Leaf, your logic isn't anywhere near effective.
Any shot to the upper torso under the conditions that you are setting is faster and more certain than a shot to the head. Heart and lungs are about five times larger than the brain, and about twice as large as the head in general. Multi taps to the head aren't anywhere near as simple and automatic as a straight line dump into the chest.
Your assertion is that trying to find the heart is a bad idea, and time consuming, but the truth is that finding the heart isn't the idea. The idea is to just put holes in the CP group and let the immediate damage shock the attacker and possibly halt the attack, and it's much easier in many ways than trying to put a shot into the head that is, in fact, not a guaranteed stop. Bleeding out over five or ten minutes is not the only way that you can disable an attacker, just taking a shot anywhere will stop many people.
There you have it. As you yourself said, you can risk missing his head or you can take a far easier try for a target five times bigger than the brain.
If we want to take it into another direction, which isn't much of an argument either, we have to look at professionals and ask them their preferences.
So far as I know, no police departments have a policy to choose head shots over body shots unless the head is the only possible target.
Take note of this. Arkansas state police, among many others, use the standard B27 target. (below. midway usa.) Passing score is 42 out of 50 hits to the seven ring.
Note that there is no provision for taking head shots, there is not even an outline to show where the brain itself is. A shot that strikes the head is counted as a zero.
One of the most important things that hasn't been accounted for is that the spinal column is the one absolute in a shooting. A shot to the spinal column that hits will buckle the attackers knees at a fraction of the speed of nerve conduction.
You implied that the purpose of your post was to put correct advise out for the public, and countering my implied bad advice. Boy, howdy. I'd like to remind you that in your own words you say that this shot depends on the skill needed to put a good shot into a section of the brain. NOT AN EASY TASK. There are numerous statements of how many 'misses', whatever that actually means during a gun battle. It's usually quoted as more than half of the shots are clear misses. The shooter failed to hit the entire body.
Think about what you have said. Making this statement on a forum is easy. Sure, I'm going to shoot the guy in the head and make him fall down immediately. Now, when the time comes, are you really going to draw your gun and take aim for the brain, and plan on several rounds before you are lucky enough to hit it? I doubt it. When faced with an attack, most people default to their lowest capacity. You will probably draw and fire at the chest.
There isn't a whole lot that really supports the case of shooting for the brain during a stressful firefight. there is much to support body shots.
Any shot to the upper torso under the conditions that you are setting is faster and more certain than a shot to the head. Heart and lungs are about five times larger than the brain, and about twice as large as the head in general. Multi taps to the head aren't anywhere near as simple and automatic as a straight line dump into the chest.
Your assertion is that trying to find the heart is a bad idea, and time consuming, but the truth is that finding the heart isn't the idea. The idea is to just put holes in the CP group and let the immediate damage shock the attacker and possibly halt the attack, and it's much easier in many ways than trying to put a shot into the head that is, in fact, not a guaranteed stop. Bleeding out over five or ten minutes is not the only way that you can disable an attacker, just taking a shot anywhere will stop many people.
There you have it. As you yourself said, you can risk missing his head or you can take a far easier try for a target five times bigger than the brain.
If we want to take it into another direction, which isn't much of an argument either, we have to look at professionals and ask them their preferences.
So far as I know, no police departments have a policy to choose head shots over body shots unless the head is the only possible target.
Take note of this. Arkansas state police, among many others, use the standard B27 target. (below. midway usa.) Passing score is 42 out of 50 hits to the seven ring.
Note that there is no provision for taking head shots, there is not even an outline to show where the brain itself is. A shot that strikes the head is counted as a zero.
One of the most important things that hasn't been accounted for is that the spinal column is the one absolute in a shooting. A shot to the spinal column that hits will buckle the attackers knees at a fraction of the speed of nerve conduction.
You implied that the purpose of your post was to put correct advise out for the public, and countering my implied bad advice. Boy, howdy. I'd like to remind you that in your own words you say that this shot depends on the skill needed to put a good shot into a section of the brain. NOT AN EASY TASK. There are numerous statements of how many 'misses', whatever that actually means during a gun battle. It's usually quoted as more than half of the shots are clear misses. The shooter failed to hit the entire body.
With a properly placed head shot however, deactivation of the main brain housing group is immediate.
Think about what you have said. Making this statement on a forum is easy. Sure, I'm going to shoot the guy in the head and make him fall down immediately. Now, when the time comes, are you really going to draw your gun and take aim for the brain, and plan on several rounds before you are lucky enough to hit it? I doubt it. When faced with an attack, most people default to their lowest capacity. You will probably draw and fire at the chest.
There isn't a whole lot that really supports the case of shooting for the brain during a stressful firefight. there is much to support body shots.