I enjoy your videos. Reminds me of drivers who are shocked someone controlled a slide in snowy conditions, like it was magical, and that they couldn't possibly train to avoid certain death in a car crash by being more competent than the drivers test. It's straight idiocy, and retaught because lots of people love to lower the bar right to where they can reach.
‘Jelly’ Bryce was a famous FBI agent/pistolero (aka “the man in the mirror”). They brought him in to take on the most dangerous criminals during the mobster era. He spent a large portion of each day dry firing his revolver in front of a mirror. He shot ‘from the hip’ because he believed it was faster. Now given that he was shooting into a full-length mirror, where could he have 'aimed' to verify where the barrel was pointed? (There were no lasers or red-dots in use back then.) Unfortunately, the FBI were so pleased with his success that they adopted his ‘shooting from the hip’ stance as their training standard. But the regular FBI agents rarely worked with a mirror, nor did they spend anywhere near the time practicing as Jelly did. So the results were pretty poor. However, it took decades before switching over to raising the handgun to eye level for close engagements. Go figure?
Hey, training by dry firing at a mirror sounds like it could work, but if all the FBI did was "ah, just shoot from the hip with your limited live-ammo budget" then I can see that would be pretty poor.
@@Treblaine Exactly: The former was proven to work & the latter was proven not to work. The sad thing is that institutions tend to hold onto things that don't work, long after they should have realized it wasn't working.
Best gun training channel.on youtube. Not even close. If $$ and time allows I'll be taking one of your in person classes. Hopefully sooner then later! Always great stuff. Keep up the amazing work!!
I remember reading Rogue Warrior by Dick Marcinko. At some point he says that when they were starting SEAL Team 6 back in the early 80s they trained to put all the pistol shots in a 3x5 memory card at 5 mtrs. I still use that technique, but I'm not able to do it at eny kind of speed, but always try my best.
I think some Russian units at one point at least trained for this. Here is what I remember as to why: Disables mobility Big arteries/spine Body armor (sans dangler) agnostic I will try to remember more
I like to use blank copy paper, taping them together one over the other...representing the head and chest area.....no markings, just blank paper...to see where my groups are, you can also use different colored copy paper.
I have been a LE firearms instructor for over 10 years. Most cops and civilians can't hit a torso reliably from 15 yards let alone a head from 5. And that is stationary.
I go to the range, every week. In past 2 or 3 years i've seen 1 cop at my range (which is near town center in san diego) that 1 cop was a far worse shot then I am. My first thought was to laugh to myself how bad he was and how much better I was, but I thought twice, and I was happy to see him actually training trying to get better.. thought how much scarier it is so many other cops aren't putting in the extra work
What do average cops and civilians have to do with Rhett's content? He demonstrates techniques that become an option if you are the type who wants to consistently work for instead of pay for or fantasize about better results. The premise is that discipline and original thought unlocks alternatives to what is understood to be most effective. A highly-trained person shouldn't just be doing *more* of what the neophyte can do, they should also be working to unlock a bigger toolbox of competencies. Like how the GIGN trains to conduct hostage rescue with an MR-73 revolver, capitalizing on more maneuverability compared to a short barreled rifle or SMG, while retaining great terminal ballistics and without the tradeoff of mission-critical precision due to them shooting tens of thousands of rounds with it per year each. This unlocks more idiosyncratic ways to attack airplane hostage situations, for example. What you've wrote is like saying an average person can remember only a few phrases of a foreign language, and so no one should try to travel away from their native tongue, simply because language is a perishable skill and must be diligently maintained to unlock the freedom to experience a wider range of places across the globe. Rhett hypothesizes, proves, and *then* teaches; he never said his approaches are for everyone or are the universal best option or should be taught to people who won't do the work. And he isn't just a conduit regurgitating dogma. If you want confirmation of your extant beliefs rather than interesting ideas to consider, there is plenty of it on the internet.
Hey Rhett, hope you're well. The headshot, regardless of the effect on the bad guy, does have a higher probability of missing though. If I shoot at the high center chest, and miss by 3 inches, the bullet is still going to hit flesh and have a chance to slow down or stop before going on to hit something else. But if I miss the head by 3 inches, the bullet is going to hit whatever is behind it at full speed. On the range, things are usually much easier than they are in real life. Proving students can do it on the range doesn't mean they should do it in a fight.
