Defensive Carry banner
21 - 40 of 41 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
357 Posts
acparmed said:
Legally speaking if the BG is not wearing a vest and you opt for the head shot first it will not go well in front of a jury.
Why? I'm not trying to be a smart*** here, I'm just curious about that statement. I'd think that, if lethal force is warranted, it wouldn't matter how/where it was applied.

SSKC
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
742 Posts
If the vest wearer is not smart enough to conceal the vest, he is not real smart. Wore one for many years, daily, and it was always well concealed. Second Chance vests usually with deep cover carriers.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
726 Posts
i know i,m a little late posting on this one, but wanted to add my $.02 worth. i'm not LE, nor have i ever been in a combat situation, so i read what you guys have to say in case i ever get into a sticky situation. when i took my CCW course, my instructor (ex-LE and airborne) taught us to go for the umbilicus area, saying that anything slightly right, left, up, or down would incapacitate. i had always read COM, or double tap, or keep firing at COM until the BG was down and out. head shots harder unless you're pretty good and the BG is pretty close. i'm not sure what i'd do at this point, but if faced with a crisis, i guess i'd start with the belly button and work my way up until the mag was empty. any thoughts?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
7,085 Posts
Nomenclature is important.

older gunner said:
i'm not sure what i'd do at this point, but if faced with a crisis, i guess i'd start with the belly button and work my way up until the clip was empty. any thoughts?
Not trying to be picky but the "instructor" in me would point out that it's not a CLIP, it's a MAGAZINE or a mag. LOL, Sorry.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
726 Posts
ExSoldier762 said:
Not trying to be picky but the "instructor" in me would point out that it's not a CLIP, it's a MAGAZINE or a mag. LOL, Sorry.
hey "Ex", not to worry. i should have known better. i guess old habits die hard. somewhere i picked up the term "clip", but i do know better. thanks for the the "heads-up" any thoughts about the my scenerio?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
615 Posts
Team American said:
Is it obvious when a person is wearing body armor? I've never seen it up close.
Trying to hit a moving head at any longer ranges has to be pretty tough...the recent Texas shoot-out was fought at about 50 yards (if I recall correctly). Would the pelvic girdle or thigh bones be a legitimate target at those distances, or is that asking for WAY more trouble than you would already have on your hands?
I've noticed LEOs wearing vests and they always look a lot beefier than normal...course that may be normal for some. As for pelvic area, Bumper and I were talking about that as an alternative first shot area. With a hefty size caliber, you're likely to shatter the pelvic bone, and I don't think the BG is gonna go anywhere but down at that point. That area is certainly a larger target than a head and if you miss, the shot is headed downward. Shooting at a thigh would be about the same as trying a head shot in my opionion, and besides, it won't necessarily take the BG down for the follow through shots. :redface:
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
177 Posts
The initial shots to the chest are going to reset the BG's OODA loop and will buy you more time to line up for the headshot.

Prospector, you can not reliably incapacitate someone with a shot to the pelvis using a handgun. The bone's are a lot heftier than you think and the dish shape makes it excellent at deflecting slow moving handgun rounds. If you had a rifle, maybe. With a pistol, stick to COM.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
484 Posts
Old style vest, obvious, newer ones, not so obvious. If you double tap COM, and they don't drop, don't assume ammo/placement failure, assume vest. Shoot head or pelvis.
Bumper, I wore a vest every day for 8.5 years, and I always wore my trauma plate, but I always was a rebel....went to work without my vest once, and boy did I feel naked all day long!
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
13,587 Posts
acparmed said:
I do not advocate the "Mozambique" in self-defense scenarios involving citizens and CCW's. The two (or four) COM shots will stun and injure your opponent (if he is wearing a vest) that gives you the necessary time to place your head shot. This is what a failure to stop drill is, not an automatic headshot following your COM shots.

In all my training and experience the COM double tap (which is two controlled, sighted shots in under one second) or the hammer (which is two shots fired at close range in under 1/2 second) is the best option to use to stop an aggressor.
I teach students to fire this sequence and if a failure to stop is observed follow up with two more COM shots then carefully sight for the headshot.
I know I'm late getting into this, but it is interesting!

Acparmed,
I'm with you about the "Mozambique" in self-defense. My personal position is that the "Mozambique" is useless for anything but a skill drill, and I can't see much value in it for that. The "Mozambique" reinforces one to stand still and take on three armed BGs and some variations require a reload right out in the open. However, I suppose if I had three BGs behind me, perfectly spaced and squared off to me, perfectly still, in bright daylight and one of them was thoughtful enough to blow a whistle to let me know they were behind me and intended to begin firing at me...

A bit of a diffenence in defintions: I've always been taught that a double tap is a sighted shot followed by a rapid unsighted shot. A controlled pair is two rapid sighted shots. I never have figured out what a hammer is exactly, although I did read what it is somewhere.

I was taught the double tap at Gunsite (one sighted shot followed quickly by one unsighted shot) as a standard response. Thunder Ranch teaches two rapid sighted shots as a standard response.

