Is it true and what to do if confronted

[Doug.38PR]

This may be just movies, but I've heard (from I think places other than movies and tv) that if a man is pumped up certain drugs then a bullet won't drop them (it won't bounce off them or anything they just won't experience the effects, til later).
Is that true? How could that be true? What is it about a bullet to the chest that makes you drop anyway? A hole (nasty one at that) has just been drilled/ripped into your body. Is it the pain?
What should you do if ever attacked by someone like this? (let's say you can't get away for whatever reason). What do you do?
Would a shot to the head stop them? I mean if you nail the brain, you've shut them down. On the other hand, I was told by my CHL instructor that "courts generally don't like headshots because they feel it is 'excessive force'" Of course if I had to choose between my life and a court, I would take on the court anyday

[sendec]

Handgun rounds in particular are'nt really good at stopping aggressive people. Far more people are wounded than are killed when hit with a bullet.

I think that there is a largely psychological component to being shot that effects people - they believe that if they are shot certain things will happen, like fall down and die. Others stay in the fight regardless of the severity of the wound. Drugs certainly can play a role.

Bullets work by letting blood out, air in, and occasionally disrupting a vital structure. A round to the chest may not immediately stop someone if it penetrates a lung, as they would have an albeit short time before pneumothorax kicks in and drops them.

I really get uncomfortable discussing "where" to shoot people on a public forum, not knowing who is listening so to speak. Suffice it to say that it is a very small target that is well protected.

[CabinJohn]

If a 120 pound deer can run 50 or 100 yards after being shot in the heart with a rifle, then why would we think that a 150 or 250 lb man would suddenly fall down with one shot to the chest from a handgun?

I am no expert, but from what I have read, there are only two things that will reliably stop an attacker - drugged or otherwise: either cause sufficient bleeding (COM shots) to cause a rapid decline or total loss of blood preasure to cause unconciousness, or a CNS (head or spine) shot.

Do a Google or Yahoo search and read the accounts of the FBI shootout in Miami for a detailed description of what havoc a fatally wounded person can do.

[biere]

A search on caliber war will turn up all sorts of numbers for handgun rounds. From momentum to penetration to how many rounds the gun holds there are all sorts of things people worry about.

A search on pcp should turn up lots of discussion about someone not stopping when shot.

Overall I boil it down to the concept that a handgun that is common for self defense carry is not anywhere close to a rifle or shotgun in power levels and ability to stop the threat.

Guns like the ruger alaskan are making my boil it down concept not work so well though. Of course I believe most folks who have said they want to or do carry it for ccw use a 45 colt loading in it.

If you do some studying on hunting you will often find animals that kept running even if their heart had been shot or whatever. Overall I figure you train to do the best you can and you should have some idea of what to do if you shoot someone and they don't stop.

[Jeeper]

If a 120 pound deer can run 50 or 100 yards after being shot in the heart with a rifle, then why would we think that a 150 or 250 lb man would suddenly fall down with one shot to the chest from a handgun?

Now put that deer on PCP and it will run a lot farther.

[mete]

PCP seems to be the worst as far as making someone immune to bullet hits and have super strength.That's all the more reason to get GOOD hits that destroy vital organs.

[k9lwt]

If you are justified to shoot to stop, you have an obligation to do just that-stop the threat. If someone is coming with a gun and you have shot them in the chest (once, twice) and they are still charging, you still need to stop the threat. It's my understanding that a CNS (central nervous system) shot is the next step. I have been told that a CNS shot will stop the threat regardless of mindset, alcohol, drugs, etc. You just can't function without that CNS.

[Sir William]

I once witnessed a shooting where the yob took 18 COM hits of 21 rounds discharged from two 4" S&W 686s. The yob walked to the ambulance. Moonshine was his drug of choice. The yob lived, the woman he shot didn't. No one shot stop in either shooting.

[JohnKSa]

It doesn't make them immune to the bullets, just immune to the pain, and probably immune to the realization that they're dying.

Most defensive encounters end before the defender even starts shooting because of the self-preservation instinct of the attacker.

When that instinct is dulled, along with pain, an attacker will literally keep going until he bleeds to death, or until he is structurally (bones/tendons/muscles/ligaments) or neurally (brain/spinal cord) damaged to the point that he becomes unable to continue.