Please post those videos that you are discussing (the lack of effective center mass shots). It would be very helpful to see these videos with your commentary.
I think under stress, many send the first shot high, and over their target. My wife first time I had her aim at center mass, and she hit a top of head headshot. I think they say 2 center mass because most people won't train to get efficient enough to reliably hit the headshot. So get 2 more sure shots into their body to start the FIBS factor. Get them running and stopping their behavior (hopefully) i personally think fast draw to the top of forehead to just above the lips. That T box on the face, if you can draw to first shot there, that persons ability to continue to do harm is almost entirely done in first hit, if it lands where intended. And if not little j frame or lcr has 7 more shots. Really just needs 1 to hit the bad people(s) off button
@demonstratedconcepts Rhett, I am going to be honest; I'm scared of the trigger short-stroking thing on the LCR screwing me up when adrenaline is flowing. But I trust your incisive and evidence-based takes, and assume you considered other 22lr revolvers before deciding on the LCR. I am sure I am overblowing the issue due to no experience with the platform. Can you share your insights around this issue?
I’ve been keeping track of them through the last 6 years of evos in Shivworks classes I’ve attended. I’ve seen a few attempts every year. Every single attempt was successful hit.
So what I’m hearing is that I need to be shooting swinging or otherwise moving beverage cans. (I don’t really have the ability to set up the moving balloon box at the moment, but a swinging beverage bottle or can I could do.)
I would personally say 25 yards would be a good rule of thumb. Practice on a 3x5 index card there, and push yourself to hit it consistently from various draws. I could probably come up with some convoluted drill, but I'd imagine just being able to double tap it from a draw in under 3 seconds is more than most could hope to achieve.
What is your opinion of the XS Fluorescent Dot front sight on a LCR 22? Also, what Pocket Holster are you currently using with your LCR? Great channel!
You are trailblazing and not following the established paradynes. If you are able to reason a different perspective it enables you to avoid becoming stupid (Bonhoeffer’s Theory of Stupidity). Thank you for sharing!
If you watched the video. He describes why head or face shot is more impactful then a torso shot. Even dead center heart shot they can keep moving for a minute plus. Face, or head is usually instant stopper, or seconds. Torso can be instant, but only really if you hit and break some spine
Col. Cooper addressed this 50+ years ago with the Mozambique Drill. And it's frustrating that we still have to educate the "experts" on this again and again. Great video! Thanks for bringing essential wisdom into the chat....
Great video. What about pelvis? I think most of us are worried that a headshot miss is more consequential (goes farther) but yes I practice headshots from 7-15 yards thanks to you with my 22 snubby. If my steel target had pelvis I’d start that way and work up.
Pelvis was discussed on Primary and Secondary one day and they basically said pistol pelvis shots suck. They said rifle pelvis shots [when they work] just tend to anchor the guy; but pistol pelvis shots rarely do much.
@@DWalter.27 I recently saw a video where the guy went down after a single pelvic shot, he did not survive. If the bone is broken in that area I think it's likely you're going down.
Wasn't Platt or Madix from the Miami FBI gunfight shot in the heart before he left the car to keep shooting and fighting? I can't remember which one it was.
Interesting take, although it’s not really supported by available data. I’d cite ASP’s research/data that indicates heavily that the first person to put meaningful rounds on target will more than likely win the gunfight
You're missing the fact that most wins are because the bad guy decides to leave. Rett is concerned with the bad guys who don't want to leave, even when shot; aka they have to be forced into stopping their bad actions.
You're right statistically. But would you be satisfied to settle for being "more than likely win the gunfight' when your life is on the line? Yes there is a trade off between taking a shot that is more likely to connect but may fail to stop, versus going for a shot that requires more training to make but was an almost guaranteed stop. Demonstrated Concepts is pointing out that you need to make this decision up front, and do the necessary training in order to be able to execute the second option. BTW: "putting meaningful rounds on target" is a rather ambiguous expression. What do you mean by it? - Some bad guys run at the sight of a gun. Others at the sound of incoming rounds. - Some when they notice they've been hit (anywhere). - Some when they experience severe pain. - But some are so committed, angry, pumped up on adrenaline or drugs that they will only stop when their body fails them. And anything other than a CNS hit will take time to have that effect.
