Defense against the armored active shooter

[SirBrass]

Info I just discovered about the CO movie massacre was the degree to which the perp was armored.  It was truly scary.  Against that, I'd think the bare minimum needed to engage him would've been a heavy rifle.  Meaning my 45ACP wouldn't have done the job with standard engagement (hit what you can and keep shooting and moving).

So, here's a question for Mas specifically based on his experience in talking with those who may have had to engage someone so armored.

Seeing as I'm armed as best I can for society (handgun only... not carrying around a .308 rifle all the time), and this nightmare scenario comes calling: crowded space, tear gas deployed, active shooter on the move and he's armored in ballistic plate from head to toe... what can I do tactically as an armed citizen to stop him.  Ideas, thoughts, theories?  Primary concern is stopping the perp from harming my accompanying loved ones first and foremost.  Secondary concern is my own individual safety and longevity of life.

I'm not panicking here, as I doubt this'll get massive repeats, but it brings home to roost a very scary situation where most hits that would get to bad guy normally will simply bounce and very little vulnerable area... except through a gas mask, which has to be penetrated before the cranial cavity can be penetrated.  I've thought about what do I do if I have to engage a bad guy wearing a ballistic vest.  My thought is: groin shots, thoracic cavity shots, head shots.  This new thought wipes most of those options away.

I'd love your ideas for things to add to the armed citizen's tool chest for "If I have to engage a bad guy wearing this, here's what I generally will want to do."

Feel free to put this on the backburner for a future pro-arms podcast.

[Devereaux]

Brass,

Remember ballistic vests are not magic. You hit them in the vest and you don't KILL them, but you DO hurt them. If there had been several guys shooting at him, there was the serious chance that some of the bullets would have gone through the sides rather than hit the front only, and that is dangerous to him. Indeed, such a shot can be redirected back into him from the inside, making it more effective. And front shots will affect him. Just not quite like you'd like. Get lucky and a head shot will finish him. But that's a difficult shot, especially under those pressures.

Start carrying your .357 Sig instead.

[SirBrass]

True, but this guy was carrying plates.  That isn't your standard police issue ballistic vest.  Plates have been able to stop much more powerful rounds than handgun rounds.

I've thought about carrying my M&Pc again, but I shoot better with the 1911.


Next 1911 not for competition is going to be in .40S&W, and I'm going to then see if I can have a .357sig barrel made for it and then have a gunsmith do some work on it.

I did see a sweet .357sig 1911 in American Handgunner a few issues back.  It was government sized, but it also came threaded for a suppressor.  I think it was based on STI's 2011 frame as well.  Anyway, I'd LOVE to have that gun, but it comes with a $3500 or so price tag.

And right now I'm putting $$ into training (MAG40 in November).  And I'll be getting a rifle next year... though considering how things have changed, I'm considering reinvesting in that .357sig 1911 build.

But I would still like tactical engagement thoughts on engaging and stopping someone like the Aurora shooter who is wearing full up battle armor from head to toe.  From what I hear he was wearing stuff that not even all of our troops have access to (which means the $64M question is: how the HELL did he get that armor).  To stop, that's going to require something different I'd think than "oh well, just b/c it won't penetrate doesn't mean it won't hurt."  I see someone like that as a man on a mission.  He doesn't care if he is caused pain.  The punks in FL ran when they got shot and they found out it hurts.  There pain worked, but this is not the same and I don't want to rely on psychological factors (dissuasion through pain, for instance) in a situation like this.

My best thought is to somehow get to where I can rush him physically, and once in close contact, jam the muzzle of my firearm in between the plates, or between the neck guard and the helmet, and pull the trigger.  But that's the best I can come up with.  But at least it'll work no matter what gun you're using... even a .22LR could work in that kind of manner.

[Blackwing Shooter]

Center mass, head, pelvic girdle.  All are good ways if ending the critical incident.

[Kimerazor]

I agree with all of the above.  The gear is not magic.  Center mass hits will cause him to cycle through the OODA loop.  Also, those hits may hit unarmored hands or his weapon.

One should try headshots & even for the feet or lower legs.  Give yourself the chance to rush him & get between him & his weapon.

The reason I carry a 40S&W in 180gr is a balance between capacity & hitting power.  I would love to get a 357 Sig barrel for it, but I'm unsure if HK makes one for the USP compact.  Like Brass I'm signed up for MAG-40, but in September.

The only thing I'm reconsidering when I carry is a 3rd magazine in a double pouch.  Also, always carry a knife.

I believe that little POS would've fell to the ground when confronted.  I'm 99% sure his pain tolerance is near zero.


NRA Life Member
SAF Life Member
GRRN Supporter

[Bob Mayne]

All of the above are good suggestions.  All the more reason to carry a standard capacity pistol!  By standard capacity, I mean more than 10 rounds.  Given these specific circumstances, I think it could easily take several rounds to stop that SOB.

[Devereaux]

There is still not a lot of accurate info on this BG. But what seems apparent is that he thought he was entering a gun-free area. Note that he was apprehended in the parking lot, and THERE he was unwilling to confront the cops, even though he had armor. They certainly didn't have any better guns than he did, but I would translate his actions as being unwilling to take a hit. So shooting back at him in the theatre might well have stopped the attack.

