Posted on 03/04/2010 9:31:50 AM PST by Erik Latranyi
Surviving a gunfight isn't what you think it is. Don’t let conventional wisdom get you killed. A well place round to "center mass" in your attacker may not take him out of the fight. Lots of people stay in the fight after "center mass" hits, and some even win it. If you expect to win your gunfight, you have to make sure that you have effectively ended the threat of your attacker. One, two or even several well placed "center mass" shots may not do what you think it will, and learning to recognize this before you gunfight may save your life.
There is a self styled self defense “expert” under every rock, and perhaps two behind every bush, these days. If you have a pet theory on what might work on the street then you can probably find a champion for that idea who actually charges people to teach them that skill. But few of the experts out there have ever been in gunfights, and even fewer have studied real gunfights to see how things really work out when the bullets really fly for blood.
There are more misconceptions out there than I can cover in one article but the one that probably gets to me the most, even over all the caliber wars that rage interminably in the print and cyber media, is the nearly universal acceptance that shooting a miscreant “center mass” with ________(fill in your favorite make, model and caliber) shooting _________ (fill in your favorite ammunition) hyper speed truck killer is practically guaranteed to get the job done.
(Excerpt) Read more at forums.gunsamerica.com ...
The third round should be a third eye.
The first two to the heart.
JMO, of course.
“Layers of Response” by John Farnam
learn it . live it. love it.
Years ago, Jeff Cooper delineated the “Color Code” and the “Principles of Personal Defense” in an effort to provide us with a logical model for one’s thinking on the subject of mental preparedness. I’d like now to go to the next step and apply the same logic to the issue of personal appearance and demeanor, as we all agree that, in the domestic defensive environment, avoiding a fight is preferable to winning one.
Layer One: Nonattendance. The best way to handle any potentially injurious encounter is:
Don’t be there. Arrange to be somewhere else. Don’t go to stupid places. Don’t associate with stupid people. Don’t do stupid things. This is the advice I give to all students of defensive firearms. Winning a gunfight, or any other potentially injurious encounter, is financially and emotionally burdensome. The aftermath will become your full-time job for weeks or months afterward, and you will quickly grow weary of writing checks to lawyer(s). It is, of course, better than being dead or suffering a permanently disfiguring or disabling injury, but the “penalty” for successfully fighting for your life is still formidable.
“A superior gunman is best defined as one who uses his superior judgment in order to keep himself out of situations that would require the use of his superior skills.”
Layer Two: Functional invisibility. We all need to practice to art of “being invisible.” It is in our best interest to go our way unnoticed, both by potential predators and by the criminal justice system alike.
Whenever I travel, particularly to foreign countries, I endeavor to be the one that no one notices; no one recalls; no one remembers. I silently slip through the radar, leaving no trace, a nameless, faceless tourist. When in any public place, I try to be clean and well groomed, but I never wear bright colors, any kind of jewelry, or anything shiny. I smile a lot, but talk softly and as little as possible. As we say in the law enforcement business, “Courteous to everyone. Friendly to no one.”
Loud talking, bright colors, Rolex watches, etc will consistently accumulate unwanted attention. On the other end of the spectrum, tattoos, poor grooming, loud and offensive language, a slovenly appearance, etc will also garner unwelcome notice.
Layer Three: Deselection. Any successful predator has the ability to quickly screen potential victims, focusing in on the ones who look as if they will make good victims and rejecting those who either (1) look too strong for expedient victimization or (2) don’t conveniently fall into any particular category.
When invisibility fails, we need endeavor to be consistently deselected for victimization. We do this by making it a habit to appear alert, uninviting, self-confident, and strong. At the same time, we never loiter or appear indecisive. We are always in motion.
“Weakness perceived is weakness exploited!”
Layer Four: Disengagement: Our best interests are not served by any kind of engagement with potential predators. Successful disengagement involves posturing, bearing, verbalizations, and movement. It is in our best interest to disengage at the lowest reasonable force level, but we must simultaneously be prepared to instantly respond to unlawful force with superior force.
Potential predators, as they attempt verbal engagement, should be politely dismissed.Bearing and eye contact should always project strength and confidence. We should continuously be moving off the “line of force.” We should be observant in every direction, giving potential predator duos and trios the distinct impression that they will not be able to sneak up on us.
When predators are confused, they are unable to focus sufficiently to carry off their victimization. Therefore, never let a potential predator seize the agenda. Don’t answer his questions, and don’t stay in any one place very long.
Disengagement, separation, and exit are our immediate goals when we have been selected or are being seriously evaluated by predators. However, if there is to be a fight, the best one is a short one. If a predator menaces me with a gun or a knife, I know that, before it is all over, there is a good chance that I will be shot or cut. However, within that prison of circumstance, I also know that the faster I can end the fight, the less hurt I’m going to get! If there must be a fight, I must explode into action, moving smoothly and quickly, in an effort to confuse and overwhelm my opponent before he has a chance to process all the information I’m throwing at him.
Ultimately, we must “have a plan.” Potentially dangerous encounters must be thought about in advance. Decisions must be made. Skills must be practiced. Confusion, hesitation, and vacillation will always attract the attention of predators and simultaneously stimulate predator behavior.
While I am not even going to read the essay, I know from personal experience that aiming for the largest visible mass is always appropriate. Anyone who thinks they can, under duress and a severe jolt of adrenaline/fear can precisely aim and fire shots, well, hasn’t been there and done that.
While I know from experience that one indeed can and does get better at it, the adrenaline is controlled, the intent is more perfect and the execution is more precise, most who will ever shoot at another human will do so without that “benefit” of bloodied experience.....
“Some folks possess know-it-all-ass.”
I prefer to say, “Sexual genius” which equals “friggin’-know-it-all”. :-) Sounds less harsh than “know-it-all-ass”.
I've seen two rationales for the hold:
1) When a gang banger is firing into a crowd, horizontal hold causes recoil to move to the next target.
2) When making a movie poster, horizontal hold allows the whole gun plus the holder's face to occupy less square footage.
Post 49
LOL! And, if you shot him in the back it was because he was firing at you from cover and you bounced the bullet off of a steel post.
Been a loong time since I have heard that, gives me some idea of your background.
Yesterday I was working at a site where the sounds of the security shooting range could be heard.
Pop-pop.....pop.
Pop-pop.....pop.
Repeat that cycle about 50 times.
Then: BRRRRAAAAAPPPPPP....pop,pop,pop about 10 times.
I was thinking - “I sure hope he’ll on my side if the fighting starts!”
Anyone who has been in a gun fight and really scared can tell you that you loose your fine motor skills. That's why trained cops can fire 18 rounds at a bad guy who is 15 feet away and not hit him.
Ah, yes... "ricochet shootin'", honed by many hours of practice out by the cement pond. Mrs. Drysdale hates it when you and Uncle Jed do that.
Relying on the center mass strategy isn’t enough, as the article properly states. What if the only shot available isn’t what is normally considered center mass, the torso? Think “center OF mass.”
Additionally, hoping a couple or more shots to that area will do the trick can also be a problem. In using deadly force, shoot until the threat is gone. Completely gone. This thinking also defeats the problematic question of “do I shoot to kill or to wound?”
Rule 1 - He who decides we are going to have a gunfight has the initiative and the advantage. This takes away the OOD of the OODA loop. If the other guy decides you are going to be in a gunfight before you do, then you are at an almost insurmountable disavantage. All talk of technique, tactics, hardware, ammo is useless unless you maintain situational awareness and continually mentally rehearse your plan for battle.
CoM is the best bet for the initial salvo, for all the reasons listed. Your loss of fine motor skills, the opponent’s movements - all sorts of factors militate against you being able to place your shots with the sort of precision you may be used to on the range. Just getting a pill into the bad guy before he puts one into you, wherever you may hit him, improves your chances enormously.
Not all hits to the CoM are equal. Anything that does not solidly strike the upper reaches of the central nervous system or the heart directly (the ‘fatal T’) is unlikely to bring the fight to a rapid conclusion. If at first you don’t succeed, try to use whatever time time it buys you to get to cover and improve your tactical position.
If you are contemplating shifting your point of aim, I would recommend shooting lower - in the pelvic area. Lots of nerves, major blood vessels and the hip joints. Plus, it is a broad area unlikely to be covered by concealable body armor. Hits here present the second best chance of inducing shock and loss of mobility in the opponent other than hits to the ‘fatal T’.
If you are fortunate enought to survive the first two or three seconds of the battle - and I mean ANYONE, even you armchair Rambos out there - and even more miraculously get a round into the bad guy, you will have done very well indeed. Just remember that even with a ‘non-survivable’ wound, your opponent may carry the fight for several more critical seconds or minutes. Remember Platt and Matix in Miami.
And finally - SHOULDER WEAPONS! (Actually, I prefer crew-served but one has to be realistic) A sidearm is only uselful for holding off the enemy long enough to get to a REAL weapon. NEVER knowingly go into a potential gunfight with just a sidearm - I don’t care if it’s a Desert Eagle. Sidearms are NEVER a match for a rifle or shotgun. Power, sight radius, multiple points of contact with the weapon - it’s all good.
Lastly, let’s go back to the situational awareness thing. If you maintain watchful, alert situational awareness, you could likely sidestep being in a position where a gunfight is necessary. The best gunfight is the one that never starts.
Functional invisibility and disengagement are your best friends.
Nice job. Way to set off a fecal matter storm.
Lots of experts on this site. Apparently, gunfight experts are as prevalent as military historians....
Who knew?
I prefer the technique “P for Plenty”; Engage until the threat ceases to be a threat.
There are too many variables in a violent encounter to sit here and pontificate as to what will and will not work.
Practice what works for you so that it becomes engrained in your muscle memory.
Wargame the “what ifs” constantly.....
...and always carry extra magazines. Running out of rounds in a firefight is ALWAYS bad.
...of course....I could be wrong....
What could I POSSIBLY know...
RLTW
You should read it.
The author does not counsel shooters to avoid shooting CoM. He just points out that it is still hard to kill/stop someone - even if you hit them center mass.
So he says be prepared to shoot multiple shots — and keep shooting until the threat stops.
How many gunfights have you been in? Please document with links.
That was the purpose of the article, which many did not read, judging by their posts.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.