COM vs. Abdomen Targeting

Pelvic Girdle

Some of the active duty guys that I have worked with say that they have started aiming for the pelvic girdle to "put down" insurgents. Who am I to disagree? It makes sense to me. There are a lot of large blood vessels, arteries, major nerves plus heavy load bearing skeletal structures in the pelvic girdle. A home defense load of 00 or #1 buck at the belt buckle would be devastating.
 
Thanks for all the replies. This has been a very interesting and enlightening discussion.

I don't know whether DM2 is a troll or not, but the many posts and his replies spawned a lot of interesting discussion both on the original thread and on this one. Interestingly, through all those pages of words nobody on the original thread questioned his credentials. I'm not saying anything about whether he is legit or not, just that nobody on his thread questioned that.

As to the efficacy of abdomen shots, he does not advocate that; it's just something I was thinking about. I have talked to a couple of Rangers who target abdomens in close quarter combat when innocents are in the vicinity.

In an urban environment with neighbors close by it makes sense to try to minimize possible unintended casualties as well as optimizing take-down effect. Also the effect of having a gun pointed at the jewels is apparently disturbing to most BGs, though I haven't tried that personally.

I appreciate all the good input. I love TFL for its members thoughtfulness, professionalism, common sense and politeness. Kudos to TFL's moderators for keeping TFL the greatest gun forum on the internet.
 
I've had to draw twice. Both times I was aiming dead betwwen the nipples. Well my closest guess to where that would be. You basically are aiming at the heart and lungs. Besides the brain and spine those are the best targets. They are also easier to hit.

The abdomen is good if you can place a shot in the stomach or liver. Other wise chances are you aren't hitting anything "vital." If you aren't hitting anything vital the other guy can do a lot of damage. Just look at Platt in Miami. That guy should have stopped from the pain. He didn't. Your bad guy might be just as determined.
 
Deadmeat2 a Troll? I don't know. I'm not going to register for the forum where he posted to see whether Deadmeat2 has posted anything more or the responses to his posts.
Click to expand...

Can't say for sure if he is a troll or not and on the same note can't state whether he is former LE working a morgue.

He did state he was going to stop posting due to in his words folks arguing about the good old caliber wars.

It was quickly obvious when that poop was first posted on the internet that deadmeat2 was a troll, and the entire thing an elaborate fabrication.

Shortly thereafter, this particular body of work began to be widely cited as an authoritative source of information concerning ballistics.

You want to suck on that teat, go ahead. But it's crap.
Click to expand...


Any proof to the above quote other than your word/opinion/thoughts?
 
Another "against" reason for not going for the abdomen...

Lack of vital structures/organs means rapid incapacitation is by no means assured.
 
I read a wonderful article on Terminal Ballistics written by a former LEO who now works in a morgue.
Click to expand...

We have discussed this before and it has had some mixed views on authenticity and accuracy.
http://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=293788&highlight=terminal+ballistics+morgue

So before thinking this is such a great article, do consider that there are those problems plus problems of the data.

He writes about first-hand witnessing of many, many gun shot deaths and the evidence those leave as to caliber, placement and bullet type.
Click to expand...
Also note problems with your own perspective. The guy likely did not witness a single death. You see, coroners and medical examiners show up after the deaths have occurred. So this guy isn't seeing what is going on premortem and antemortem (at around the time of death). He knows people are dead, but not necessarily how quickly their deaths resulted or how much carnage was done before death.

As a cop, he may have witnessed some gun-shot deaths, but generally speaking, no cop ever witnesses very many gunshot deaths over their entire careers and of those that witness people dying from GSWs, even few witness the GSWing event.

I see an average of 8.2 autopsies per day/365 days per year, and I can tell you that when the chips are down, there's nothing that beats a 12-gauge.
Click to expand...
Here, the author is sort of fudging. The numbers of autopsies makes it sound like the guy is doing them and he isn't. He may see 8.2 autopsies a day like the head of my auto service place sees about 70 cars a day.

What does 8.2 autopsies a day look like logistically? That is about 3000 a year and the offices that run that many are staffed with 10-15 forensic pathologists to handle the load (on average) plus a large administrative staff. Nobody works 24/7/365. At best, the guy signs off on the reports and so likely isn't even witnessing all the autopsies first hand.
http://www.npr.org/buckets/news/2011/01/coroner-stats/county-table.php?year=2005

Looking at 8.2 autopsies a day another way, how many are actually gun-shot related? Heck, the FCME in Atlanta has a pretty heavy load, but maybe only 1/3 of the autopsies are homicide/suicide-related and obviously not all of those are going to be firearms-related. So the notion of the oh-so impressive number of 8.2 autopsies a day comes down to 2-3 folks who might have died intentionally and some lesser number that were firearms-related.

The guy is throwing out the 8.2 a day because it is the only number he may have (assuming it was even real) because he doesn't actually have any quantified terminal ballistic information.
 