@@JimTempleman >What do you mean by it? Anatomically significant hits is a term John Correia uses often in conjunction with that. >satisfied to settle Anyone can shoot a torso sized target faster than a head sized target, unless it's really close and they're skilled. Everyday folk miss a LOT at even 3 yards in real encounters. If we grant (and only if you buy into this premise) that getting a shot on someone in the chest nearly guarantees the fight being won, then it makes sense to shoot them in the chest because you will make the shot faster. It's the highest probability play to make. It's not "settling" to take the highest probability play. There is a slight statistical bias in what John Correia analyzes though. He's sampling the population at large, not necessarily people who dedicate time or have high levels of proficiency. I would trust any statistic he gives on his channel, but with that grain of salt. Aiming center mass is definitely the call for 95% of people, assuming 95% of people are not very skilled. But for more proficient shooters at relatively close distances, I can see the difference between a bodyshot and a headshot being marginally different in time. Taran Butler can clean a plate rack from the hip, and the plates are about 8 inches. I'm not sure his draw to first shot gets much faster if it's a torso sized target. Eventually the time improvements of going for a chest shot are so small that going for a headshot makes more sense... if you're good enough and close enough. I'd love some stats or even anecdotes if the shooter is skilled enough, but not many people actually take headshots in real life encounters. Everything else is just gonna be stuff on a timer, and most timers will show that shooting a bigger target is faster than shooting a smaller target. And then you have to pass that to speculation land: "does that speed to first shot advantage outweigh a CNS hit?" I've heard quite a few USPSA GMs speculate that they think a headshot is worth it at their skill level though. I'd still say I agree with John's assessment - fast and first hits to the torso are incredibly effective. And then I personally feel that if you're good enough and at a distance where a headshot isn't gonna slow you down, then go for it. Here's some keyboard warrior math to think about: Idk how fast someone reacts to a gunshot wound and involuntarily flinches from the pain, but if at a given distance you can make a headshot faster than you can make a chest shot + their flinch response time (thus likely missing you with their first shot), then it makes sense to do so. Reaction times are measured around 150ms on the site "HumanBenchmark" for people that have good equipment for the test (gaming monitors. the actual mean/median on the site is inflated and not representative of real world reaction times. You're gonna have to trust me on this one bro), but honestly I would think an involuntary pain flinch is significantly faster.
@@Jake-uy6qw Fine analysis! Minor, but significant exceptions: While hitting most people in the chest will stop them, some chest shots will not stop some people. The further the chest shot it away from the center line, the less likely the stop. Deer have been known to run 20 yards after taking a heart or lung shot with a rifle. Some people hit at certain places in the chest will not flinch or even notice that they've been hit (with a 22 from a snubby). You are relying on statistics rather than turning off the light switch. I agree that that's a good strategy for most people. But I question if it's the best strategy for someone willing to train to the required level. Bill Roger's reactive shooting training & test is based entirely on making head shots as the head-sized targets momentarily appear from behind cover. Another point in favor of high level training.
I need to make one last point: Shooting a pistol is a perishable skill, as are taking head shots, and aiming with a red-dot sight. The more perishable skills you combine, the more perishable the resulting composite skill becomes. I really enjoy shooting, have participated in steel challenge competitions, and even like dry fire practice. But I’ve been through periods in my life when other interests and duties call me away from practicing regularly, and my skills diminish and need to be re-honed when I return to shooting. This raises an interesting question. Is it better to stick with iron sights & torso shots because they are easier to maintain and fall back on during the times you’re out of practice; or is it better to ‘shoot for’ the highest level of performance you can achieve, knowing that you might need to work your way back up to it if you let these skills atrophy? Granted the further along you were, the faster the general level of proficiency will return. But you can trap yourself into a ‘strategy’ (headhunting and/or red-dots) that creates a hurtle to overcome when you return to the practice. This puts you at risk, especially if you need to use these skills when you’re rusty and must apply them at an inopportune moment. Thus, I don’t know the answer to the question above.
