Using a Firearm to Detain a Person

[bwframe]

Curious what others think about these techniques?

[video=youtube_share;mlSebGdJ2Lo]http://youtu.be/mlSebGdJ2Lo[/video]

 

[K_W]

It better damn well have been home invasion or a felony witnessed by others who stick around, or your going to catch a pointing a firearm charge.

You draw on a non-violent shoplifter, you will be the one in jail the longest.

 

[jblomenberg16]

Sorry, and no offence to the poster, but is that the same guy that did sign language at Nelson Mandella's funeral? Holy cow, I talk with my hands, but that guys hands are very distracting!


Joking aside, I think his commands are good, and pulling and pointing the weapon would only be the result of seeing or visually perceiving a life threatening situation. Once the threat is over (weapon is dropped or visually you confirm no threat), IMHO, the gun comes low ready but is no longer pointed.

 

[rhino]

I'm not in the detaining people business, whether through the use of firearms or not.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

I quit watching at the 4:30 mark. I couldn't take any more.

The pelvis is not the best target, and good luck breaking the pelvic girdle with a pistol round. You *can* do so, but its like relying on shooting someone in the eye. If you can't see someone's hands near their abdomen while holding the pistol center mass, you're doing it wrong.

The times I've seen civilians detain someone its been because the person was too injured to flee or was physically restrained. Consider that you are extending the encounter when you attempt to detain someone, and assuming you don't have handcuffs and aren't willing to shoot someone for failure to comply with your orders, you are giving them time to reassess and possibly re-attack. It may be in your best interest to end the encounter even if you don't have to shoot by simply removing the threat (letting him flee or withdrawing yourself).

 

[lovemachine]

I haven't been able to watch the video yet, but I had assumed this would be good advice, since the guy is a lawyer.

 

[looney2ns]

FYI: Guy talking in video is a lawyer that makes regular appearances on The Best Defense show.

Mayoob Assab promotes the idea of aiming for the pelvis.

Edit, not sure what brain fart I was having but I meant Massad Ayoob.

 

[sopwith21]

That would scare me to death. If you are not a cop and attempt to detain anyone outside your home with a firearm, you are begging for a very long prison sentence. If there is any way humanly possible to charge you with a crime, you can rest assured that it will be done. Remember, prosecutors need criminals because without criminals, no one needs a prosecutor.

And if your firearm is drawn when police arrive you may well be gunned down on the spot. And don't expect them to face charges for it, even if they use your corpse for target practice. They won't. Sorry, but that's reality in the new Amerika.

I have no plan to detain anyone with a firearm under any circumstances. I would actually let the bad guy flee before I tried this. I am far more afraid of police and courts than I am of any criminal on earth.

 

[cedartop]

I quit watching at the 4:30 mark. I couldn't take any more.

The pelvis is not the best target, and good luck breaking the pelvic girdle with a pistol round. You *can* do so, but its like relying on shooting someone in the eye. If you can't see someone's hands near their abdomen while holding the pistol center mass, you're doing it wrong.

The times I've seen civilians detain someone its been because the person was too injured to flee or was physically restrained. Consider that you are extending the encounter when you attempt to detain someone, and assuming you don't have handcuffs and aren't willing to shoot someone for failure to comply with your orders, you are giving them time to reassess and possibly re-attack. It may be in your best interest to end the encounter even if you don't have to shoot by simply removing the threat (letting him flee or withdrawing yourself).

You beat me to it. Marty Hayes is pretty well regarded but this video is full of fail.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

FYI: Guy talking in video is a lawyer that makes regular appearances on The Best Defense show.

Mayoob Assab promotes the idea of aiming for the pelvis.

In what context?

Let's say I'm armed with a gun and you do manage to damage my pelvis to the point I can't walk. How many rounds do you think I can get off before I bleed out?

