Maybe. Or I could have taken it all completely out of context. We talked about a number of things. Terminal effectiveness was only a small part of the discussions.Originally Posted by Hambo
Sent from my SM-A505U using Tapatalk
Maybe. Or I could have taken it all completely out of context. We talked about a number of things. Terminal effectiveness was only a small part of the discussions.
Sent from my SM-A505U using Tapatalk
Not to pile on, but someone shot in an arm or leg can usually still shoot back, even if some decide not to do so.
Again, different frame of reference.
Does the average Iraqi insurgent work on down and disabled techniques? For that matter does the average mugger practice this stuff?
It would be an interesting topic to discuss the practical aspects of this stuff too. How often do the techniques get used in reality?
Sent from my SM-A505U using Tapatalk
Not much data, but in a match, in a kneeling stage, my bad knees gave out, putting me on the ground behind a barrel. Guess what, I still shot the targets from that position.
Shooting the genitals? Who's going to say shooting at a small target?
African or European opossum?
He might have been talking about an armored bad guy and good guy/s only have duty pistol ammo. That's the only valid reason not to go immediately high thoracic, neck, head. If you can shoot pelvis or limbs you can just as well shoot the head so even then...
Green no blue aaaaaaaaarg
Welcome to Africa, bring a hardhat.
Agreed. The Chapman is superior to the Weaver for most scenarios not requiring shooting from retention.
Perhaps at the edge of my lane. While I have trained with people who have trained with JH and we have shared instructors ( Gunsite, TR, Tom Givens, Pat Rogers, John Hearne etc.), I have never trained with JH.
I have seen dozens of JH musings on a closed email group. Multiple people who I have trained with say he can still shoot and does not ask his students to do anything that he cannot do himself re shooting standards etc. He has an answer for everything he says. You may not like it, or agree with it, but it is clear he has thought about what he is saying.
This clip appears to demo a 5 shot drill, at 5 yrds or less given the big step off line in 3 seconds with 5 shots in a 5 inch group or less, definitely in the UPPER chest. (top of rib to bottom of sternumb, nipple to nipple-jugular notch to xiphoid)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lXk2WmBGY_M
I am told that he is an accomplished life long ( as in since he could hold a gun and walk) hunter in that he has shot thousands of animals in the 1 to 300 lb range at least. In my mind, he tends to extrapolate data from that POV. i.e. if 5.56 is not deemed worthy to dispatch a 150 lb dear in many locales, it is suspect to do the same with a motivated 150 lb human relative to other rounds.
I believe that many of his data points that he still relies on are older and as such, under represent new "datasets" re latest gen 9mm rounds particularly and .40 cal/.45 ACP to a lesser extent.
My take away from JH is--- aim small/miss small as fast as you must with as big a projectile as you can handle (i.e. .45 ACP). And MOVE when possible (Motionless Operators Ventilate Easily)
As I have said in other postings, If you are a dyed in the wool circa 1984 weaver shooter, non leo/mil/gov, and you are dry firing 5 mins a day 3 x a week and live firing with a plan 2x a month, you are highly likely to be just fine with your hyper weaver, bladed, elbow bent down, push/pull, thumb over thumb self. If you wear body armor on a daily basis, I would assert you should square up more than "classic" weaver has been said to dictate to get to armor out front but otherwise rock on with your weaver self.
Reply With Quote