Spoken like a warrior. 99% of people aren't warriors. You are inspiring warriors and speaking to warriors. Everyone else is a dreamer who will never put in the work. I'm glad you're saying it. I want you to say it. But for the majority of people watching , this is tactical masturbation.
I think there is a lot of value to what you are saying here, but I can't agree with this advice for the average self defender after watching many Active Self Protection videos. The number of misses from multiple police, aiming center of mass, tells me that under the huge stress of being attacked, that average shooters can't hit small targets. They can't even hit the much larger target of the torso, so I don't find it convincing that most people could hit a head under those conditions. That isn't to say I don't think you could do it. In fact, I am confident that you could, but you are not the average officer or civilian self defender. Thanks for another good video, but I am going to have to disagree with you on this one.
I think the real issue is what the ideal shot is. 99% of shooters you ask will definitively tell you that center of mass is ideal without considering the drawbacks. And on your point, why would we gear our training toward the average shooter? Should we just expect ourselves to be winging shots off into nowhere when the pressure is on? Think about the mentality of someone who has only ever trained A zones at 7 yards vs someone who expects themselves to be able to hit a more difficult shot. The lower standard shooter prioritizes a lower quality shot, while the higher standard understands the best possible shot and also has the option to take whatever shot is available.
I think the problem goes deeper and you'll find those people you're talking about are just pointing their gun in the general direction of the bad guy and jerking the trigger. Aka they aren't taking aimed shots at all, making them irrelevant to this discussion on aimed shots.
Demonstrated Concepts LLC is not giving this advice to run of the mill police officers. He's giving it to enthusiasts who are willing to train & maintain a skill set.
You have to think about who this advice is for. If you've made it to this video and certainly if you're taking one of Rhett's classes you're probably at least interested in being significantly better than the average self defender. Certainly a demonstrated concepts or shivworks class is not the same thing as a NRA concealed carry class. It doesn't make sense to constrain high-performing shooters to the same "rules" and advice as the sort of person who "trains" maybe 2-3 times a year if that.
@@JimTemplemanRight, if we’re watching his channel it’s because we wish to be much, much better than the average shooter. I disagree with the premise of the original comment stating that we shouldn’t try to train to a higher standard because of theoretical reasons. Who dares, wins after all.
In a legal self defense scenario there can be severe negative ramifications of putting a round in the head or face. This issue is magnified even more so dependent on the State or locale the event occurs. Not a word about this fact.
Every year firearms hardware changes and ( arguably) improves. This dude is the first real innovator in software and approach I've seen in decades.
That’s a good analogy.
Reverse Mozambique... I can dig it
"Headshot isn't as hard as you think" is a funny title when most of your RUclips viewing is photography and firearms😂
This is great content. This is the most realistic perspective for everyday concealed carry and shooting info.
I enjoy your videos. Reminds me of drivers who are shocked someone controlled a slide in snowy conditions, like it was magical, and that they couldn't possibly train to avoid certain death in a car crash by being more competent than the drivers test. It's straight idiocy, and retaught because lots of people love to lower the bar right to where they can reach.
This is excellent advice.
I really think you’re one of the most innovative trainers out there right now. I wish I lived in the US to take one of your courses right now.
Well said good information. Switches beat timers every time. Playing cards are my favorite targets to use.
I took your advice and got an AKP and set it up as a cheek pistol. So much fun, and the looks I get at the gun range are hilarious lol
This is controversy the channel and I think it's fantastic.
‘Jelly’ Bryce was a famous FBI agent/pistolero (aka “the man in the mirror”). They brought him in to take on the most dangerous criminals during the mobster era.
He spent a large portion of each day dry firing his revolver in front of a mirror. He shot ‘from the hip’ because he believed it was faster. Now given that he was shooting into a full-length mirror, where could he have 'aimed' to verify where the barrel was pointed? (There were no lasers or red-dots in use back then.)
Unfortunately, the FBI were so pleased with his success that they adopted his ‘shooting from the hip’ stance as their training standard. But the regular FBI agents rarely worked with a mirror, nor did they spend anywhere near the time practicing as Jelly did. So the results were pretty poor. However, it took decades before switching over to raising the handgun to eye level for close engagements. Go figure?