This is taken into account in standard defensive training.

What you should do is aim at the attackers center of mass and continue shooting until the threat is ended.

There are some who say that if a reasonable number of COM shots don't take effect, the defender should aim for the pelvis (in an attempt to damage the walking mechanism) or the head (in an attempt to damage the central nervous system.

I have some problems with this approach.

1. It's harder to hit those targets.
2. It's possible--even extremely likely--that the COM shots didn't take effect because they were only SHOTS, not HITS. People don't shoot well under extreme stress and missing is more common than hitting. If that's the case, it makes NO sense to stop shooting at the easy target and try to start shooting harder targets. See #1.
3. The pelvis and the head are hard targets--not easily damaged. The head due to it's round shape which can deflect bullets, and the pelvis due to it's large size and strength.
4. Complicating the issue at a time when a person is under a lot of stress is not wise. "Oops, he's not stopping--am I missing or hitting--should I go for the head--should I go for the pelvis--should I keep shooting COM?" That's a lot of decisions to make in a very short time. Some people just freeze up in a stressful situation with a lot of decisions. Most people would be better served with a single approach that works in all situations. Shoot COM until the threat ends.

[pax]

Would a shot to the head stop them? I mean if you nail the brain, you've shut them down. On the other hand, I was told by my CHL instructor that "courts generally don't like headshots because they feel it is 'excessive force'"

Shooting someone is using deadly force. This is true whether you shoot them in the face, in the chest, or in their right big toenail. There is no greater degree of force than deadly force, so there can be no legitimate question of "excessive force" based upon where you aimed when you pulled the trigger. By shooting them at all, you have already engaged in the highest degree of force anyone could use.

Deadly force either is, or is not, justified. If you are justified in shooting them, you are justified to shoot any body part you are able to hit. If you aren't justified in shooting them, it won't matter which body part you hit -- you're still going to be in a world of legal hurt.

That said, most people do not understand this stuff, so juries often need to be educated about deadly force issues. Hopefully you will be able to document that you knew this stuff beforehand, that were in immediate and otherwise unavoidable fear for your life, and that you did everything within your power to avoid shooting the other person. If you can do those things, you will probably come unscathed through the legal process. If you can't, you probably won't.

pax

[Glenn E. Meyer]

We did the head shot / lawyer argument before and decided that such instructors are deluded and misinterpret the idea of shooting to stop.

People stop attacking you as they:

1. No functioning CNS
2. Bleed out (could be slow) and/or impairment of circulation to brain (15 sec of activity)
3. Sensory or motor impairment - blinded, broken hip (this depends on the damage obviously)
4. Some psychological processes:
a. cognitive evaluation of risk
b. motivational loss
c. various incapacitating stress reactions.

Pain is just a signal of bodily damage, if you can get through it, you can continue for awhile.

If you were righteously shot in the areas of the noggin that afford penetration to the brain stem - who cares how pumped up you are.

[dave_in_delaware]

sendec wrote:

Bullets work by letting blood out, air in, and occasionally disrupting a vital structure. A round to the chest may not immediately stop someone if it penetrates a lung, as they would have an albeit short time before pneumothorax kicks in and drops them.

I have to disagree w/ the lung thing. I was walking around just fine after my one lung had collapsed from pneumothorax, and I never "dropped" ... I never had shortness of breath either. Yes, the doctors were amazed (they kept asking "Are you SURE you can breathe ok?"). Granted, it was only partially collapsed. But I would think that if it were from a gunshot and I was hopped up on something, too, the lung shot wouldn't matter much. Thank God my OTHER lung was strong though!

I laugh at the "head shot too excessive" comment, too. If someone broke into my home, to harm/kill me or my family, and I was pumping JHP's into his chest and it didn't seem to be working, my last resort would be a head shot to try to STOP him. You betcha! But, that's under perfect circumstances. Under stress like a home invasion, we'd be lucky to get all our shots to hit COM.

[XavierBreath]

To answer your question directly, a shot to the brain stem will usually drop a man like boiled cabbage. He might twitch, he might shudder a couple of times, but his voluntary movement will cease. Taking out the cerebrum will result in spastic involuntary movement, and likewise, the human equivalent of boiled cabbage.

The problem is getting to the pons or cerebrum on an attacker. The pons is a small, moving target that is pretty well armored. The cerebrum less so.

I'd rather live and worry about what a jury will think than be buried and wondering where I'm headed next.

[springmom]

Glad I didn't read that right after eating :barf: I was working on a doctorate in educational psychology, but my specialization was neuropsych, so I thought I'd add my $.02.

Yes, a shot to the medulla should settle the bad guy's hash quickly and permanently. However, the only predictable way to hit this relatively tiny target would be an execution-style shooting, and I really don't think any of us wanna go there. Even in Texas, grand juries would take a very dim view of that sort of shot unless it was made by a woman who was being raped or somebody who was on the ground being assaulted in some other manner. In that case (golly, this is a gory topic) the pistol right in the guy's neck, pointed up and back, would be the best shot, I'd think. OTOH, and this is an important caveat, it would NOT necessarily prevent an involuntary system response. IOW, let's say HIS finger is on the trigger pointed at YOU. If you were to shoot him without being able to move away from that gun, you would probably end up being shot yourself, as his muscles would contract as his CNS went haywire. If, however, he were not pointing a weapon at you and you had the opportunity to defend yourself in this manner, well, it would be effective.

Pass the Pepto-Bismol, please (gulp).

Springmom

[rallyhound]

Now put that deer on PCP and it will run a lot farther.


Oh great, now i have to spend the weekend spreading PCP all around my deer stand to see if you are correct.
Do they sell it in 50 pound sacks?

[JohnKSa]

One 50 pound sack would be enough to drive a tenth of the deer in the U.S. crazy...

[StormTrooper]

i do believe part of it lies in the central nervous systems ability to maintain live circuitry even after a terminal hit, this is basically shock. The body reacting to overcome from the trauma delivered.

[mfree]

Have y'all forgotten that PCP is an animal tranquilizer?

[orionengnr]

but it hops people up pretty well...

[MTMilitiaman]

Regarding shooting COM until the threat stops--let's not forget the primary focus of this conversation is handguns in defensive shootings. With a rifle, this approach might be more legitimate, but with handguns, things such as body armor must be considered. If you shoot COM until slide lock and the guy has a bullet proof vest on, you might end up going hand-to-hand with a man hopped up on PCP and thus incapable of feeling fear or pain. Body armor may be rare, but it has been used and must be considered. I am of the conviction that if something isn't working, you should try something else. A popular definition for insanity is trying the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result. I might try a couple controlled pairs to the chest, but if that fails to deliver the desired result, then I am switching my aim to the head until BG is on the ground and not trying to get back up again or until slide lock.

[Bender711]

One reason that a deer will run after having its insides liquified is that it dosent know that it has been shot so it will feel the pain and run from it, not that it helps. As for a person JHP is the way to go short of exploding rounds. Any one know the leagalites on them?

i dont care what you are on a CNS shot will bing you down, i mean it can kill the undead why not the soon to be dead?

[SeekHer]

If you remember your history, the reason the U S Army switched from the .38 to the .45 during the Spanish American War was because of the Moro tribesmen of the Philippines and they were only hyped up on religion, Islam that is, and after being shot they would, like the Duracell Bunny, keep on going, actually coming at you swinging a machete...the only guaranteed way of putting them down with a .38 was a shot to the head...too small of a target, too hard to hit for most of the soldiers, so shots to the body with larger caliber slug was ordered...since this was before the Geneva Convention Rules of Warfare, they were using the soft lead bullet.

[JohnKSa]

they were only hyped up on religion

They were also often heavily wrapped and essentially "pre-tourniqueted" to prevent blood loss.

since this was before the Geneva Convention Rules of Warfare, they were using the soft lead bullet.

The Geneva Convention did not deal with expanding ammo, that was the Hague Convention.

the U S Army switched from the .38 to the .45 during the Spanish American War

Yes, the switch was from the .38 Colt, a cartridge somewhat less powerful than the .38 Special to the .45 Colt revolver cartridge.

[SeekHer]

My error, I should have remembered that, happens more often after you hit 50, but it still pre-dates Laws and Customs of War on Land (Hague); October 18, 1907.
I was trying to emphasize the fact of the expansion of the cartridge was lame due to being under powered not because it was "full metal jacket" (to keep with the movie theme of the original poster).

[warwagon]

and, the U.S. never signed off on the Hague.