the gun clears the holster and as long as the threat is there you continue firing as the pistol moves up to the center of mass and maybe even to the head. Then back to the chest for several shots and down to the pelvic girdle so long as the threat persists. This of course if you have that much bad guy to shoot at and if the threrat still presents itself. Of course, I would hope if you had time to get off as many shots as that would be, you would be moving and seeking cover and maybe be behind it pronto.
 
Fracturing the pelvic bone is touted as a way to stop someone from advancing by collapsing their skeletal support structure. It does do that. What it won't do is prevent return fire. That's probably not a good thing :p
 
huntinaz said:
So if you think a low center mass shot is worthless, are only head shots effective then because that's the only place you can cause "massive CNS damage?" Why bother with 2 to the chest then? I acknowledged in my original post that a high CNS shot is the most effective way of stopping somebody right now. But I don't think that is necessarily the first place you should aim. Sometimes yes, sometimes no. I'm saying in general, a low center mass shot is a good spot to hit somebody.
Click to expand...
This thread reminds me why I don;t spend any time in this part of the site. You opened up this thread asking for opinions, and then every opinion that doesn't agree with your new-found wisdom you argue with.
That's a great way to stifle discussion, but not a good way to learn anything.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top