COM?

Tell your RSO to go back to reading Soldier of Fortune.

Yes, a pelvic hit can be an option, but as the guy is falling down he is still pulling the trigger.

A COM may not stop him from pulling the trigger either, but I will prefer to take this shot over the pelvic shot.

Usually the pelvic shot is taught as an alternative to the head shot in the "two to the body, one to the head". Instead it would be "two to the body, one to the groin".
 
Okay, a couple of problems here. As far as shooting at the pelvic girdle, while it may drop the threat to the ground, it does nothing to eliminate the threats ability to continue to shoot at you which should be your #1 goal. Knocking out the hydraulics or central nervous system is the only way to make sure that you eliminate a threat.

As far as the "technique" of two shots to the pelvis and then continue to fire as you draw the gun upward...this is an improper technique of drawing from a holster. A handgun should be drawn straight up from the holster, rotated 90 degrees and pushed forward into the firing position. The problem with drawing and sweeping the gun up is that if you always do that you may find yourself in a situation where the threat can block your arms as they raise up from a low position. By keeping your weapon close to your body, rotating and pushing out you can make viable hits on your threat with the gun close to your body until it is pushed all the way out; you are always in a good firing position to make good hits. Just my 2 cents.
 
Buckhammer, In a nutshell... TIME is the only reason I choose COM first with a follow up head shot. I can, in less time, acquire COM in my sights. My first 2 shots are to be rapid fired... I won't even know if the first shot was enough. But following the second shot I expect the threat to have deviated from his initial itinerary at least a little bit. If still making forward progress I have my gun raised already and have assessed the situation while looking down the barrel which is still up and ready and easily pointed for a head shot... *hopefully*...
Brent
 
Reality

Okay, a couple of problems here. As far as shooting at the pelvic girdle, while it may drop the threat to the ground, it does nothing to eliminate the threats ability to continue to shoot at you which should be your #1 goal. Knocking out the hydraulics or central nervous system is the only way to make sure that you eliminate a threat.

As far as the "technique" of two shots to the pelvis and then continue to fire as you draw the gun upward...this is an improper technique of drawing from a holster. A handgun should be drawn straight up from the holster, rotated 90 degrees and pushed forward into the firing position. The problem with drawing and sweeping the gun up is that if you always do that you may find yourself in a situation where the threat can block your arms as they raise up from a low position. By keeping your weapon close to your body, rotating and pushing out you can make viable hits on your threat with the gun close to your body until it is pushed all the way out; you are always in a good firing position to make good hits. Just my 2 cents.
Click to expand...

My thoughts exactly!

I have taught that Punch Draw since 1980.

In a training class I attended (10 years ago?) the guest speaker was Dr. Martin Fackler, the class attendees were all firearms instructors.

The question was asked "What is your opinion of pelvic girdle shots, Dr." the question was asked by a instructor who advocated this aiming point, it was on the Departments target.

Dr. Fackler said "The pelvic girdle is the largest bone mass in the body, pistol rounds would just make holes in it" he went on to say the top few inches of the spine, or the brain stem were the only guaranteed instant stop portions of the body.
 
Shooting at the pelvic girdle is a tool in the arsenal. I'm not aware of any reputable trainer teaching that the pelvic girdle shot should be taken in preference to a COM shot, just that it's an option that one should be aware of.
Click to expand...

The late Jim Cirillo wrote of this as a valid option/alternative to starting with the COM based on his and his unit's experiences with it. It was particularly well suited he stated for an LEO holding someone at gun point since you are able to see the suspects hands when focused on the pelvic region and cannot readily do so when focusing on COM. As we know, hands kill.

In his book he did not say write off the COM but that he saw the benefit of the pelvic shot first.

Has it replaced COM across the board, no. At least not for civilians. Guys who present themselves as Special Forces may say different and are in an entirely different environment if they are. If your two shots to the COM fail though you are going to need to switch to a higher or lower target. The pelvis may not be as reliable an area to rapidly stop someone compared to the head but it sure is an easier target to hit.
 