It reminds me of the concept of "mobility kill" when going against enemy armor. A tank that has thrown track, busted a final drive, had the engine taken out, etc. is no longer mobile, thus a reduced threat. You're a fool if you think its out of the fight though.

 

[Coach]

In what context?

Let's say I'm armed with a gun and you do manage to damage my pelvis to the point I can't walk. How many rounds do you think I can get off before I bleed out?

It reminds me of the concept of "mobility kill" when going against enemy armor. A tank that has thrown track, busted a final drive, had the engine taken out, etc. is no longer mobile, thus a reduced threat. You're a fool if you think its out of the fight though.

He gave the line of reasoning in the video. You may not accept it but he gave it. Also at no time did he say it would stop the fight. Aiming at the pelvis is the lawyer talking not the gunfighter. Plus the threat was disarmed at that point.

I agree with everything you said about a reduced threat but not out of the fight.

 

[Expatriated]

1. The pelvis is a valid target. It is a technique taught throughout fighting pistol classes as a secondary target in certain cases, i.e., to defeat body armor. Similarly to aiming at the head. Head shots will typically end the fight faster but are smaller, move quicker and can be harder to hit, launching a missed round into a crowd, possibly. A miss to the pelvis means you're generally shooting down and a miss goes into the ground, floor, etc. To plan on initially targeting the pelvis however, is silly.

2. As someone who has pointed a gun at hundreds of people over the last couple of decades, I can tell you right now that the bad guys know you can't/aren't going to shoot them. They WILL NOT sit there at gunpoint waiting until the cops show up. They'll take off. Or they'll fight you. One guy told me once "Get that MFing gun out of my face!" and the fight was on. Only in the movies do criminals just "give up" when a gun's pointed at them and figure they're caught.

3. I would not teach people to detain other people. There is an entire host of other factors to consider. You could ruin your life from the legal consequences of not knowing what you don't know.

 

[cedartop]

1. The pelvis is a valid target. It is a technique taught throughout fighting pistol classes as a secondary target in certain cases, i.e., to defeat body armor. Similarly to aiming at the head. Head shots will typically end the fight faster but are smaller, move quicker and can be harder to hit, launching a missed round into a crowd, possibly. A miss to the pelvis means you're generally shooting down and a miss goes into the ground, floor, etc. To plan on initially targeting the pelvis however, is silly.

2. As someone who has pointed a gun at hundreds of people over the last couple of decades, I can tell you right now that the bad guys know you can't/aren't going to shoot them. They WILL NOT sit there at gunpoint waiting until the cops show up. They'll take off. Or they'll fight you. One guy told me once "Get that MFing gun out of my face!" and the fight was on. Only in the movies do criminals just "give up" when a gun's pointed at them and figure they're caught.

3. I would not teach people to detain other people. There is an entire host of other factors to consider. You could ruin your life from the legal consequences of not knowing what you don't know.

I agree with your points 2 and 3. As to 1, just because it is taught doesn't mean it is a good idea. We already know handguns are marginal stoppers under good circumstances. If you want to target the pelvis with a rifle or slug loaded shotgun you have a good chance of breaking down the structure. Pistol, not so much. Just my opinion and that of quite a few trauma medicine guys.

 

[Expatriated]

I agree with your points 2 and 3. As to 1, just because it is taught doesn't mean it is a good idea. We already know handguns are marginal stoppers under good circumstances. If you want to target the pelvis with a rifle or slug loaded shotgun you have a good chance of breaking down the structure. Pistol, not so much. Just my opinion and that of quite a few trauma medicine guys.

I'm speaking as a SECONDARY target--like center mass isn't working. If that's not working because the guy has body armor on, you're basically down to two choices at that point: head and pelvis. I'm good with either one but I think pelvis is easier to hit. Personally, I'd go back and forth between the two.

But, mostly I train to shoot the gun out of his hand

 

[cedartop]

I'm speaking as a SECONDARY target--like center mass isn't working. If that's not working because the guy has body armor on, you're basically down to two choices at that point: head and pelvis. I'm good with either one but I think pelvis is easier to hit. Personally, I'd go back and forth between the two.