Umm the spinal cord is part of the CNS.
Click to expand...

Technically yes. However the entire spinal cord is part of the CNS but hits to the lower spinal cord will not force a stop. So we either have to separate the spinal cord from the brain while talking about the CNS or we can't say that hits to the CNS will force a stop.
 
Yes the entire spinal cord is a part of the CNS. The entire spinal column is not but the cord is. At least that was the right answer on USMLE Steps 1, 2, 3 and ABIM exam.
 
actually I would say the spinal column is a part of the axial skeleton as it is made of bone. but the cord is squishy grey stuff.
 
Basic rules of thumb I've been taught for when to go for pelvic shots:

1) When the attacker is armed with a contact weapon, and stopping him from closing negates his ability to continue the attack;

2) When it appears he might have armor, as chest hits had no effect, and head shots might be harder to achieve than pelvic;

3) Not so much shooting, but when covering a BG who has surrendered -
a) Covering pelvis allows continuous scan of both his hands, which are what will kill you, and his waistline, which is where he's most likely to have other weapons concealed;
b) Angle is downward, which is generally good for bystander safety;
c) Reports are that most BGs, though they might not show fear of getting shot, in general, are very afraid of getting shot in the cajones, and a weapon aimed at their groins has (reportedly) chilled some out rather quickly.
 
MLeake, put aside your interesting input, what you meant are "cojones". "Cajones" can be translated by "drawers ". Hope you don't mind the correction, it just made me chuckle.
 
Im going COM because there are the most vital stuctures of the body there. If I miss the heart I could hit lungs, pulmonary arteries/viens, Abdominal Aorta, Superior and Inferior Vena Cava, Subclavian arteries/viens and a slew of other things.
--Abdomen shots do not offer these opportunities. Imho, Im shooting for COM, if that fails and I believe a can make the shot-- HEAD, and then I would go for lower abdomen/pelvis if the HEAD was not available after the COM failure. Remember COM becomes whatever is exposed on the BG when he's behind cover. If the only target exposed is the leg then that becomes COM, imo.
 
A couple of two to three rounds COM, followed instantly by a head shot(s), if the head is still there when the gun gets there.

The pelvic shots dont make a lot of sense to me. If you are lucky and they do happen to go down right off, that still hasnt shut down their brain or trigger finger. Youre still in mortal danger until you finish the job.

Size wise, the head really isnt all that much smaller than the pelvic girdle either, so why go for a target that isnt likely to instantly end the match?

At reasonable and likely distances, head shots are not really all that hard to make, even while moving.
 
Technically yes. However the entire spinal cord is part of the CNS but hits to the lower spinal cord will not force a stop. So we either have to separate the spinal cord from the brain while talking about the CNS or we can't say that hits to the CNS will force a stop.
Click to expand...
Well if you want to get technical and really want to shut down all extremities you'd need to hit the spinal cord above C-7 which is at the base of the neck. Hitting at a line at the nipples will be below T-4 which probably won't shut down the arms.
Of course hitting any where on the spinal cord will stop them from chasing you.;)
 
Nordeste, thanks for the corrections.

I guess I was caught with my cajones down; I should have said cojones...
 
Interestingly, through all those pages of words nobody on the original thread questioned his credentials
Click to expand...

Not his credentials, because there was no way to validate or invalidate those. But I challenged his veracity, which prompted a muddled response and brush-off. Still, most folks continued to lap up his schtick as he driveled it out. You could have sold the Brooklyn Bridge. Twice. To the same guys.
 
The spine is an vital structure as are the aretires clustered around it. I am aware of a case where a big healty 20+ year old male went from 'berserker' to unconscious in about three minutes--and dead in about three more--over a lucky stick with a $3 truck stop folder.

My opinion is that the centerline of your opponent's body, at whatever angle it presents, makes the best target. Destroy the spinal column and it hardly matters whether you hit him high or low.
 
Here is another way it was explained to me for targeting different areas:

Head - The "electrical" area, if there is no power then things stop working real quick

Body - The "hydraulic" area, loss of fluid means things stop working

Pelvis/legs - The "mechanical" area, if the wheels fall off the car isn't going anywhere
 
I remember reading an article by Massad Ayoob in which he states that he usually keeps his sidearm trained on the groin of the suspect. He mentions the fact that it is an extreme psychological factor, and that a bullet shattering the pelvic girdle is going to immediately and severely hamper mobility and probably put the BG on the ground.
Click to expand...

Interesting quote. About 35 or 40 years ago, one of my closest buddies and shooting partner was a firearms instructor for the State Police of the particular state we were residing in at the time. He always emphasized keeping the sidearm trained on the groin area of a suspect for exactly the same reason as mentioned in the quote. As a matter of fact, when he was teaching firearm defensive handguns to women students who were not LEOs, it always seem to hit home to his students when he would teach his psychology of holding a gun to the groin area.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top