Shot Placement, in the real world

pickpocket: RE "stopping power"

Both of these concepts have been debunked...there are no such things as "stopping" or "knock-down" power. Hopefully your research uncovered that as well.
Click to expand...

Absolutely, that's why I feel comfortable with a 9mm handgun that I can hit targets COM in a variety of situations: moving, low light, simulated stress, etc. The decrease in accuracy and speed, FOR ME, is not worth carrying a bigger caliber. And, while I know that most documented gunfights involve 2 or less shots fired, I still feel better with 17 +1 in My G17; it might not be rational, but if my mind feels more at ease with more bullets in my handgun it can only help my marksmanship and performance if ever forced to fire in self defense.
 
A pistol is a pistol and a rifle is a rifle. Pistols are not as effective and are second rate to a rifle. You should master the pistol you use then you should master a few more pistols. IMHO it takes a hell of a longer time to master a pistol than a rifle, too many variables to consider. One thing is right on the money, shot placement has gotta be 95% of pistol shooting. Too much of the shooting public have a false confidence that a pistol is going to pull them out of a bind for home defence when they should use a lever action or a shotgun.
 
A central nervous system shot; a shot to the brain or upper spinal cord region will drop someone in their tracks. Hard to hit, but it works.

The most significant killing/wounding asset of a bullet is 'penetration'.

"Kinetic energy does not wound. Temporary cavity does not wound. The much discussed "shock" of bullet impact is a fable and "knock down" power is a myth.

The critical element is penetration. The bullet must pass through the large, blood bearing organs and be of sufficient diameter to promote rapid bleeding. Penetration less than 12 inches is too little, and, in the words of two of the participants in the 1987 Wound Ballistics Workshop, "too little penetration will get you killed."

Given desirable and reliable penetration, the only way to increase bullet effectiveness is to increase the severity of the wound by increasing the size of hole made by the bullet. Any bullet which will not penetrate through vital organs from less than optimal angles is not acceptable. Of those that will penetrate, the edge is always with the bigger bullet."

Source: http://www.firearmstactical.com/hwfe.htm
.
 
Yes, shot placement is vital.
But in the real world, when you are shooting at somebody and he is shooting back at you, your body is full of adrenalyne and it is not at all like what you experience on the range (Trust me on this).
Your heart races, your hand shakes, you are full of disbelief and anger at the same time.
Becuase of this, the idea that you are going to do precise, surgical shooting is bunkum.
Which is why I generally prefer a magnum or a big bore over a clip full of hornets. If my shot placement is off, I want to do as much physical damage to the other guy as possible to cease hostilities. :o
 
One of the things NOT reflected in a video game is the art of shooting, as opposed to the science. The mechanics of shooting such as shot placement and supposed commensurate damage can be replicated in a game, but human variables such as reverting to a motion learned by thousands of repetitions can not.

For example, my department has a driving simulator that is composed of the dash area of a Crown Victoria down the details such as the A/C even blowing. You have to turn the ignition to start the scenario, put it in gear and so forth. Feedback is given by three screens; one directly in front of the driver, and two offset to the sides to simulate peripheral vision. Everything would appear to be in place as it is in the real world. Even given all of these conditions, it's not unusual for deputies to fail to even be able to negotiate simple driving tasks (much less pursuits) because there is no physical feedback other than that which your eyes perceive. The speedometer might say 75mph, but failing to feel those forces on your body, deputies merrily attempt to take corners at such speed that would be difficult to negotiate at 35mph, with predictable results.

The same applies to shooting. Your body reacts the way it has been trained without conscious thought when you go into fight/flight mode. When in a position such as that of law enforcement where we have to suppress any flight reaction that might arise and force a fight response, if you are properly trained, things such as sight alignment, sight picture and a deliberate steady squeeze of the trigger to the rear will take care of themselves. If you suffer tunnel vision (which you likely will), you will probably recall seing a perfectly clear front sight superimposed on the target's center of mass.

These reactions depend on properly training yourself, and repeating the tasks of drawing, sighting and squeezing enough to ingrain them into muscle memory so that your body can draw on them when your baser instincts take control.

It's funny how the human body works sometimes.

-Teuf
 
But, but, but!!! Some video game controllers have triggers on them!:p

Seriously, though. I'm a Nintendo 64 Goldeneye master, but on the range with my 1911, I can't seem to hit water if I fall out of a boat! I think playing video games teaches you how to sit in a chair and push buttons on a little remote control.

One thing about First-Person-Shooters that I would apply to real life though: When in a high-intensity anger-management counseling session with an armed assailant, shoot until they drop their weapon (or themselves). After that, you're just wasting ammo and causing yourself grief at the end of the game...
 
In our region there is a law enforcement simulator that goes around in the back of an 18 wheeler that has full size screens and multiple shoot, don'/t shoot scenarios. The machine is hooked up to a Glock 17 and a special device works the slide and resets the trigger through compressed air. If you hit the guy on the screen, the screen freezes up.
You will be amazed at how realistic it is, and how badly your shooting is, and how your pulse goes up.

The idea that video games have anything to do with a real shooting or for that matter even a real simulator is rediculous.
 
The idea that video games have anything to do with a real shooting or for that matter even a real simulator is rediculous.
Click to expand...

I agree about video games, but as to professional simulators, they can be quite effective in teaching officers/students complex shoot/don't shoot situations. I spend time every few months on a Rangemaster simulator at my Shooting Range, and I find it of tremendous benefit to train my brain in those important situations where split second decision making is required. After I'm done with the simulator, I spend an hour at the range to work on my marksmanship.
 
As "real" as the sims are, they're still nothing like a real life armed encounter. Not even close. They have some value for practicing judgement but do nothing for shooting skills or simulating the physical or mental aspects of a real shooting. Still just a "game" for all intents and purposes.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top