If your two shots to the COM fail though you are going to need to switch to a higher or lower target.
Click to expand...

The problem with that is that most people (including me) arent going to stop shooting to see if their first two shots have been effective. It is a pretty basic principle to shoot till the threat has been eliminated. The only 100% way to eliminate a threat is through physiological means. The only physiological reasons why a threat will stop shooting are because you damaged multiple organ systems, knocked out the body's hydraulic system or you damaged the central nervous system; none of which can can be accomplished with a pelvic shot. Attempting to knock a threat out of a fight through pain and psychological means has proven to be unpredictable at best. While a pelvic shot might put your threat on the ground and hurt like hell, it does nothing physiologically to stop his trigger finger.
 
The problem with that is that most people (including me) arent going to stop shooting to see if their first two shots have been effective. It is a pretty basic principle to shoot till the threat has been eliminated.
Click to expand...

Which is why Gabriel Suarez's advice on the matter has made excellent sense to me. There is no pause between 2 COM shots and the following head shot. You make the two COM shots and simply bring the gun back to where the head should be instead of the chest. If it is there then he is still standing so shoot. It it is not then something has changed and additional shots may or may not be needed but at the minimum you must re-evaluate the situation.

Suarez is also a former pupil of Cirillo and did discuss the pelvic shot in his writings. He seemed to be more focused on it with regards to a LEO holding a suspect at gunpoint for the reasons I explained above.

The thing is, if two shots have hit COM with no noticeable effect then the odds plummet pretty rapidly that additional shots in the same area will have any better results in a short enough time to prevent the offender from returning the favor. He may be wearing body armor or he may be loaded up on pharmaceuticals. He may have not been hit in a vital enough area which combined with mental state did not cause him to give up the fight and at this point adrenaline and all its "benefits" kick in resulting in him becoming a bullet sponge until he either bleeds out or you get lucky and take out the CNS. Whichever is the cause of his not going down you now need to change your tactics because your odds of success are not increasing with more of the same.

Attempting to knock a threat out of a fight through pain and psychological means has proven to be unpredictable at best. While a pelvic shot might put your threat on the ground and hurt like hell, it does nothing physiologically to stop his trigger finger.
Click to expand...

Putting him on the ground though significantly improves your chances of escaping. When the gunfight is on the most important thing is to NOT BE SHOT. To that end distance is your friend. Preventing him from moving after you or others, inhibiting his ability to shoot you and allowing you a much greater chance to escape may not be as good as an instant stop but it is a far cry better than missing his head should the COM have failed. In addition if we are talking about an attacker using something besides a firearm you have now effectively ended the fight. Distance is always the law abiding citizen's friend.
 
Personally I practice 2 to the COM immediately followed by 1 to the head with no pause (assuming a head is there when I line up where it should have been).

I see the reasoning behind the pelvic and am not going to say it is wrong. If I couldn't get the head shot I would go for the pelvic but what I choose to practice is 2 to the COM and 1 to the head.
 
if anybody has actually shot at anybody's head it is an incredibly hard target to hit. even with a carbine sized rifle. people move their heads around ALOT, especialy if you are pointing a gun at them or they are walking.

we were taught to aim com x2 then 1 thru the mouth. the mouth area is lower on the head, and thus there is less movement.

i looked up alternatives to the 3rd/hear shot and found the pelvic girdle.

it is supposedly the single most painfull place on the body to be shot
 
Where is this shooting taking place?

Talking about shooting this part of the body, then this other part, two followed by one?

Imagine opening the door of your vehicle! late at night, 2AM, the far end of a large parking lot, the only space available at 6PM, when you arrived.

"I need that vehicle more than you!" Then you see the gleam of light on the blade, he is 15 ft away, stepping over a pile of trash some one had dumped behind your Jeep! Your Glock 19 comes on to target, as you have done a thousand times on ranges, a brief blink of green dots, bulk of the man, with the street light the other side of the parking lot behind him.

