Handgun stopping power? - Page 3
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 35

Thread: Handgun stopping power?

  1. #21
    Distinguished Member brownie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Superstition Mtns, Az
    Posts
    53,774
    Quote Originally Posted by High Seas Drifter View Post
    Isn't the Mozambique and the Failure Drill technically two different things, as well?

    One has a pause, one does not?

    -on Tapatalk
    IMO only, the Mozambique is a 3 shot skill [ 2 to the body, one to the head ] with a stop after two rounds to assess. I DO NOT LIKE nor ever liked/thought the Mozambique was something of a go to, it locks one into making two and whatever assessment time then making the head shot. I shoot 4-5 rds a second, after a second or so if they've haven't fallen I'll move to a failure to stop mode and go high to attempt a head shot.

    During the week long national tactical invitational, they had Teddy tactical 3D's as threats in various entry scenarios. We were instructed that some Teddy's would not fall to body shots, we were then to make a head shot to drop Teddy. Only 125 were invited the year I attended [ around 1997 or so ]. Not one attendee I saw decided to just mozambique all Teddy's just in case. IOW, not one entry leo used it all week long.

    Mozambique history https://www.shootingillustrated.com/...ry-and-how-to/

    "Rousseau made a quick combat presentation with his pistol and planted two bullets in the area of his opponent's breastbone. In a fighter's worst nightmare, the soldier not only stayed on his feet, he managed to hang onto his rifle. Rousseau, having lowered his pistol to the ready position, assessed the situation and decided to deliver a third shot to the man's central nervous system. Aiming for the head, Rousseau either fired too soon or jerked the trigger, because his third shot hit his enemy in the throat. It did, however, sever the spinal column and neutralize the threat."

    He asked Cooper if he could be allowed to call it the Failure Drill, suggesting the third shot was the solution for when the first two shots failed to stop the attacker. Mudgett said Cooper graciously told him to call it whatever he liked, the important thing was to teach it. At this point, the Mozambique/Failure Drill consisted of firing two shots at center mass, lowering the pistol to the ready position and assessing the need for the third shot.

    Mudgett and Helms taught the failure drill to fellow officers and a number of other police departments. However, they felt officers might be wasting too much time in coming to the ready position after the two center-mass shots—time that could easily get them killed. They modified the drill so the shooter kept the handgun on target after the first two shots and transitioned for the head shot if the threat was still viable.

    So what we affectionately know as the Mozambique drill is actually a modified Mozambique drill, but there's still that lag time of assessing after two shot, gun up or not, when they could still be putting lead COM. Hell, the first two shots may be a little errant and not take someone down, but a 3rd or 4th non errant shot may just do it. I don't like the idea of the gun barking, stopping to asses for any length of time, then resuming.

    I'll plant 4-5 into COM and not hesitate to take the head shot IF by then they aren't succumbing to the shots. Looking at the odds on the streets, it's an extremely low percentage of running into turds wearing vests to begin with [ exceptions might be responding to bank robberies, armored car robberies and the like where the odds of a turd wearing a vest are slightly higher, but still very low odds. OMMV

    Just like the speed rock as advanced and taught by Chuck Taylor in the 70's and 80's was thought at the time better than sliced bread, it's been discovered it's a very bad skill to use, putting one off balance. AND, it is no longer taught in law enforcement for a few reasons. Something thought to be great, turned into something not that good and discontinued in training.
    Last edited by brownie; 10-30-2019 at 08:03 PM.
    The mind is the limiting factor

    https://www.youtube.com/user/azqkr

    The lion does not even bother to turn his head when he hears the small dog barking..

    Stay Sharp

    Brownie

  2. #22
    Distinguished Member joecarry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Tampa Bay
    Posts
    4,096
    It has always been my opinion that if you have to shoot someone then shooting them 5 times in rapid succession to center of mass is the way to go. I also believe that one should carry a high capacity mag of at least 10 or more rounds with at least 9mm caliber to accomplish the goal. If after the 5th round the threat is still a threat, a head shot would be warranted for the 6th shot. The 5 shots to center mass will hopefully enable one or two rounds to hit a vital area and stop the threat.

    JMO, YMMV.
    Anyone interested in the 80's TV show Miami Vice? If so click here --->Miamiviceonline.com

    The largest Miami Vice web site on the planet dedicated to all things Vice!

  3. #23
    Distinguished Member Ronnie948's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Location
    Daytona Beach
    Posts
    3,828
    All you need is a single shot handgun small enough to carry easily and hidden.
    The gun will need to use a bullet like the AR-15 or AK-47 uses because Beto and his Dem O Rat buddies all say that the 223 bullet will explode on contact and tear anything it hits to shreds.
    No large capacity "CLIPS" would be needed.
    Just imagine how powerful a 223 would be in a gun smaller then a Sig 365 ETC.
    These are all well educated people running our country so they must know what they are talking about.
    Ronnie
    N.R.A. - FLORIDA CARRY - D.A.V. - American Legion - M.C.A.--- U.S. Army disabled Veteran, GOA
    If you are not a member of the N.R.A. - It is time to join - Turn 5 million members into 15 or 20 million members
    If your not a member of FLORIDA CARRY it is time to join.

