"Shoot them in the Crotch"?

[Kano383]

A pelvic hit is a good anchoring shot if you hit something structurally important, or the lower spine. It won’t kill, unless you hit an artery - and even then, it will not kill fast enough - but it can stabilize the target for further remodeling works. Worth taking when better alternatives are not available, or you happen to have your gun pointed there, as it can easily come to pass when grappling with someone very close.

A heart shot is a killing shot... but it takes time, and the shootee can make the shooter deceased, even with big gaping holes in the main pump. General boiler room shots are not very good at taking something alive out of commission, and at times they may trigger a rush of adrenaline that seemingly makes the wounded party impervious to other blows.

If something is intent on killing you, the only sure shot is the computer box, or the main wiring loom. Not easy, especially on bipedal humans with very mobile upper body, but still I wonder why there is not more emphasis and time spent training to hit the head...

 

[BSA1]

The closest I ever came to shooting somebody was after a car chase. The driver jump out of his car, screaming "Shoot me" while running towards my rookie partner with his right arm upraised holding something that looked like a knife. Due to my position I could not clearly see what he was holding but it was consistent with how someone would hold a knife if they were going to stab you. I drew down on him, aimed at his pelvis and was in the process of pulling the trigger when he changed his position just enough for me to see he was holding his car keys. (We still had to fight him but he did not get shot).

I was calm, clear headed and had my shoots planned. My first round was going into his pelvis to try to drop him on the ground. If that failed the next ones were going into the heart / chest area until he either fell down or my gun ran dry.

 

[JTHunter]

BSA - at what distance was this driver as you drew down on him?

 

[DT Guy]

Shoot whatever is available, as soon as it's available, and shoot until the threat ends. Pelvis, head, leg...as mentioned before, when someone is trying to kill me, I'm going to do whatever I can to stop them, whether it's 'ideal' or not.

I also was taught (as an LEO) that the 'shoot, assess' idea will get you killed. I don't care if he's been hit, I don't care if he's carrying soon-to-be-mortal wounds, I care if he's stopped being a threat. If he hasn't stopped being a threat, I'm still shooting.


Larry

 

[shoobe01]

One thing I think I am not seeing here is a broader discussion of target sizes. Because the second thing I want to do is have any one shot stop the threat. The first is I want is to not miss the target entirely, to reduce the chance of tossing bullets into innocent bystanders, nearby or hundreds of yards downrange.

So, if I have someone not going down, and I know or suspect body armor, my options are now head or a pelvis. Depending on the beyond-target threat and how much they are moving their head around, a pelvis may be a safer shot. It may be hard to hit those vital zones, but I am putting bullets into something potentially vital, and probably not into the air next to him.

To the usual tool-in-the-toolbox discussion: Let's say someone is hiding behind solid cover. A corner of a wall. People sorta suck at hiding, and routinely leave something sticking out, especially on the lower body. If I have a choice of shooting at the whole leg or the pelvic area, knowing the vulnerability of the various bits I will take a belt-buckle-region shot over a random thigh. So, I disagree a bit with shooting whatever is available; aim at something specific, especially if the first few shots aren't effective, or there's obstructions, etc. and your choices are limited. Knowing anatomy helps you choose where to aim more effectively to stop the threat.

 

[WrongHanded]

For what it's worth at this point in the thread, I was actually considering the pelvis as an option primarily on a moving attacker; one closing distance on you. Why? Well because the hips move more predictably on a moving person than either the head or torso. I really didn't cover that in my OP, and I should have better explained my mode of thought.

I can see that if an attacker is using a gun and taking advantage of cover, the torso and head are better targets for some obvious reasons. They are more likely to be presented, and more likely to be stationary at some point. And of course, a hit on either is likely to be more effective than a good hit on the pelvic area.

 

[DT Guy]

.... So, I disagree a bit with shooting whatever is available; aim at something specific, especially if the first few shots aren't effective, or there's obstructions, etc. and your choices are limited. Knowing anatomy helps you choose where to aim more effectively to stop the threat.

I think we're speaking around each other a bit here-given the choice between a COM target and a leg, I'd choose the COM. Given the choice between a leg and no target, I'd choose the leg. And agreed about the anatomy; I thought I knew a bit about the anatomy behind stopping folks, and then I met my knife instructor....


Larry

 

[If1HitU]

Wow ouch!