One, two, three, four shots, your ears ringing, your pulse 90 BPM +, the knife swinging man, down in the rubbish, screaming curses at you!

You do not have a clue were he is hit, or even if you hit your target at all!

"911 emergency, Police/Ambulance or Fire Service" Listen to your reply on tape!

Counting shots, picking parts of the head to hit? You have to be joking!
 
Picking spots of the head to shoot or any body part just a suggestion of sorts. If your going to aim in on the head, mays well pick a spot. Aim small miss small. In my post I put in 2 very key words, 'situation dictates.' Not every situation is going to be one of which you can be like 'oh this is chapter 7 of Tactics for Dummies.'

we were taught to aim com x2 then 1 thru the mouth. the mouth area is lower on the head, and thus there is less movement.
Click to expand...

The bottom/mouth area is also in line with the spinal cord, brainstem etc, which when broken causes the ever so famous knee buckling dead on the spot shot. We call it the tbox, and its drawn on our targets for our EMP and movement shoots. While not a hostile scenario, youd be surprised how many succesful hits there are even while on the move.

-Max
 
Counting shots, picking parts of the head to hit? You have to be joking!
Click to expand...

No. We are not joking. You do write pretty fiction though.

There have been people killed by attackers wearing body armor who did not respond to the old COM shots. It has happened. There have also been several public rampage shootings where the shooter wore a vest.

Nobody is saying stand there and count one, two, three. The purpose of practice is to develop an automatic response where counting and in depth analyzing is not required. When the decision to shoot is made on a snap basis I know from long practice that two are going straight at the center of the threat and I am automatically raising the gun to the head level for the third and taking the shot; if a head is still there.

Perhaps you have never done any repetitive training so you cannot appreciate what actually can be accomplished with it. It is real though and applies to a host of activities. You can do it, you just need to practice.
 
I was taught by my instructor to shoot for the pelvis when unexpectedly attacked at bad-breath distance with gun or knife.

His rationale was that a draw followed by holding the pistol in retention at the hip, canted a few degrees away from the mid-body, naturally permits placing shots on the pelvis more quickly than any other target, while protecting the pistol from a grab. The hits are expected to inhibit the BGs mobility, particularly if bone is shattered, permitting getting out of range of a knife, and reducing the ability of a BG with a gun from firing accurately, ESPECIALLY if you sidestep off the X while executing the maneuver.

I have practiced this quite a bit, and the shots naturally go where expected. If the BG does not fall, one can probably run, or step aside and progress into the Zipper.

A bad-breath distance attack does not offer much in the way of options (unless you are H2H capable), so while pelvic shots are not infallible in stopping the threat, they may be the best option available, after which you may have the choice of running, or placing shots elsewhere.

This was taught me by an instructor who customarily carries a .38 and who taught me while using a 9mm, so he evidently thought these calibers were enough gun. In a previous thread on this subject, there was outright skepticism that these calibers would reliably do enough damage to be effective, and I concede that a heavier one would be preferable to shatter pelvic bone.

However, I think it is important to bear in mind that this defense is designed to get the all important first hit under difficult circumstances, and a pelvic shot is the best chance of doing so in the circumstances, as that is where the pistol initially points when drawn. It also provides time and space for further evasion. It is not designed primarily to attain a one or two shot absolute stop, which is in any case uncertain with this and other points of aim.

The zipper has been promoted as an effective defense because it permits placing multiple shots on target as soon as the gun leaves the holster and on it's way to COM and aimed fire without losing any time (with practice). It is a natural progression from the retention shots I described. Just remember to MOVE as you shoot!

"It is an absolute must, IMHO, to be able to make [uninterrupted] hits all the way throughout your draw stroke.....one handed or two. .... and zipper them up[wards] " Sweatnbullets

Also:
http://www.defensivecarry.com/vbull...s-battle-concealed-handgun-permit-holder.html post 29 & after. (Great thread throughout).