    An armed population conststs of CITIZENS"
    AN UN-ARMED POPULATION CONSTSTS OF "SUBJECTS

  4. Remove Advertisements
    FloridaConcealedCarry.com
    Advertisements
     

  5. #24
    Distinguished Member Rick McC.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Weeki Wachee, Fl.
    Posts
    7,294
    Quote Originally Posted by joecarry View Post
    It has always been my opinion that if you have to shoot someone then shooting them 5 times in rapid succession to center of mass is the way to go. I also believe that one should carry a high capacity mag of at least 10 or more rounds with at least 9mm caliber to accomplish the goal. If after the 5th round the threat is still a threat, a head shot would be warranted for the 6th shot. The 5 shots to center mass will hopefully enable one or two rounds to hit a vital area and stop the threat.

    JMO, YMMV.
    No thanks. I’ll use the zipper to put four shots into the BG; first to the abdomen, next two COM, and the forth a head shot, in under a second and a half (including draw time).
    Rick

    "Sights are for the unenlightened."

    http://www.guntipsandtalk.com/

    IDPA Certified Safety Officer

  6. #25
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2019
    Posts
    22
    Over the past year I have had numerous conversations with 3 different attorneys that defend members of one of the better known insurance/prepaid legal services about the issue of shooting an attacker more than once. All 3 felt that once you shoot and hit the bad guy more than 3 times you are making it very difficult to defend. Remember your only defense is to show that you had a reasonable belief that your life or someone else's life was in immediate danger. So if you decide to zipper the mfer with 5 shots a really good prosecutor can convince a jury that your intent was to kill and not stop the attack. In addition they said to be very careful in what you say on line because a prosecutor will use your posts to show frame of mind

    Sent from my Moto G (5) Plus using Tapatalk

  7. #26
    Distinguished Member joecarry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Tampa Bay
    Posts
    4,096
    Quote Originally Posted by Rick McC. View Post
    No thanks. I’ll use the zipper to put four shots into the BG; first to the abdomen, next two COM, and the forth a head shot, in under a second and a half (including draw time).
    Whatever works for you and gets the job done to stop the threat.

    Quote Originally Posted by CZ Man View Post
    Over the past year I have had numerous conversations with 3 different attorneys that defend members of one of the better known insurance/prepaid legal services about the issue of shooting an attacker more than once. All 3 felt that once you shoot and hit the bad guy more than 3 times you are making it very difficult to defend. Remember your only defense is to show that you had a reasonable belief that your life or someone else's life was in immediate danger. So if you decide to zipper the mfer with 5 shots a really good prosecutor can convince a jury that your intent was to kill and not stop the attack. In addition they said to be very careful in what you say on line because a prosecutor will use your posts to show frame of mind

    Sent from my Moto G (5) Plus using Tapatalk
    I'm not so sure I agree but I'm not an attorney either. First of all in a panic and shooting, how will the average person that's never been put in that situation be expected to even know how many times s/he fired? Who is to believe all the shots will reach their intended target under stress? And if the other person is shooting at you.....also why I stated...stop the threat...

    YMMV
    Anyone interested in the 80's TV show Miami Vice? If so click here --->Miamiviceonline.com

    The largest Miami Vice web site on the planet dedicated to all things Vice!

  8. #27
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2019
    Posts
    22
    Quote Originally Posted by joecarry View Post
    Whatever works for you and gets the job done to stop the threat.



    I'm not so sure I agree but I'm not an attorney either. First of all in a panic and shooting, how will the average person that's never been put in that situation be expected to even know how many times s/he fired? Who is to believe all the shots will reach their intended target under stress? And if the other person is shooting at you.....also why I stated...stop the threat...

    YMMV
    As sad as it is a prosecutor will be pounding into the jury that the law states that once the threat is over you have to stop shooting. If you continue to shoot you have broken the law. Remember you own the result of every shot you fire no matter what the circumstances are.