Hey, training by dry firing at a mirror sounds like it could work, but if all the FBI did was "ah, just shoot from the hip with your limited live-ammo budget" then I can see that would be pretty poor.
@@Treblaine Exactly: The former was proven to work & the latter was proven not to work. The sad thing is that institutions tend to hold onto things that don't work, long after they should have realized it wasn't working.
I think I hear Bob Munden laughing...
Best gun training channel.on youtube. Not even close. If $$ and time allows I'll be taking one of your in person classes. Hopefully sooner then later! Always great stuff. Keep up the amazing work!!
Thank you! Hope to see you in the range soon!
I remember reading Rogue Warrior by Dick Marcinko. At some point he says that when they were starting SEAL Team 6 back in the early 80s they trained to put all the pistol shots in a 3x5 memory card at 5 mtrs. I still use that technique, but I'm not able to do it at eny kind of speed, but always try my best.
Posted this video over on Defensive Carry, resulting in the predictable shitstorm. Ah well.
Thank you for your videos!
I don't understand how this guy still only has 18k subscribers. He is a high quality channel
this is the most badass title&thumbnail to anything I have ever seen
Well said per usual.
I would like to see your thoughts on pelvis shots.
I have the same question. It's a pretty large target area with lots bone, and a high probability that you'll be aiming down.
I think some Russian units at one point at least trained for this. Here is what I remember as to why:
Disables mobility
Big arteries/spine
Body armor (sans dangler) agnostic
I will try to remember more
One of my first firearms teachers had to make a head shot at 20 feet and he trained a guy who landed a helicopter and delivered a 40 yard headshot.
Wasn't a major factor in the IPSC A-Zone dimensions the common front sight blade size of a 1911 of the era?
No idea. Would love to learn more
Would be dope to see a new target and a game/sport surrounding it, where the head scores more points by a hefty margin
I like to use blank copy paper, taping them together one over the other...representing the head and chest area.....no markings, just blank paper...to see where my groups are, you can also use different colored copy paper.
I have been a LE firearms instructor for over 10 years. Most cops and civilians can't hit a torso reliably from 15 yards let alone a head from 5. And that is stationary.
Absolutely.
But everyone who actually makes an effort can do it on demand.
I go to the range, every week. In past 2 or 3 years i've seen 1 cop at my range (which is near town center in san diego) that 1 cop was a far worse shot then I am. My first thought was to laugh to myself how bad he was and how much better I was, but I thought twice, and I was happy to see him actually training trying to get better.. thought how much scarier it is so many other cops aren't putting in the extra work
@@jackgreenstalk777The History of cops. They are there to make money, and get a confession, not be your friend, or follow the constitution.
What do average cops and civilians have to do with Rhett's content? He demonstrates techniques that become an option if you are the type who wants to consistently work for instead of pay for or fantasize about better results. The premise is that discipline and original thought unlocks alternatives to what is understood to be most effective. A highly-trained person shouldn't just be doing *more* of what the neophyte can do, they should also be working to unlock a bigger toolbox of competencies. Like how the GIGN trains to conduct hostage rescue with an MR-73 revolver, capitalizing on more maneuverability compared to a short barreled rifle or SMG, while retaining great terminal ballistics and without the tradeoff of mission-critical precision due to them shooting tens of thousands of rounds with it per year each. This unlocks more idiosyncratic ways to attack airplane hostage situations, for example. What you've wrote is like saying an average person can remember only a few phrases of a foreign language, and so no one should try to travel away from their native tongue, simply because language is a perishable skill and must be diligently maintained to unlock the freedom to experience a wider range of places across the globe. Rhett hypothesizes, proves, and *then* teaches; he never said his approaches are for everyone or are the universal best option or should be taught to people who won't do the work. And he isn't just a conduit regurgitating dogma. If you want confirmation of your extant beliefs rather than interesting ideas to consider, there is plenty of it on the internet.
Stats show the average LE officer scarcely shoots outside of quals.
As usual, excellent and scientifically valid.