C
 
The SF guy is correct for the combat situation, the pelvic girdle area is not protected as well as the chest area (COM armored vest protection) on a combat ready soldier. I doubt that you or I would ever encounter a BG wearing a armored vest in the parking lot of our local shopping center.
 
Probably not gonna find too much armor on badguys in A-Stan or Iraq either, for that matter.

One of the benefits of the "low ready" is the ability to start shooting well before you get to perfect center of mass. Basically, your target area is about 3-5" wide and starts at the crotch and goes straight up to the noggin. Just shoot your way up. Of course, this isn't an application for all situations/environments....just relates to the "pelvic girdle" concept.
 
Not much significant to add here. I think someone probably got their wires crossed. I will say that in the event you are attempting to secure subjects for interrogation, I can see taking the wheels out from underneath them so they can be questioned later. Maybe that is what he was alluding to. Failure drills aside, COM is still the current, and correct, methodology AFAIK.
 
The zipper has been promoted as an effective defense because it permits placing multiple shots on target as soon as the gun leaves the holster and on it's way to COM and aimed fire without losing any time (with practice). It is a natural progression from the retention shots I described. Just remember to MOVE as you shoot!

"It is an absolute must, IMHO, to be able to make [uninterrupted] hits all the way throughout your draw stroke.....one handed or two. .... and zipper them up[wards] " Sweatnbullets
Click to expand...

I'm sorry, but there is nothing fast about the "zipper" technique. First, you have to draw your weapon up to get it out of the holster. By the time the barrel clears the holster you are almost in position to rotate the gun 90 degrees and push it forward to shoot, so why complicate things? Once the barrel rotates 90 degrees it can be fired at any time (ie the BG is too close to fully push out the gun). The same can not be said about the zipper technique and firing from low ready. Drawing, making a conscience effort to push the gun to low ready and shoot up from low ready up to COM would take more time and effort then drawing the weapon correctly and putting meaningful shots on COM.
 
Farnam was still teaching this in 2006, when he taught it to me... people tend not to just stand there when they perceive you are aiming a gun at them, after all. They duck, and if you're aiming high, your target may disappear. My high school basketball coach many years ago taught us to look at an opponent's belt buckle area when playing defense, so as not to get faked out. Coach always said that where his belt buckle is going, the rest of him will go too.

And I always agreed with Cirillo, in that a low aiming point lets you see more of what the prospective shootee is doing with his hands.

lpl
=====
http://www.defense-training.com/quips/2000/15Nov00.html

15 Nov 00

Aiming point:

I am now teaching students, when shooting at a standing human, to put the first round into the navel, than move upward into the thoracic triangle with subsequent shots. We're doing this, because placing one's front sight immediately on the upper chest of an attacker makes it very difficult to track the target when he subsequently ducks and/or sidesteps.

When the front sight goes immediately to the zone just below the neck, and the felon suddenly ducks, the shooter is left with a blank sight picture! He must then drop his sights and search for the target. When the front sight goes no further up than the navel before the first shot is fired, no matter how the felon moves, he can't get away from follow-up shots.

I've been teaching it this way for some time now, but the technique was critically substantiated when we had students engage the famous Bob Berry "Ducking Target" during a training program in Pennsylvania several weeks ago. Students who automatically put their front sights too high invariably lost the target.

Several friends who teach the same thing call it the "Zipper Technique." Fair enough!

/John
==========================

//Dr Jim Williams, an emergency-room surgeon, presented a wonderful class on bullet placement. He has done a good deal of work on the subject, and his conclusions were confirmation that we're teaching this subject correctly. For example, we learned that lower-abdominal wounds result in significantly more fatalities than do penetrating chest wounds! The "zipper" technique that we are currently teaching fits in with what Dr Williams has seen. Lower-abdominal wounds are debilitating and disorienting in the short term and fatal in the long term. Bill Hickok was right all along!// - http://www.defense-training.com/quips/2006/23Jan06.html
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top