That mirrors my FOF experience as well.Originally Posted by Utm
That mirrors my FOF experience as well.
Are you loyal to the constitution or the “institution”?
This ^^.
Time is a factor and people move. A threat can easily move their head enough that you miss the small portion of the head that actually provides an instant stop. The head can move quicker and easier than the rest of the body.
Louis Awerbuck taught a technique in very close quarter shooting with an unmanageable backstop hazard.
You take a large step forward to close some distance as you drop to one knee. The villain is then at a slight angle above your line of fire, his line of fire is now angled downward, so both backstop problems are lessened. With DVC ,some serious self possession, and a healthy chunk of luck, you headbone him.
Best case, only he and you get shot. Worst case, only you get shot. So it's an improvement on everyone getting shot.
Agree on the need for penetration but not on the headshot or rationale for it.
Head shots on live targets which can (and do) move at their own volition are much more difficult than head shots on a static range target. The skull is hard enough that peripheral hits with a pistol can glance off. As such a head shot would increase the down range bystander risk.
Nor are you automatically a dead man unless you are standing still.
All of this goes back to my argument, that minimal performance deltas between iron sights and red dots on static ranges do not accurately reflect the performance delta in FOF or actual fights with opponents who also “get a vote.”
That is one effective technique. Another is simply lateral movement to change backstop. Lateral movement is quicker if a lateral movement, and staying on your feet, will give you a clean background. The situation will dictate, which is more appropriate.
“Earn your shot” drills are a thing.
You also made yourself immobile and probably increased your chance of getting shot in the head because you replaced your center mass with your face
Anyone thats exchanging gunfire with a bag guy will likely not have a still, full thoracic.
Are you loyal to the constitution or the “institution”?
What feudist mentioned was something I was thinking about. Up angles *might* have a clearer backdrop. Then again, what goes up, must come down (somewhere). Shutting down that kind of threat *right now* was also playing a part in my thinking there, as was the relatively short distance. I threw the "might" qualifier in there for a reason. I'm well aware of targets moving when you start shooting at them, and how hard skulls are to hit and break. As has been said, most folks are going to default to COM, and that's also my reasoning for wanting more penetration from my rounds.
Moving obviously is important. That is something a lot of folks don't get the opportunity to practice much.
If you are saying shooting while moving, at moving targets, while using red dots on pistols is easier, I would agree. I think that was hashed out in a few places, with data to back it up. Sage Dynamics for one.
I agree few people get to practice moving and shooting and even fewer get to practice force on force.
Unfortunately, this creates unrealistic expectations and assumptions.
Yet we see one of both parties moving in most videos of actual shootings.
To the OP, we have used the photo targets at work in the past. Gunsite has these and similar targets in their simulators in the past, but as @HCM notes, few people will or can access these resources. Scary situations, but I’d do my best to focus on the high chest throat area and moving as @HCM suggested earlier, anticipating multiple controlled shots, maybe even closing for more precision-just speculating…
In a separate thread there was some discussion about USState Dept. quals; no movement there(should there be?). Off the top of my head, the only tests I know where there is shooter movement is on the US Marine MEU SOC qual and the Glock Operator Standards. There have been some earlier quals where one stepped sideways to a barricade or such, but not a lot of movement. So, moving shooters and targets is going to take some institutional effort, usually tax supported. There are practical competitions available to qualified citizens like IPSC/USPSA/IDPA that are helpful. Some private instructors like Hackathorn had drills involving movement. The one I took years ago we did a sort of box drill on several steel IPSC targets, forward sideways and backing up. Conversely, Farnam is of the opinion that if you move, move. You want to shoot, stop and deliver accurately. Pros and cons to each.
A thought is one could practice movement dry with a laser mounted to frame at home. I’ve done it with my TLR8s to see how movement affects weapon movement but I’m an admitted nerd…
Reply With Quote