I shoot a lot, about 200 rounds a week, all defensive shooting oriented. I am accurate and fast - I say that not to boast, but to say this: I find, and I think this lends support to what Acparmed teaches, that while I can shoot acceptable double taps (one sighted, one non-sighted), out to about 5 yards, it seems that one, significant practice is required to get consistent, acceptable hits and two, the skill seems to be, at least for me, rather perishable. Further, I find from time to time, I have one of those "fliers"; you know, where we blow the shot and call it a flier as if that makes it ok somehow?

Wow, that's a lot of words to say this: I am becoming more and more convinced that two rapid sighted shots have a higher probability of producing two good hits than a double tap. I realize there are some who can really do great shooting double taps, but more median shooters like police officers and civies that don't /can't/won't shoot much, would be much better served with two sighted shots instead of trying to do double taps.

Also it seems to me that sighted shots work at any distance where double taps (my definition) are range limited to about 5 yards.

My compliments, Acparmed, on what I consider wise shooting tactics.

I've already "talked" way too much, but if you guys can tolerate one more comment: A failure drill, as we all realize, is some method to incapacitate a lethal attack ASAP. I agree with what I have been taught, defensive shooting is situational driven. E.g. if two COMs don't do the job and I have a good chance of hitting the head, I'd probably do the head shot. If the head isn't available, I should immediately go to the groin/pelvid area. I do not consider a hit in the pevlic area nearly as good as a head shot, but there's a good possiblity he will go down or at least be immobilized by the pelvic shot(s). Then, I'll probably have a better shot at the head.

The method, two COM shots, assess, shoot as dictated by the situation, is sound tactics I believe. But I must qualify this by saying the assessment must be nearly instantaneous and decisive. The shot must be fired smoothly and at once if necessary. I would venture to say, that if we were to observe a well executed two COM, assess, head shot we would think it was pre-decided to fire the three shots, when reality was that there was a quick assessment and then the head shot.

One of my instructors said (may have been Clint Smith, I'm not sure though) "Take the two COM shots, look for the head, if it is up, then he is not down, he is still a threat, how long should you wait before you make the head shot?" In this scenario, you shoot two COMs, assess instantaneously, see he's still a threat so you shoot the head quickly.

Sorry guys, I talk too much.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
7,085 Posts
Verbiage

Tangle said:
A bit of a diffenence in defintions: I've always been taught that a double tap is a sighted shot followed by a rapid unsighted shot. A controlled pair is two rapid sighted shots. I never have figured out what a hammer is exactly, although I did read what it is somewhere. I was taught the double tap at Gunsite (one sighted shot followed quickly by one unsighted shot) as a standard response. Thunder Ranch teaches two rapid sighted shots as a standard response.

The method, two COM shots, assess, shoot as dictated by the situation, is sound tactics I believe. But I must qualify this by saying the assessment must be nearly instantaneous and decisive. The shot must be fired smoothly and at once if necessary. I would venture to say, that if we were to observe a well executed two COM, assess, head shot we would think it was pre-decided to fire the three shots, when reality was that there was a quick assessment and then the head shot.
According to Jeff Cooper (who originally founded GunSite as the American Pistol Institute) your description of "Double Tap" fits HIS of "Hammer."

I think I'd rather be smooth, accurate and tactically sound than "fast." IMHO, unless you're drawing against an already drawn gun (that thread has already been posted, btw), you're either going to have all the time in the world to draw....or no time at all. If you've made "Condition Yellow" (another Cooperism) a way of life, you'll have all the time you need, even if that is only moments. If you're not ready for "that moment" you could have all the time in the world and it won't be enough.

I think the Mozambique was meant for combat situations rather than civvie self defense or LEO applications.

I am becoming more and more convinced that two rapid sighted shots have a higher probability of producing two good hits than a double tap.
I agree 100%
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,213 Posts
Jumping on the bandwagon

Holy smokes! I too am on board with Tangle on this one! I have to agree with that completely.

I do the Mozambique because I feel it better simulates real firing conditions that just sitting there and cranking them out. It also has helped me increase my control over follow up shots and handling in general.

But my thinking has always been, unless it's some crazy scenario, like the one poor Mr. Wilson found himself in, put a couple right there in the COM and THEN look for the headshot. I am so glad to see someone else out there smarter than I am about these things has that same line of thinking!
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
144,518 Posts
Discussion Starter · #32 · (Edited)
Decided Not To

Decided not to interrupt the flow of this thread with that dumb photo. The topic is too important. See how mature I'm becoming? :wink:
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
20,035 Posts
I agree with Tangle and acparmed on this one, as well. I prefer a controlled pair over the double tap unless very close. I would prefer to make my first two count and assess the situation before delivering the third to the head. People do frequently "assume" that by assessing between shots 2 and 3 you are talking about taking your time (or at least too much time) for the assessment. It result should sound like three, not two plus one.

