I did have a trainer once in a live fire shoot house tell me I had time to slow down and take a head shot. I still didn’t got for a head shot after that.
Your reference to force on force is well made. In the force on force stuff (same trainer as above) they never chastised us for not taking a head shot. Hmmmm. And it never occurred to me to take a head shot.
I’ve used them and seen guys on the range use them. I print all of my targets off of the internet for the price of paper and ink. I figure if I can hit a 9 inch pie plate or an 8.5 x 11 piece of paper from multiple distances, I am combat accurate. Do I still practice precision shooting? Yes. Of course. Sticky notes and an old deck of playing cards work for that too. We also shoot the old trifold display boards our kids used for school projects. Lots if little stuff to shoot at on those as well.
The first shooting class I ever took used a crass phrase to teach this. Pardon me for repeating it, but “tits to pits.” Line up the nipples and the armpits and shoot along that line.
We were taught to NOT use sul. But this picture is also NOT what we were told Sul was.
The Sul they demonstrated has the gun angling at more of a 45 degree angle towards the front rather than this picture which is very close to straight down. Thanks for providing this pic.
I was taught that it is actually a Portuguese word since the concept was developed in Brazil. (Google says it means “south.”) Masad Ayoob and others teach that the Brazilian SWAT were taught a similar technique for officers entering a building. The Brazilian cops were constantlu muzzling the guy in front of them (and maybe friendly fire was happening too). So they trained their cops to use position Sul to mitigate. What they showed us was not what was pictured but more of a 45 degree downward angle. We were taught it is not a good tool since you are still muzzling someone in front of you, now his lower extremities rather than the middle of his back. We were taught a technique not called Sul, but very similar to what @Karacal posted. Your support hand opens up and you pivot the gun straight down keeping your hands together. Very fast to get the gun back to correct grip.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but for your bomb scenario, you need more than just a head shot. You really need to be shooting through some very small piece of the head: the ocular cavity, nose/mouth, or the ear or maybe the back of the head/brain stem. That’s really the only way to reliably shut down the central computer and turn the bad guy off now.
I don’t recall seeing this discussed above, but head shots that hit the bony parts of the head have been known to glance off and not penetrate into the brain. Seems I just read about this actually happening somewhere but I don’t recall where.
Don’t know if it’s true but one of the cons of a .223 or .556 is that they’re too light weight. Hitting even a small twig or similar will deflect the round off course. Perhaps a more knowledgeable person can give some insight.
I heard about the kid in the top photo,
Yes he lived, but it’s not like he walked away from it either!
When it happened he collapsed instantly and was in a coma after hours of surgery. The fact that he ever woke up and had any level of function is astounding!
That’s a far cry from taking that headshot and just standing there carrying on a conversation.
And of the undoubtedly millions of people that have received headshots since the invention of the gun, I’d say the survival rate is pretty insignificant.
Those pictures are creepy and could give a person nightmares. Still glad you posted them.
There will always be reasons for head shots. Anytime the head is all you can see is a great reason for them. A head shot is great for hitting someone behind cover but requires more precision. But, with someone charging me, I would go for the body. Chest and pelvic areas are much easier when you are in a rush, but I do practice head shots too. It’s easy to hit the head at the range. It is even easier to hit the body.
Not only can the bullet glance off of the skull but it’s my understanding that even if it penetrates the skull it might not instantly shut the person off unless it hits the part of the brain that controls motor function. I believe those controls are in the lower part of the brain and brain stem located right behind the area around the nose that you described. But too low and you risk missing the brain altogether.
During the first in person pistol self defense class I took we had a segment where we skipped bullets off of the top of 50 gallon plastic drums into a target. All the bullets shot by the various participants in the class - 9mm, .45, 40 - glanced right off the top and into the target as long as the angle was shallow enough. Windshields are even tougher than the plastic barrels.
When I lived in New England a lot of the hunters would talk about how easily rifle bullets could be deflected by hitting twigs or even leaves in the thick forests up there. This was considered true even with .308 or 30-06. It was often recomended to use heavy for caliber bullets with flat or rounded tips to decrease the chances for deflection.
Makes sense to me from a physics perspective though maybe they were all just using that as an excuse for missing their targets during hunting season🤷♂️
I have never heard of that. Fascinating. Makes sense, but so interesting. Like skipping rocks I suppose.
Just like skipping rocks. If I remember correctly the primary point he was trying to show us was why you want to hide behind the engine block or wheels of a vehicle and not stand up and shoot over the hood where an attackers misses could get deflected at you off of the hood or the window.
This instructor also taught the State Police special response team and threw in several different training techniques that I suspect most people don’t get in a level 1 self defense pistol class.
This happened near my neighborhood this past weekend. The details of the shooting don’t sound good, but an officer shooting his buddy highlights the risk of being shot, or missing a shot, during an actively moving real-time event. Maybe the officer in the back should of been practicing SUL.
“Two officers, at least one of which was using a shield, engaged with Taylor after police said he refused their commands to drop the weapon. One of the officers was struck in the arm by a bullet from the second officer.”
I mentioned that I shoot a Hostage simulation whenever I go to the range. A few years ago we had this company conversation about Hostages. The point that was being made was that it was better (for the hostage) to take the shot, rather than let the hostage be moved to a second crime scene. As nothing good comes of being removed (for the hostage) from the location.
The fascinating legal point to this, is that criminal is going to be the one charged.
Not saying any problems with that practice.
It’s something I do not believe most people who break the law understand. That any legal repercussions for collateral damage by LEO, during the commission of the crime and apprehension of the criminal, will be additional charges as well.
I agree.
However, in this case it appears the criminal/burglar was already gone. Right now it looks like the police killed the homeowner that called 911 and reported the burglar at his house (condo?).
It sounds like the homeowner had a taser, but did not follow police instructions to put it down, so the police shot him thinking he was pointing a pistol at them. This is a very sad chain of events, and I am sure the police wish they could get a do-over.