Hey Rhett, hope you're well. The headshot, regardless of the effect on the bad guy, does have a higher probability of missing though. If I shoot at the high center chest, and miss by 3 inches, the bullet is still going to hit flesh and have a chance to slow down or stop before going on to hit something else. But if I miss the head by 3 inches, the bullet is going to hit whatever is behind it at full speed.
On the range, things are usually much easier than they are in real life. Proving students can do it on the range doesn't mean they should do it in a fight.
Ok, I have to save the money for your class!
Would love to see you on the range!
Please post those videos that you are discussing (the lack of effective center mass shots). It would be very helpful to see these videos with your commentary.
I always thought the Mozambique drill was backwards. It makes sense to start with the head and transition to the body as you are fighting recoil.
I think under stress, many send the first shot high, and over their target. My wife first time I had her aim at center mass, and she hit a top of head headshot. I think they say 2 center mass because most people won't train to get efficient enough to reliably hit the headshot. So get 2 more sure shots into their body to start the FIBS factor. Get them running and stopping their behavior (hopefully) i personally think fast draw to the top of forehead to just above the lips. That T box on the face, if you can draw to first shot there, that persons ability to continue to do harm is almost entirely done in first hit, if it lands where intended. And if not little j frame or lcr has 7 more shots. Really just needs 1 to hit the bad people(s) off button
@demonstratedconcepts Rhett, I am going to be honest; I'm scared of the trigger short-stroking thing on the LCR screwing me up when adrenaline is flowing. But I trust your incisive and evidence-based takes, and assume you considered other 22lr revolvers before deciding on the LCR. I am sure I am overblowing the issue due to no experience with the platform. Can you share your insights around this issue?
To what extent has the headshot-first approach been validated through force-on-force scenarios?
I’ve been keeping track of them through the last 6 years of evos in Shivworks classes I’ve attended. I’ve seen a few attempts every year. Every single attempt was successful hit.
@@demonstratedconceptsllc4918 Thanks.
Where can we find your current cp33 setup?
So what I’m hearing is that I need to be shooting swinging or otherwise moving beverage cans. (I don’t really have the ability to set up the moving balloon box at the moment, but a swinging beverage bottle or can I could do.)
I agree with everything said in the video but I would be curious at what distance do you decide to switch to body shots to improve hit probability?
I would personally say 25 yards would be a good rule of thumb. Practice on a 3x5 index card there, and push yourself to hit it consistently from various draws.
I could probably come up with some convoluted drill, but I'd imagine just being able to double tap it from a draw in under 3 seconds is more than most could hope to achieve.
All right John Wick, lets hear it
How did you build your moving target?
I’ll do a video on it in the future
What is your opinion of the XS Fluorescent Dot front sight on a LCR 22?
Also, what Pocket Holster are you currently using with your LCR?
Great channel!
Thanks! I like the factory front painted orange. I’m using a cut down Barsony leather sleeve
@@demonstratedconceptsllc4918
Much Appreciated. Very few have developed your level of acumen & skill with this platform
You are trailblazing and not following the established paradynes. If you are able to reason a different perspective it enables you to avoid becoming stupid (Bonhoeffer’s Theory of Stupidity). Thank you for sharing!
Does your draw to first shot time stay the same for head vs. torso? If not, is it worth the compromise?
If you watched the video. He describes why head or face shot is more impactful then a torso shot. Even dead center heart shot they can keep moving for a minute plus. Face, or head is usually instant stopper, or seconds. Torso can be instant, but only really if you hit and break some spine
Col. Cooper addressed this 50+ years ago with the Mozambique Drill. And it's frustrating that we still have to educate the "experts" on this again and again.
Great video! Thanks for bringing essential wisdom into the chat....
I always heard that center mass is to slow down person, headshots are follow up.
How long can you drive a car with an oil leak?
How long can you drive a car without electrics?
Answers on a postcard!
Great point
Great video. What about pelvis? I think most of us are worried that a headshot miss is more consequential (goes farther) but yes I practice headshots from 7-15 yards thanks to you with my 22 snubby. If my steel target had pelvis I’d start that way and work up.
Pelvis was discussed on Primary and Secondary one day and they basically said pistol pelvis shots suck. They said rifle pelvis shots [when they work] just tend to anchor the guy; but pistol pelvis shots rarely do much.