A bit of a diffenence in defintions: I've always been taught that a double tap is a sighted shot followed by a rapid unsighted shot. A controlled pair is two rapid sighted shots. I never have figured out what a hammer is exactly, although I did read what it is somewhere.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
177 Posts
never thought of a double tap that way, just figured it for two quick shots. I don't think the controlled pair has to be any slower than the double tap. Assessment doesn't have to take any time either. an assessment is the wrong word, it doesn't have to be anything more than a realization that he's not dead on the ground yet.

When i'm at the range i do not practice the mozambique or cotrolled pairs. I think getting into the habbit of shooting a set number of shots and assessing is bad. change it around. 3 chest 2 head, 4 head, 6 chest 3 head, 2 head 1 chest. Don't get into a pattern since you never know what shot will make itself available first.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
13,587 Posts
ExSoldier762 said:
I think I'd rather be smooth, accurate and tactically sound than "fast."
Absolutely! This makes such an important point. Shooting is shooting, defensive shooting is shooting (accurately of course) AND tactics.
ExSoldier762 said:
IMHO, unless you're drawing against an already drawn gun (that thread has already been posted, btw), you're either going to have all the time in the world to draw....or no time at all.
Wow! Another good point. I believe it again speaks of the importance of tactics. We of course, want to use our tactics to keep us in the "...all the time in the world to draw..." mode. But the best tactics in the world can't avoid every "...no time at all...", but hopefully we won't ever face one.

ExSoldier762 said:
If you've made "Condition Yellow" (another Cooperism) a way of life, you'll have all the time you need, even if that is only moments. If you're not ready for "that moment" you could have all the time in the world and it won't be enough.
I'm afraid my condition yellow has been pretty pale lately; time to get back on track.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
13,587 Posts
Euclidean said:
Holy smokes! I too am on board with Tangle on this one! I have to agree with that completely.
Great minds think alike! Why can't i put that green big smiley face here?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
49 Posts
Bad Guy in Body Armor

First of all, we can always hope they have one of the Point Blank vests rejected by the Marine Corps that failed the tests. Second, I like the idea of the Mozambique (Two hugs and a kiss) as my trainer said the two shots to center will (most likely) stun or cause the bad guy to pause for an instant. I also know of an L.E.O. who was hit while wearing a vest and spent several days in the hospital recovering. I don't know what caliber it was but produced a very large, very ugly bruise. He described it as akin to a sledge hammer. I have seen projectiles turned out of solid brass that were reputed to penetrate body armor, but then you face a liability, both in the use of such and perhaps if they were found in your weapon. Still, perhaps, better than dead.....................
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
27 Posts
ExSoldier762 said:
This is exactly why the "Failure to Stop" drill was invented. IOW: Two to the chest (pause--check) and one to the head makes CERTAIN they're DEAD.
this guy know what he is talking about!
just take how you com in to the mess in the first place like your walking by a bank about 50' away there are many cars coming and going and parked every where when you might hear gun shots so you get pumped up and take cover first behind a car you think that a guy that just robed a bank is going to just walk out and get into his car. HELL NO! he is going get out side and run like hell to his carif you think you can make a runing head shot take it but my self would go for the mass in the body cuz if you miss you know he is going to unload his mag on you well he is still runing. but if you shoot in the mass and make a hit. he is going to ether fall down and give up or get shocked and don't know what to do and stumable around a little before he unloadeds his clip. plus that shot you made should have been with +p any way. (this guy prob got the cheapest body armer he could find on the internet class 1a stuff and a 45 +P wold go about 3" though that armeryou might not kill him but if a bullet is inside of him he would have to go to the hospital where by law they would have to call the poilce for a GSW "gun shot wound" by law) a boddy shot will win inless you can pull off a head shot in that 20 fett out the door to his getaway car.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13 Posts
Look at the test specs for a level IIIA (+P 9 mm, 45 ACP, and 44 Mag) the vest can deflect up to 1.73 inches and still pass. That deep a dent over the heart will certanly get the BG's attention. I was taught to keep firing until the BG drops, all being quick aim, thowing lead is a wast, aim all, keep it up until your target is down. I heard from a reliable source of a BG being shot 6 or more times (probably dead on 1st) and the court (hearing) finding for the GG. Simply said, I was scared for my life, and he kept moving.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,706 Posts
RazorWire-
I heard from a reliable source of a BG being shot 6 or more times (probably dead on 1st)
I have a VHS tape titled "Deadly Effects; what bullets do to bodies" (highly recommended to all who carry) in which they show the body of a BG shot 27 times with 9mm and 4 with 12 ga. slugs (one clearly exiting between the shoulder blades taking out the spine and the one that probably put him down) and don't forget the BG in the Miami FBI shoot out that did most of the killing took a "non-survivable" hit in the opening seconds of the fight, yet went on killing agents for several minutes. I do not expect a single shot, or even a couple shots to do the trick, I am of the mind set to shoot till he hits the ground, multiple attackers get tricky, double taps all round, then hit anyone still vertical again??

Also remember; what you know before an incident is admitable in court, so something like “Deadly Effects” can be used to explain to a jury why you used multiple shots in a defensive shooting.
 
21 - 40 of 41 Posts
Top