Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 11

Thread: Where to shoot?

  1. #1
    Site Supporter
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Erie County, NY

    Where to shoot?

    https://www.thetacticalwire.com/feat...d-3ca9efdf3ff9

    Given the opportunity, the pelvic girdle is the first place to engage. Just about everyone who is shot in the pelvis ends up on the ground. Take away their mobility and it’s easier for you to escape. The pelvis is a large target and you can fire at a lower angle, which is an advantage in crowded and urban areas. Plus, there are a lot of goodies located in the pelvis like blood vessels, joints and nerve bundles. And, if the threat is wearing body armor -- which is showing up more on the street, most of it doesn’t protect the pelvic girdle.
    Skill Set: Where to Shoot - Tiger McKee - in my morning feeds. That's a little off standard presentations of the issue. Cites the difficulties of head shots and COM for ridding yourself off an attacker.
    Cloud Yeller of the Boomer Age

  2. #2
    Dr. Fackler has written the following discussion on shots to the pelvis:
    Quote Originally Posted by Fackler ML: "Shots to the Pelvic Area". Wound Ballistics Review. 4(1):13; 1999.
    “I welcome the chance to refute the belief that the pelvic area is a reasonable target during a gunfight. I can find no evidence or valid rationale for intentionally targeting the pelvic area in a gunfight. The reasons against, however, are many. They include:

    -- From the belt line to the top of the head, the areas most likely to rapidly incapacitate the person hit are concentrated in or near the midline. In the pelvis, however, the blood vessels are located to each side, having diverged from the midline, as the aorta and inferior vena cava divide at about the level of the navel. Additionally, the target that, when struck, is the most likely to cause rapid and reliable incapacitation, the spinal cord located in the midline of the abdomen, thorax and neck), ends well above the navel and is not a target in the pelvis.
    -- The pelvic branches of the aorta and inferior vena cava are more difficult to hit than their parent vessels -- they are smaller targets, and they diverge laterally from the midline (getting farther from it as they descend). Even if hit, each carry far less blood than the larger vessels from which they originated. Thus, even if one of these branches in the pelvis is hit, incapacitation from blood loss must necessarily be slower than from a major vessel hit higher up in the torso.
    -- Other than soft tissue structures not essential to continuing the gunfight (loops of bowel, bladder) the most likely thing to be struck by shots to the pelvis would be bone. The ilium is a large flat bone that forms most of the back wall of the pelvis. The problem is that handgun bullets that hit it would not break the bone but only make a small hole in passing through it: this would do nothing to destroy bony support of the pelvic girdle. The pelvic girdle is essentially a circle: to disrupt its structure significantly would require breaking it in two places. Only a shot that disrupted the neck or upper portion of the shaft of the femur would be likely to disrupt bony support enough to cause the person hit to fall. This is a small and highly unlikely target: the aim point to hit it would be a mystery to those without medical training — and to most of those with medical training.

    The “theory” stated in the question postulates that “certain autonomic responses the body undergoes during periods of stress” causes officers to shoot low, and that apparently this is good in a gunfight because such shots cause “severe disability.” I hope that the points presented above debunk the second part of the theory. As for the “autonomic responses” that cause officers to shoot low, I am unaware of anything in the anatomy or physiology of the autonomic nervous system that would even suggest such an occurrence. Most laymen do not understand the function of the autonomic nervous system. It is simply a system whose main function is to fine tune the glands and smooth muscles (those in the walls of organs and blood vessels) of the body. During times of stress such as perceived impending danger, the autonomic nervous system diverts blood from the intestines and digestive organs to the skeletal muscles — in the so-called “fight or flight” response. The effects of this response are constantly exaggerated by laymen who lack an adequate understanding of it — most notably by gun writ-ers eager to impress their readers. Interestingly, the human body can get along quite well without major parts of the autonomic nervous system. During my professional life as a surgeon, myself and colleagues removed parts of thousands of vagus nerves (mostly in treating peptic ulcer disease) -- thus depriving the patient of the major part of the parasympathetic half of the autonomic nervous system. We also removed many ganglia from the sympathetic half of the auto-nomic nervous system, in treating such things as profusely excess sweating and various problems caused by spasm of the arteries. I am unaware of any evidence that these operations produced any significant effect on the future capacity of these patients to react appropriately in times of impending danger.

    Unfortunately, the pelvis shot fallacy is common. This fallacy, along with other misinformation, is promoted constantly by at least one gun writer who is widely published in the popular gun press. Because of this, I regularly debunk this fallacy by including some of the above rationale in my presentations to law enforcement firearm instructor groups.”
    There are no doubts regarding serious mortality rates with pelvic wounds, the issue is whether wounds to the pelvis offer rapid enough incapacitation to reliably stop an adversary during a lethal force encounter. Obviously use a pelvic shot if it is the only target available, but it may not be the best primary target or failure to stop response target.


    Source: https://pistol-forum.com/showthread....-to-the-Pelvis

    The whole pelvic girdle thing seems to come up every couple of years. The biggest problem I see is that with handguns, they typically do not reliably cause mobility kills as they lack the necessary power to break the bone, unlike with rifles, so that defeats the key premise of McKee's argument for aiming for the pelvic girdle.

  3. #3
    Site Supporter
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Erie County, NY
    Every presentation I heard - Dr. Williams included, presented problems with thinking the pelvic shot was best. Just posted it, FYI - not that I thought it was a new breakthrough.
    Cloud Yeller of the Boomer Age

  4. #4
    When it comes to guidance involving use of force, vet your sources carefully. Check the resumes and experience of the people offering advice and compare.

    And that's all I'll say about that.

  5. #5
    Glock Collective Assimile Suvorov's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Escapee from the SF Bay Area now living on the Front Range of Colorado.
    Quote Originally Posted by Edster View Post
    When it comes to guidance involving use of force, vet your sources carefully. Check the resumes and experience of the people offering advice and compare.

    And that's all I'll say about that.
    Tiger McKee isn’t exactly your every day gun store Fudd/Commando.

  6. #6
    Quote Originally Posted by Suvorov View Post
    Tiger McKee isn’t exactly your every day gun store Fudd/Commando.
    Didn't say he was. I've seen different opinions on this subject and the experience and backgrounds of the people offering those opinions is worth considering, too.

  7. #7
    I chanced through the range while a class was in progress.
    The shooting drill was one center of mass, one at each hip joint.
    So SOMEBODY is still teaching it.
    Code Name: JET STREAM

  8. #8
    Shots to the pelvis...as several have noted, the thinking man might have some reservations.

    Aside from the fact that if you hit the guy where you intend, with the desired results, chances are that the assailany will still be able to use his firearm in attempt to hurt you.

    Let's add4ress another problem, actually identifying and targeting the proper areas on a fully clothed subject, one with baggy pants hanging low, or a boomer sporting armpit wear.

    The accuracy required, under stress, might be compared to that required to shoot an assailant in the shoulder joint to render the assailant incapable of using their weapon. I've never heard any knowledgeable folks advocate that course of action, either.

    I believe shooting the pelvis/hips is a more credible tactic with buckshot, or a SMG, still, though, you end up with an armed subject on the ground who may be able to use their weapon.
    Adding nothing to the conversation since 2015....

  9. #9
    Member MVS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    MI
    I didn't know this was still a thing, I thought it died with empty brass in its pockets some time ago.

  10. #10
    Site Supporter
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Erie County, NY
    I was surprised to read the column, for all the reasons mentioned above.
    Cloud Yeller of the Boomer Age

User Tag List

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •