The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > Hogan's Alley > Tactics and Training

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old February 13, 2020, 02:45 AM   #1
JohnKSa
Staff
 
Join Date: February 12, 2001
Location: DFW Area
Posts: 22,809
Interesting video of a robbery ended by an armed defender.

Violence Advisory: A person is killed in this video.

There was a church shooting not long ago where the perpetrator was shot in the head from several yards away. There's always a probabilistic component when shooting at a small moving target, but it's clear that there was skill required.

To help understand why the shot was so impressive, here's a counterpoint video that helps puts things into perspective.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0hWWoNuBY10

The defender shoots three times. The first shot was taken at the longest distance--estimated muzzle to cranium distance is between 2 and 3 feet. Based on the attacker's reactions and other cues in the video, the first shot seems to hit the attacker in the hood of his jacket but does not significantly impact the attacker's head nor does it cause any apparent impairment.

I don't see how the second shot could have missed the attacker completely, based on his position and the position of the gun at the moment of firing, but it doesn't appear to have hit the attacker in the head (or at least not in the brain) as his body is still clearly under voluntary control after the second shot. The robber does not appear to be significantly impaired/injured by this shot. The second shot was taken at a muzzle to cranium distance of about 2 feet.

The third shot does the trick. It is fired at a muzzle to cranium distance of perhaps 3 to 6 inches. It quite obviously hits the attacker in the brain and things get calm very quickly.

Mr. Wilson, who took down the TX church shooter obviously had a skill set which does not come easily or automatically. He fired once at about 10 yards at a moving target and scored a brain shot which ended the encounter.

The defender in this video fired at a person standing next to him and didn't score a brain shot until the third shot -- fired with the muzzle just a few inches from the robber's head.

Both defenders got the job done, but the differences in the two scenarios made me ask myself two questions, each with two parts.

Question 1: Part 1: Based on the practice and training I have received and continue to engage in and based on the skill level I have achieved and work to maintain, which of the two defenders' performance am I most likely to be able to match? Part 2: If I don't like the answer, am I willing to do anything about it?

Question 2: Watch the shooting sequence a couple of times, carefully noting the robber's head movement. Watch how the orientation of his head and the hood's size combine to make the initial shot miss. Watch how the robber's movements result in the second shot missing at even closer range. Part 1: Was the defender wise to choose the head as his target? Part 2: Having seen this video is that what I would do in the defender's place?

One more question occurs to me. The defender expended 3 rounds neutralizing an attacker who was at arms length distance and who never fired on him. He appears to have scored a 33% hit rate at point blank range. This has interesting implications when it comes to capacity considerations, especially in situations where the marksmanship requirements are more stressing and/or there are multiple attackers.
__________________
Do you know about the TEXAS State Rifle Association?
JohnKSa is offline  
Old February 13, 2020, 06:50 AM   #2
URIT
Junior Member
 
Join Date: February 7, 2020
Location: Coastal North Carolina
Posts: 14
A good video that we should all watch and answer the questions you posed for ourselves. Thanks for sharing it with us.

It demonstrates to me the need for more point-of-aim training and less sighted training. Also, the importance of having both hands free.

The draw shows the importance of a good holster positioned correctly so you can get a good grip on your gun from the beginning and not have your muzzle cross your own body.

I believe the shooter was wise to go for the head. Bad guys wear bulletproof vests too and the hoody would hide one well.
URIT is offline  
Old February 13, 2020, 07:34 AM   #3
TunnelRat
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 22, 2011
Posts: 10,130
Quote:
Originally Posted by URIT View Post
A good video that we should all watch and answer the questions you posed for ourselves. Thanks for sharing it with us.



It demonstrates to me the need for more point-of-aim training and less sighted training. Also, the importance of having both hands free.



The draw shows the importance of a good holster positioned correctly so you can get a good grip on your gun from the beginning and not have your muzzle cross your own body.



I believe the shooter was wise to go for the head. Bad guys wear bulletproof vests too and the hoody would hide one well.


To the last point, I think failure to stop drills are worth mentioning. To me start shooting at something you have a much higher likelihood of hitting, then move to the head if that proves ineffective. Certainly bad guys can wear armor, but repeated misses to try to address an unconfirmed possibility may not be the best call, imo.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
TunnelRat is offline  
Old February 13, 2020, 07:50 AM   #4
Petersburg
Junior Member
 
Join Date: January 1, 2020
Posts: 12
And when he finally does get one in the brain-box...perp immediately wilts and drops...notice the position of the hands...tell-tale dead. Hands back, loose, dangling from wrist.
Petersburg is offline  
Old February 13, 2020, 09:16 AM   #5
USNRet93
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 23, 2018
Location: Republic of Boulder, USA
Posts: 1,463
Watched the video a while ago..I subscribe to John's youtube channel....BUT, I have a question..the gent to the BG's right was not threatened..he pulled out his HG and killed him..if in the US, would this be described as a 'good shoot'?

A few months ago, I asked about the same sort of thing here. I walk into my bank and there's is a guy holding one of the tellers at gunpoint..I walk up and put one behind his ear...'good shoot'??
__________________
PhormerPhantomPhlyer

"Tools not Trophies”
USNRet93 is offline  
Old February 13, 2020, 02:39 PM   #6
Aguila Blanca
Staff
 
Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 13,436
Quote:
Originally Posted by USNRet93
..if in the US, would this be described as a 'good shoot'?
I'm inclined to think that in most U.S. jurisdictions it would be considered a "good shoot." There are probably some places where a prosecutor might send it to a grand jury, or possibly directly to an arrest and trial. If it results in an arrest and charges, then only the jury can decide whether or not it was a "good shoot."

Quote:
Originally Posted by USNRet93
A few months ago, I asked about the same sort of thing here. I walk into my bank and there's is a guy holding one of the tellers at gunpoint..I walk up and put one behind his ear...'good shoot'??
See above.
__________________
NRA Life Member / Certified Instructor
NRA Chief RSO / CMP RSO
1911 Certified Armorer
Jeepaholic
Aguila Blanca is offline  
Old February 13, 2020, 05:49 PM   #7
2damnold4this
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 12, 2009
Location: Athens, Georgia
Posts: 2,435
I'm not sure the defender in the video missed any of his shots.
2damnold4this is offline  
Old February 14, 2020, 02:12 AM   #8
JohnKSa
Staff
 
Join Date: February 12, 2001
Location: DFW Area
Posts: 22,809
He certainly didn't hit the guy in the brain or the guy wouldn't have stayed on his feet and making voluntary movements.

The first shot does appear to have hit the hood of the robber's jacket and may have touched meat under the hood, but had to have missed the brain.

The second shot may have touched meat too, but again, it missed the brain because the man stayed on his feet and his body remained under voluntary control.

The immediate reaction when the third shot connects makes it pretty obvious that the brain was hit.
__________________
Do you know about the TEXAS State Rifle Association?
JohnKSa is offline  
Old February 14, 2020, 05:16 AM   #9
TBM900
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 2, 2015
Posts: 539
Just to be a bit technical...
The term "brain" is used to describe a complex of structures that work together but are in fact separate.
And there are certain parts (most of it) that can be damaged and not necessarily immediately incapacitate.

The largest portion of the brain, the cerebrum, can be severely damaged and not immediately incapacitate the individual its attached to (just look at your typical liberal for proof). In fact there have been more than a few examples of people who have been shot in the head, the bullet fully penetrating their cerebrum, and didn't even realize what had happened.

Surprising to many, there are only a few small areas in the brain structure that when damaged, guarantee an immediate incapacitation of the person, the cerebellum, medulla, and brain stem. This is why police/military snipers often aim for a very specific portion of the brain in certain situations, not just the head or the largest portion of the brain. If those critical areas are not damaged, the person could potentially react or even function in a reasonable capacity after being struck.

My point being is that in the video, the first shot(s) may not have missed the brain.
They may have just missed the critical portions of it.

[OCD-OFF]
__________________
Queen of England
Retired Colonial Marine
14th Earl to walk on the moon
TBM900 is offline  
Old February 14, 2020, 09:33 AM   #10
Ed4032
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 13, 2010
Posts: 161
He may have missed the first shot but the BG hearing was totally gone for sure. It did not seem to confuse the BG at all. It took three rounds.
__________________
Gun control is like stopping drunk driving by making it harder for sober people to drive.
Ed4032 is offline  
Old February 14, 2020, 09:36 AM   #11
JERRYS.
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 23, 2013
Location: Alabama
Posts: 2,600
use of lethal force is justified in every state of the union to prevent the serious harm or death or immediate threat of serious harm or death or prevent any forcible felony against one's self or an innocent third party.

in this case the innocent third party is the cashier, and having a gun pointed at them during a robbery is both a forcible felony and an immediate threat of serious harm or death.

on face value this was a justified use of lethal force. a bench trial if arrest was pushed by a liberal D.A. would probably be the best choice for the defendant.
JERRYS. is offline  
Old February 14, 2020, 09:44 AM   #12
JohnKSa
Staff
 
Join Date: February 12, 2001
Location: DFW Area
Posts: 22,809
Let me think about this thread for awhile and maybe I'll try again with very slightly different wording so people can focus on the actual lesson (a skilled shooter who places an emphasis on training uses excellent technique to take down a threat at around 10 yards with one shot through the head vs a shooter who fires one-handed and requires 3 shots to perform the same task from only a couple of feet away) vs. becoming completely distracted by the use of the term "brain".
__________________
Do you know about the TEXAS State Rifle Association?
JohnKSa is offline  
Closed Thread

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:15 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2018 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.06191 seconds with 10 queries