@@DWalter.27 I recently saw a video where the guy went down after a single pelvic shot, he did not survive. If the bone is broken in that area I think it's likely you're going down.
Rifle? Pistol? Shotgun? Did he keep shooting back after going down? The comment doesn’t mean much without that info.
Wasn't Platt or Madix from the Miami FBI gunfight shot in the heart before he left the car to keep shooting and fighting? I can't remember which one it was.
I believe the bullet stopped just short of the heart
@@donh1572 that may have been it, I just remember they both got shot, one stayed and gave up and the other one kept fighting
Interesting take, although it’s not really supported by available data. I’d cite ASP’s research/data that indicates heavily that the first person to put meaningful rounds on target will more than likely win the gunfight
You're missing the fact that most wins are because the bad guy decides to leave.
Rett is concerned with the bad guys who don't want to leave, even when shot; aka they have to be forced into stopping their bad actions.
You're right statistically. But would you be satisfied to settle for being "more than likely win the gunfight' when your life is on the line?
Yes there is a trade off between taking a shot that is more likely to connect but may fail to stop, versus going for a shot that requires more training to make but was an almost guaranteed stop.
Demonstrated Concepts is pointing out that you need to make this decision up front, and do the necessary training in order to be able to execute the second option.
BTW: "putting meaningful rounds on target" is a rather ambiguous expression. What do you mean by it?
- Some bad guys run at the sight of a gun. Others at the sound of incoming rounds.
- Some when they notice they've been hit (anywhere).
- Some when they experience severe pain.
- But some are so committed, angry, pumped up on adrenaline or drugs that they will only stop when their body fails them. And anything other than a CNS hit will take time to have that effect.
@@JimTempleman >What do you mean by it?
Anatomically significant hits is a term John Correia uses often in conjunction with that.
>satisfied to settle
Anyone can shoot a torso sized target faster than a head sized target, unless it's really close and they're skilled. Everyday folk miss a LOT at even 3 yards in real encounters. If we grant (and only if you buy into this premise) that getting a shot on someone in the chest nearly guarantees the fight being won, then it makes sense to shoot them in the chest because you will make the shot faster. It's the highest probability play to make. It's not "settling" to take the highest probability play.
There is a slight statistical bias in what John Correia analyzes though. He's sampling the population at large, not necessarily people who dedicate time or have high levels of proficiency. I would trust any statistic he gives on his channel, but with that grain of salt. Aiming center mass is definitely the call for 95% of people, assuming 95% of people are not very skilled.
But for more proficient shooters at relatively close distances, I can see the difference between a bodyshot and a headshot being marginally different in time. Taran Butler can clean a plate rack from the hip, and the plates are about 8 inches. I'm not sure his draw to first shot gets much faster if it's a torso sized target. Eventually the time improvements of going for a chest shot are so small that going for a headshot makes more sense... if you're good enough and close enough.
I'd love some stats or even anecdotes if the shooter is skilled enough, but not many people actually take headshots in real life encounters. Everything else is just gonna be stuff on a timer, and most timers will show that shooting a bigger target is faster than shooting a smaller target. And then you have to pass that to speculation land: "does that speed to first shot advantage outweigh a CNS hit?" I've heard quite a few USPSA GMs speculate that they think a headshot is worth it at their skill level though.
I'd still say I agree with John's assessment - fast and first hits to the torso are incredibly effective. And then I personally feel that if you're good enough and at a distance where a headshot isn't gonna slow you down, then go for it.
Here's some keyboard warrior math to think about: Idk how fast someone reacts to a gunshot wound and involuntarily flinches from the pain, but if at a given distance you can make a headshot faster than you can make a chest shot + their flinch response time (thus likely missing you with their first shot), then it makes sense to do so. Reaction times are measured around 150ms on the site "HumanBenchmark" for people that have good equipment for the test (gaming monitors. the actual mean/median on the site is inflated and not representative of real world reaction times. You're gonna have to trust me on this one bro), but honestly I would think an involuntary pain flinch is significantly faster.
@@Jake-uy6qw Fine analysis!