But, mostly I train to shoot the gun out of his hand

I get ya, but that is not how it was presented in the video.

 

[Expatriated]

I get ya, but that is not how it was presented in the video.

Yeah, I'm not supporting anything in that video. Other than it was in English. And it was outdoors. I like both of those things.

 

[jdhaines]

I'm not ready to 100% sign off on this, but I'm about 98% of the way there. Having your gun out when not ready to shoot is the worst place you can be. We go through a demo of this in MC. Pretty much every direction the encounter can go is downhill. I'm sure there are circumstances that I haven't thought of, but I'm getting closer and closer to the point of "if the gun comes out it needs to go off." I'll qualify that as I'm constantly trying to do a better job of being able to keep the gun in the holster until that last possible unavoidable second. Part of that is being semi confident if you get tangled, part of it is trying to talk your way out, part of it is taking steps towards making it the better option for him to walk away.

When I started in this world the gun would come out early to act as a magic talisman hoping I could avoid parts of the encounter I was no good at. As I slowly work towards shoring those pieces up I can leave the gun put away where it belongs longer and longer. I sort of see "if the gun comes out it must go off" as the final level of attainment. If there are any math geeks in the audience...

I think I'm right, but it's a theory rather than a law at this point.

 

[jblomenberg16]

I'm not ready to 100% sign off on this, but I'm about 98% of the way there. Having your gun out when not ready to shoot is the worst place you can be. We go through a demo of this in MC. Pretty much every direction the encounter can go is downhill. I'm sure there are circumstances that I haven't thought of, but I'm getting closer and closer to the point of "if the gun comes out it needs to go off." I'll qualify that as I'm constantly trying to do a better job of being able to keep the gun in the holster until that last possible unavoidable second. Part of that is being semi confident if you get tangled, part of it is trying to talk your way out, part of it is taking steps towards making it the better option for him to walk away.

When I started in this world the gun would come out early to act as a magic talisman hoping I could avoid parts of the encounter I was no good at. As I slowly work towards shoring those pieces up I can leave the gun put away where it belongs longer and longer. I sort of see "if the gun comes out it must go off" as the final level of attainment. If there are any math geeks in the audience...

I think I'm right, but it's a theory rather than a law at this point.

I like your math! Good work!

 

[Leadeye]

Detaining people is a job for the police, that's what you pay taxes for. "Detaining" somebody makes you a target with your attention focused in an unknown situation, a fatal mistake for an unfortunate fellow recently.

 

[Expatriated]

I'm not ready to 100% sign off on this, but I'm about 98% of the way there. Having your gun out when not ready to shoot is the worst place you can be. We go through a demo of this in MC. Pretty much every direction the encounter can go is downhill. I'm sure there are circumstances that I haven't thought of, but I'm getting closer and closer to the point of "if the gun comes out it needs to go off." I'll qualify that as I'm constantly trying to do a better job of being able to keep the gun in the holster until that last possible unavoidable second. Part of that is being semi confident if you get tangled, part of it is trying to talk your way out, part of it is taking steps towards making it the better option for him to walk away.

When I started in this world the gun would come out early to act as a magic talisman hoping I could avoid parts of the encounter I was no good at. As I slowly work towards shoring those pieces up I can leave the gun put away where it belongs longer and longer. I sort of see "if the gun comes out it must go off" as the final level of attainment. If there are any math geeks in the audience...

I think I'm right, but it's a theory rather than a law at this point.

Being one that has had their weapon out and it went sideways, I can see where you're coming from. However, some thoughts pop into mind when I start to mull this over a bit. One is if I am clearing/searching my house or property for some reason. Having the weapon holstered makes me lose valuable time.

Or, maybe you are just talking about a active, visible, threatening person you are encountering?