A new head shot nuance

This week I shot the local close range match, that I have described previously. It's always fun. Eric bases it on real world events for which he had videos. The new thing for me was a head shot target addition. Eric says it comes from Gunsite and is a wedge shaped area in the center of an IDPA target. As most know, IDPA changed its head shot rules with the circle addition. With this wedge, if you get a shot inside the wedge, the target is neutralized and you don't have to fire anymore shots, even if the COF calls for more.

The problem is whether to take a tad extra time to hit that or a faster two COM shots. Most of our stages had two strings, so you could try each if this target type was part of it. I found that for the close targets I would attempt the head to see if I could do it (yes) and for the farther ones - COM.

Some observations - I carry on my left hip OWB as that fits my sterling physique. So I have a cover garment that I sweep away with my hand as I go for the gun. Some folks have a cover over the gun - as in appendix. That seemed a touch slower and I saw it screw up a few times. Not to start an AIWB debate but I'm not happy with having to use two hands most of the time. Carrying with only one good hand (broken wrist) for a bit, I want to only use one hand. Debate among yourselves.

Shot my Glock 26 with Trijcon night sights. It is a great gun and had the close distances (only one shot at 15 yards), it is comparable in accuracy to the longer full sized guns. Perfectly controllable even with Hornady Critical Duty +P. The only downside was capacity in the sense with some of the four to 5 opponent targets, more rounds would be nice. Are that many targets realistic - Eric used real incidents where the good guy did make it through the fight (sometimes).

I did like the head shot target but the point of the post is whether it is a good training nuance but one that shouldn't be primary? Or is it a fun game trick? Never been to Gunsite, so I don't know their philosophy on that.

The day end with lunch at a Korean restaurant with a hot plate of spicy sizzling squid and assort Korean sides. This produce a nice nap later.

Having shot the match with a 642 and a G42, the G26 or 19 is so much easier. The first two are for carry only if circumstances really dictate it or for bugs. Yeah, they are good mow the lawn guns.

Good thought provoking post. Thanks in advance.

For me, I think of it as, can I shoot them in the head reliably when in an actual shooting situation. Because of my experience in a previous shooting and a few other life threatening situations not involving guns, the answer for me is an emphatic no.

While reading your post a few ideas jumped into my pea brain.

1. The first one I already stated, can I shoot the head reliably?
2. Can I do that at all distances or will we have a cutoff. i.e. I will shoot the head 7 yards and in, and the body 7+. The question then becomes do we have enough experience to know distance under stress. For me I have a hard time doing that. I frequently think the object is closer than it really is. So I shoot the bad guy head at 6 yards but after the fact find out I was really 18 yards from them.
3. Because of 2 above I am a strong advocate of seeing the front sight before shooting if at all possible. The feedback I received from the front sight to human body size relationship helped me shoot at the appropriate speed when at 45 yards. I did this even though I thought and told detectives that I was at 15 yards. Others have told me they have used that sight relationship for shooting the correct speed at distance.
4. Because of 3 above I like to shoot to the body first unless at contact distance. If I go to the head first and see the front sight hanging over the head then I have to take the time to go to the body. Not fast at all.
5. Because I've seen well trained officers rush a first shot and then walk in the second shot to center mass I like the old two shots to the body and then go to the head. If the head is still there and not falling I will shoot it. That two to the body acts like insurance to make sure one is in the heart or lungs.
6. IMO there's a lot to be said for two to the body and one to the head.

Interesting concept for competition and nice that they had a way to help determine how it works for each person.

I always followed the idea similar to JustOneGun for head shots but maybe less detailed. Can I reliably hit the head of the threat(not target) under the conditions I am in at the time? And a little more specifically can I hit the right part of the head in the same circumstances (i.e. the 3X5" ocular area from the front)? Along with this is the reason for the head shot. Am I taking a head shot first or at all because circumstances demand it (Hostage with gun to head or similar, Bomb vest terrorists or more in the realm of probable rather than possible a person wearing body armor or under the effects of body chemicals or other mind altering chemicals) not responding to torso hits?

I too am unable to reliably make good solid head shots except for at very close range and contact shots or clinch shots are not conducive to getting the head shot hits while maintaining control of my gun if in arms length without significant risk of disarm or diverting the muzzle by the assailant.

Because of these reasons I have always considered torso shots to be first and a continued targeting of hits to remain centerline and move upward until the ocular vault region is targeted. In simpler terms "the zipper". Starting with first shots to high center chest and following shots hitting in the jugular notch area then mouth then ocular vault. My hope is that any of the shots may penetrate to impact the spine and have the desired effect even if the spinal column is not severed but preferable if it is. The rounds will soon strike above normal body armor positioning or be an edge hit and rounds above this are directed to the same centerline area above body armor for sure and with the fastest and most effective hit to the brain/brain stem depending on angle of head tilt etc. This also allows for some degree of diminished accuracy while still imparting hits to vital areas without endangering bystanders or having almost no effect such as a miss or glancing hit.

Is this for everyone or the fastest and most positive method to gain instant incapacitation such as a single hit to the brain stem? No However it is what I am reasonably capable of performing.

I seriously doubt the possability that I will ever be faced with a terrorist with bomb vest or since retirement a hostage situation and only list these as possible not probable almost to the elimination of the idea of either of them. However body armor and/or limited exposure of just the head/upper body is what I consider more likely and starting to fall into the area of probable rather then just possible.

Since so many incidents are resolved initially by presenting a gun,firing a shot(s) without hits, any hit or solid torso hits and few requiring hit(s) to brain stem I believe the starting shots to the high center chest area are best in the vast majority of circumstances. There are always exceptions but I don't train to exceptions as a primary technique/tactic.

ETA: I noticed this original post was placed in the competition skills development section so please accept my apology for taking the discussion off that specific area, competition and changing it to self defense. I have no comment on the head shot being the targeted area for competitive challenge purposes or presented as an option to competitors.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Glenn E. Meyer

The only downside was capacity in the sense with some of the four to 5 opponent targets, more rounds would be nice. Are that many targets realistic - Eric used real incidents where the good guy did make it through the fight (sometimes).

---

No. You run out of time before you run out of ammo. You shoot guy #1, maybe guy #2, and guys 3-5 are lighting you up if they are dedicated to staying in the fight. If they aren't they are fleeing.

As far as head shots, skill and situation dependent. Things to consider
1) People aren't stationary targets, and the head is faster to move than the torso
2) People duck instinctively when startled, which exacerbates #1.
3) Speed matters, and getting good hits starts resetting their OODA loop.

I am a big believer in the failure drill for many reasons, but it plays into this debate.

Is the situation proactive? I would be more likely to take a head shot in that circumstance than in a purely reactive situation.

As to the AIWB situation, I can see your opinion. Most of the time however if I wasn't carrying AIWB, it would be hard for me to carry at all. As such, I do a lot of one handed draw practice.