Minor, but significant exceptions: While hitting most people in the chest will stop them, some chest shots will not stop some people. The further the chest shot it away from the center line, the less likely the stop. Deer have been known to run 20 yards after taking a heart or lung shot with a rifle.
Some people hit at certain places in the chest will not flinch or even notice that they've been hit (with a 22 from a snubby).
You are relying on statistics rather than turning off the light switch. I agree that that's a good strategy for most people. But I question if it's the best strategy for someone willing to train to the required level. Bill Roger's reactive shooting training & test is based entirely on making head shots as the head-sized targets momentarily appear from behind cover. Another point in favor of high level training.
I need to make one last point: Shooting a pistol is a perishable skill, as are taking head shots, and aiming with a red-dot sight. The more perishable skills you combine, the more perishable the resulting composite skill becomes.
I really enjoy shooting, have participated in steel challenge competitions, and even like dry fire practice. But I’ve been through periods in my life when other interests and duties call me away from practicing regularly, and my skills diminish and need to be re-honed when I return to shooting. This raises an interesting question. Is it better to stick with iron sights & torso shots because they are easier to maintain and fall back on during the times you’re out of practice; or is it better to ‘shoot for’ the highest level of performance you can achieve, knowing that you might need to work your way back up to it if you let these skills atrophy?
Granted the further along you were, the faster the general level of proficiency will return. But you can trap yourself into a ‘strategy’ (headhunting and/or red-dots) that creates a hurtle to overcome when you return to the practice. This puts you at risk, especially if you need to use these skills when you’re rusty and must apply them at an inopportune moment. Thus, I don’t know the answer to the question above.
who's watching in 2024? 😂
Spoken like a warrior. 99% of people aren't warriors. You are inspiring warriors and speaking to warriors. Everyone else is a dreamer who will never put in the work. I'm glad you're saying it. I want you to say it. But for the majority of people watching , this is tactical masturbation.
I think there is a lot of value to what you are saying here, but I can't agree with this advice for the average self defender after watching many Active Self Protection videos. The number of misses from multiple police, aiming center of mass, tells me that under the huge stress of being attacked, that average shooters can't hit small targets. They can't even hit the much larger target of the torso, so I don't find it convincing that most people could hit a head under those conditions.
That isn't to say I don't think you could do it. In fact, I am confident that you could, but you are not the average officer or civilian self defender.
Thanks for another good video, but I am going to have to disagree with you on this one.
I think the real issue is what the ideal shot is. 99% of shooters you ask will definitively tell you that center of mass is ideal without considering the drawbacks. And on your point, why would we gear our training toward the average shooter? Should we just expect ourselves to be winging shots off into nowhere when the pressure is on? Think about the mentality of someone who has only ever trained A zones at 7 yards vs someone who expects themselves to be able to hit a more difficult shot. The lower standard shooter prioritizes a lower quality shot, while the higher standard understands the best possible shot and also has the option to take whatever shot is available.
I think the problem goes deeper and you'll find those people you're talking about are just pointing their gun in the general direction of the bad guy and jerking the trigger. Aka they aren't taking aimed shots at all, making them irrelevant to this discussion on aimed shots.
Demonstrated Concepts LLC is not giving this advice to run of the mill police officers. He's giving it to enthusiasts who are willing to train & maintain a skill set.
You have to think about who this advice is for. If you've made it to this video and certainly if you're taking one of Rhett's classes you're probably at least interested in being significantly better than the average self defender. Certainly a demonstrated concepts or shivworks class is not the same thing as a NRA concealed carry class. It doesn't make sense to constrain high-performing shooters to the same "rules" and advice as the sort of person who "trains" maybe 2-3 times a year if that.
@@JimTemplemanRight, if we’re watching his channel it’s because we wish to be much, much better than the average shooter.
I disagree with the premise of the original comment stating that we shouldn’t try to train to a higher standard because of theoretical reasons. Who dares, wins after all.
In a legal self defense scenario there can be severe negative ramifications of putting a round in the head or face. This issue is magnified even more so dependent on the State or locale the event occurs. Not a word about this fact.
Sounds like a bunch of gun store fuddlore to me.
Because it's not a fact, it's BS