I'd tend to agree with the majority of his assessments, but several points are clearly misspoken based on historic records as well.
Even little tiny, scrawny pencil neck geeks that weigh 95 pounds soaking wet?, I doubt that very much :rolfThere's no argument, 9mm is for women and .45 is for men!!!! :rolf
I must have gone to the same doctor you did Will :drinks1. Its not that complicated....put as many rounds .22 - 44mag on target with (COM being you POA), as quickly as possible until the fight is over.....
2. Brits STILL train 2 X COM and if no result move to head shots...
3.I guess I went through a sex change without knowing it!, as I have carried and continue to carry a 9mm for most of my life. POI and tactics always out ways size of projectile.
4. Nice article though, even with some of miss-information.
5. My 3 rules or a gunfight:
Have a gun that works.
Cheat.
Win.
Jedburgh,There are 4 factors to a projectile (bullet) wound. They are Penetration, Permanent Cavity, Temporary Cavity, and Fragmentation.
Because of the speed of handgun ammunition, only penetration and permanent cavity are a factor. Pistol rounds move too slowly to achieve consistent fragmentation or to cause damage through the temporary wound cavity.
In order to achieve incapacitation, the central nervous system (CNS) must be destroyed. The CNS is the brain and upper spinal column. In order to destroy the CNS, a projectile must pass through the area (not just reach it). Hits to the heart-even multiple hits-will not quickly incapacitate your attacker. Even if the heart is severely damaged, your attacker will have approximately 15 seconds of full voluntary function before bleeding out.
The bottom line is that you want a defensive round that will penetrate 12-18 inches. The bigger the permanent wound cavity the better. Determining how much better a .45 is than a 9mm is extremely difficult and subjective. As long as the penetration is there, the only thing that matters is placement.
I wrote a paper on this awhile back with more detail about the factors of wounding, etc. You can download it if you're interested:here.
DOL
Hell on wheels with a pistol -- :thumsupI knew Ayman very well. He was in my company. He was a good soldier and hell on wheels with a pistol.
DOL
That's an interesting hypothesis but it makes one move the gun from mid range to high range and then all the way to low range. Lots of movement on the gun with all the inherent errant shots created by that amount of movement of the firearm.I had a firearms instructor in the police academy who had a very good point. He taught us while advancing on the target to put 2 rounds COM, 2 rounds in the head, and 2 rounds in the groin region ( more towards the inside part of the leg.) If the threat hasn't been neutralized repeat the process until it has.
His explanation was pretty simple, and made a lot of sense. He told us, "you just put 2 rounds in his chest, but he was wearing body armor, and that's why you put 2 in his head. You realized 1 bullet to the head just grazed him and the other one didn't penetrate." Now were all wondering why he had us put 2 to the groin region. He reminds us that your femoral artery runs through that region of your leg, and we may have a chance of hitting it with those 2 rounds and incapacitating the target.
So if I am in a close quarter combat situation, I am putting 2 in the chest, 2 in the head, and 2 in the groin, repeat.
:thumsupFBI Miami Shootout
April 11, 1986: Pinecrest, Fla.
A close-quarters gun battle involving eight FBI agents and two heavily armed suspects during a felony stop in southern Miami, this incident led FBI Firearms Training Unit Director John Hall to conclude that the carnage was primarily "an ammo failure."
The FBI's after-action report solidified Hall's belief, because it showed that Michael Platt and William Matix—an Army Ranger and Army MP of the 101st Airborne, respectively—sustained fatal wounds yet continued to bring the fight to the agents. The agents had fired .38 Special and 9mm rounds from revolvers and semi-auto pistols, which lacked adequate stopping power, FBI officials said afterward. Only Special Agent Edmundo Mireles deployed a long gun—his Remington 870 pump-action shotgun.
One bullet, in particular, was singled out as the "shot that failed." Fired by Special Agent Jerry Dove, this 9mm bullet struck Platt's right forearm, entered his right ribcage, and stopped an inch from his heart. Platt survived to fight for four more minutes, eventually killing agents Dove and Benjamin Grogan.
Matix had also apparently been taken out of the fight early with a .38 Special +P round fired by Special Agent Gordon McNeill from his S&W Model 19 that struck Matix in the face and contused his brain. According to Dr. French Anderson's "Forensic Analysis of the April 11, 1986, FBI Firefight," the wound "must have been devastating." After he lay unconscious for more than a minute, Matix became alert, left his car, and joined Platt in agent Grogan's and agent Dove's vehicle.
Following the tragedy, the FBI phased out revolvers and .38 Special ammunition. Agents were also eventually issued H&K MP5 submachine guns for high-risk encounters.
"The FBI went looking for a pistol round with deeper penetration," says Dave Spaulding, a retired Ohio police lieutenant and pistol instructor. "It's not important that you hit something, it's important that you hit something important."
The FBI's adoption of 10mm Auto to attain greater stopping power popularized the then-obscure round. The FBI later switched to a subsonic load (the "10mm FBI") to better tame the full-powered 10mm that delivered about 38,000 pounds psi, says Ayoob, who's written extensively about the incident.
Later, the FBI switched to the .40-caliber S&W that is now the most prevalent duty ammo in law enforcement. The .40-caliber provides similar ballistics to a 10mm in a shorter casing.
I think this should help on the subject of ballistics. This gunfight alone, was studied by more law enforcement agencies than any other. Writings have been made by M. Ayoob, Dr. Anderson and many others.......This is one of 5 gunfights that changed Law Enforcement thoughts on gunfights forever. Please read this link to Police Magazine......http://www.policemag.com/Channel/Pa...5-Gunfights-That-Changed-Law-Enforcement.aspx
No matter what, its shot placement and hard hits that drop badguys.
Just my .02
BTTBBOB
That isn't surprising at all. Sometimes two's enough, other times it's not. What your statement tells me is that most think two rds was/is enough. It may or may not be, and if the scenarios demanded more than 2, there's lessons there which is exactly why we train to begin with, to learn lessons from mistakes/errors in judgement that we then may not have to make on the street in real time.At Judgment Training Institute in Vero Beach, it is stunning how many first-time virtual-reality scenario students engage a threat with only two rounds. Range practice is a hard habit to break. Our computer is set to have any scenario end with a bad-guy collapse with a random number of COM strikes--rarely one.
With multiples, boarding house rules apply IMO. You don't want to be putting 2-3 in the first two only to have the 3rd tap you before you can get to them for spending too much time on the first two. You may not have to re-engage either or may have to engage each again, but I'm not wasting time to get lead on each and damage them all thereby reducing my chances of getting hit to begin with.Uncle Sam was kind enough to train me, train me and then train me some more. We practiced 2 to "center mass", 1 to the head. In a military situation this is an acceptable way to engage a target. In the civilian world, you have to think before that type of engagement. The aftermath of any shooting is the problem. And no, I am not advocating that anyone disengage before the threat is removed. I practice 2 to center mass and then keep my weapon on target for immediate follow up shot. If needed, that becomes the 1 to the head. The moral of the story, keep your weapon downrange and on target until the threat has been eliminated. Obviously each scenario is different. Multiple threats would require immediate termination of each threat in succession. (you don't want to have to re-engage)
Got a really great friend who's a field investigator/agent with ICE/EPA in Ohio. He likes two on each as well. Here's the problem I see with that. As fast as he is, and likely you are, his splits run .20 seconds. That's .40 seconds added before the 3rd guy gets a helping of his own lead injection. It allows that 3rd person more time than necessary. Even a .17 split turns into a little over a third of a second to get a round on me while I'm working on the first two. Any of them may need more, or not, but they've been damaged if they need a second helping and thus aren't as likely to be as viable at putting lead into me thus decreasing the odds of being hit further.Brownie, a buddy and I did a lot of training, looking for the best way to shoot multiple bad guys (Man sized cardboard targets, 3 of)
Swinging left to right, right to left. Targets 7m away, 1m apart.
For whatever reason, single hits on each target! Had lots of misses, and/or poor, peripheral hits! Swinging to fast?
The best combination, two on each! Holding still for first shot, because you know you are going to fire more shots?
I don't know? Try it. Against the clock.
All my hits are COM [ inside an 8" circle ] and that's all I look for with speed on multiples. If you find you don't have to shoot one or more twice [ which is probable based on odds ] you've decreased your time to the 3rd guy. If you have to go back to one and give him more lead, he's already been damaged and that increases your chances of errant rounds from him on yourself to boot.Why I like the two on each, much better hits! The closest hits in a people situation, not targets equal distance apart, as in one guy in the center of the room, closest, then two more at the doorway. As in one at say, 3 yards, then two next to each other, off to one side, 7 yards away.
So a blinding fast double tap, looking over sights, the transition to full sights for the other two. What say you?