    Sent from my Moto G (5) Plus using Tapatalk

  9. #28
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2019
    Posts
    22
    Getting back to stopping power here is a video that addresses the Ellifritz study

    https://youtu.be/mBlNOi_Jids



    Sent from my Moto G (5) Plus using Tapatalk

  10. #29
    Distinguished Member brownie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Superstition Mtns, Az
    Posts
    53,774
    Quote Originally Posted by CZ Man View Post
    Over the past year I have had numerous conversations with 3 different attorneys that defend members of one of the better known insurance/prepaid legal services about the issue of shooting an attacker more than once. All 3 felt that once you shoot and hit the bad guy more than 3 times you are making it very difficult to defend. Remember your only defense is to show that you had a reasonable belief that your life or someone else's life was in immediate danger. So if you decide to zipper the mfer with 5 shots a really good prosecutor can convince a jury that your intent was to kill and not stop the attack. In addition they said to be very careful in what you say on line because a prosecutor will use your posts to show frame of mind

    Sent from my Moto G (5) Plus using Tapatalk
    A really good defense atty would demonstrate leo's no longer are taught two and assess and a head shot [ because the assess portion is dangerous to the defender if those two haven't stopped the threat. A really really good defense atty will be able to demonstrate how long it took to make the 4 shots in the zipper [ about a second ]. You see, to the attys, more than 3 sounds excessive and would expect anything over 2-3 rounds to take more than just a second and a fraction at best, but a really really good atty will also demonstrate cases where it took up to 10 shots to stop the threat. NOT kill him, but stop him from more aggression.

    A really good atty could point to leo's who've had to shoot people multiples of times to get them to STOP their threatening/aggression. We have people in this discussion that haven't a clue when the zipper would be utilized, or how long it takes members who've learned it to get those 4 shots off.

    Those attys for that prepaid legal services are simply generalizing, about a possibility, not a certainty. I'm not risking my arse on 3 attys who would ask me not to fire more than 3 shots at someone trying to kill me because a prosecutor may try some BS shenanigans in a court room. The DA/prosecutor can always claim anything. If it's a good shoot, it's a good shot. A good atty would negate all the DA's BS tactics with facts in evidence from previous lawful SD shootings by citizens and leo's.

    As well, if more than three rounds might mean someone was trying to kill the person and not stop the threat, then any shooting of more than that could be argued the same way. I've not read any cases where charges were filed against the defender for firing more than 3 rounds. If there are any, they are statistically insignificant, and would have to have resulted in evidence that demonstrated the fight was over [ aggression stopped ] and more shots were then taken unnecessarily.

    I wonder if those same attys could cite case law on convictions solely due to more than 3 rounds being fired with no other mitigating circumstances. My guess is they can't. If they're going to suggest more than 3 may be argued murder not lawful SD, they'll have to demonstrate cases where just that fact alone ended in a conviction of the defender.
    Last edited by brownie; 10-31-2019 at 07:22 PM.
    The mind is the limiting factor

    https://www.youtube.com/user/azqkr

    The lion does not even bother to turn his head when he hears the small dog barking..

    Stay Sharp

    Brownie

  11. #30
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2019
    Posts
    22
    Quote Originally Posted by brownie View Post
    A really good defense atty would demonstrate leo's no longer are taught two and assess and a head shot [ because the assess portion is dangerous to the defender if those two haven't stopped the threat. A really really good defense atty will be able to demonstrate how long it took to make the 4 shots in the zipper [ about a second ]. You see, to the attys, more than 3 sounds excessive and would expect anything over 2-3 rounds to take more than just a second and a fraction at best, but a really really good atty will also demonstrate cases where it took up to 10 shots to stop the threat. NOT kill him, but stop him from more aggression.

    A really good atty could point to leo's who've had to shoot people multiples of times to get them to STOP their threatening/aggression. We have people in this discussion that haven't a clue when the zipper would be utilized, or how long it takes members who've learned it to get those 4 shots off.

    Those attys for that prepaid legal services are simply generalizing, about a possibility, not a certainty. I'm not risking my arse on 3 attys who would ask me not to fire more than 3 shots at someone trying to kill me because a prosecutor may try some BS shenanigans in a court room. The DA/prosecutor can always claim anything. If it's a good shoot, it's a good shot. A good atty would negate all the DA's BS tactics with facts in evidence from previous lawful SD shootings by citizens and leo's.

    As well, if more than three rounds might mean someone was trying to kill the person and not stop the threat, then any shooting of more than that could be argued the same way. I've not read any cases where charges were filed against the defender for firing more than 3 rounds. If there are any, they are statistically insignificant, and would have to have resulted in evidence that demonstrated the fight was over [ aggression stopped ] and more shots were then taken unnecessarily.

    I wonder if those same attys could cite case law on convictions solely due to more than 3 rounds being fired with no other mitigating circumstances. My guess is they can't. If they're going to suggest more than 3 may be argued murder not lawful SD, they'll have to demonstrate cases where just that fact alone ended in a conviction of the defender.
    You make some valid points.
    However, juries don't necessarily decide cases on facts. They decide innocents or guilt like they (including you and I) decide most things, on emotion. If you have a gifted prosecutor who can spin a good story facts are not as important. The same holds for a defense attorney. Just look at the verdict in the OJ Simpson case. Facts as clear as the noonday sun in Miami and yet OJ walked.

Sposors

Posting Permissions

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