We will never know, I guess. So keep thinking shot placement, movement, and not stopping until the threat or you are down.

[SirBrass]

Dev, but what if it had only been a single cop? Perhaps it was the force of numbers that caused him to stand down, or that his bloodlust was satiated. I'm not willing to plan thinking that the folks that do this are cowards. If that's how it turns out, then so much the better for all when he stands down in the face of force. But I can't afford to plan based on that assumption.

So, yeah, I agree: keep shooting & moving

Sent from my Samsung Galaxy S3

[flop-shank]

One of the best things one can do is train in weapons disarmament. While part of the Krav Maga system, I'm sure other martial arts cover such situations as well. More important than the fighting system is the right instructor IMO.

If one cannot get close enough to go hands on, then accurate gunfire will be needed to neutralize the prick, sans being able to escape, or hide. While it is pretty much a given that these kind of turds usually shoot themselves once they meet real resistance, Jamie is right in thinking that some will not. IIRC, the Trolley Square shooter in Salt Lake City, Utah sought shelter and fought from there.

Another thing that could prove invaluable is the foot shot. One can often shoot under barriers at feet and throw a serious wrench into an active shooters plan. While feet are small targets, when stationary they're a lot bigger than they look. If the assailant is standing on a hard surface aim for the very bottom edge of the foot. A shot that goes low will ricochet up into the foot, one that goes high will hit the foot as intended. Blood loss, or pain, from a foot shot may stop hostilities.

Everyone has two femoral arteries and two femurs. Bust those and things have turned your way dramatically.

Body armor has arm holes. Use them if possible.

Leave the .380 home, or use it as a third gun. If there ever was a time to have an accurate full sized pistol in a major caliber, this would be it. Big guns are your friend.

Kimerazor, 180s in .40 aren't a bad thing, but you will hit harder with lighter bullets.

Just a few random thoughts.....

[SirBrass]

I usually love deflating the caliber argument (though I have specific reasons for prefering the calibers I do and why I think they're superior... but that itself is qualified with "I think any caliber with <defined> range is adequate"), and I include the .380 in the "adequate" category when talking about backup guns, or "it's just too hot to carry anything else" guns.  I WILL disparage anyone who thinks .22LR, .32ACP, or .25ACP are adequate 3rd or 4th gun options... They simply are NOT unless you're an old arthritic person who has a very hard time operating a handgun in the first place.  If that's you, then by all means, PLEASE use a .22mag revolver single action or pistol... it could very well save your life.  But that isn't most of us.

But in this situation, yes, I will argue caliber choice.  And I DO think that if this becomes the new "crazed normal", then we need to reconsider the caliber ranges which are adequate, with heavy preference to the "lightning loads" for 38super (if they still make them hot and fast), 357sig, and 10mm (I've also heard that the Dillon 9x25 was a prefered round for competition, but that would be for exclusive handloading, so that's not even on the chart for self-defense).

If this is the new "normal", then 9mm just became the modern .380.

I HOPE not, but this is something that needs to be considered.  However, Bob Mayne has said he carries Ranger T's in 9mm +P+, which it seems has similar ballistics to .357sig, which would put the 9mm back into the running for effectiveness against armored active shooter.  True just about any major caliber will do, but would you rather be smacking a guy in a level III vest with neck arm and leg protection (true there's holes, but how well are you about to do precision  marksmanship on the fly when lead is flying your way... my bet is "not well"... so you're going to still have to shoot at what's there) with a slow .45ACP, or a slightly faster .40S&W or similar speed (to the 40) but lighter weight standard pressure 9mm?  Or would you rather be whacking him with 10mm, 9mm +P+, 357sig, or 38super?  I'd want the harder-hitting, faster rounds that are going 1300fps at a minimum.  True I've argued against relying on use of pain... but if it's going to make him hurt by default... the more it hurts and the better it penetrates when it hits flesh, the better, and that's what faster rounds do better.

Though something I just thought of.  The faster rounds also have louder reports.  And the louder the report, the more potential damage to one's hearing.  Granted, it's a toss up between "continue breathing... you and the people around you" or some minor to moderate hearing loss... and I'll take the hearing loss if those are the only 2 choices thanks very much, but still... it's no minor consideration.

[Kimerazor]

I believe this was an unusual situation.  Also, any caliber is better than a sharp stick.  A .380 to the foot will slow down or stop this threat especially if the Achilles is taken out.

Your post has caused me to investigate the 165gr projectile v. 180gr.  The foot pounds loss of the 165 v. Speed gained doesn't justify the change for me.  I do like the all copper of the Corbon DPX, but they only are in 140gr.

When I shoot a simple steel tree with my different calibers I see a difference.  My 9mm barely moves the 6" plate & my 230gr .45 ACP doesn't have any trouble.  The 180's don't have any trouble which led me to believe that if I ever had to shoot through something I'd want the heavier projectile.

I'm still open for suggestions.


NRA Life Member
SAF Life Member
GRRN Supporter

[SirBrass]

Try 357sig. Hitting that steel plate will whack it right down, and in 124gr too.

Sent from my Samsung Galaxy S3

[flop-shank]

I believe this was an unusual situation.  Also, any caliber is better than a sharp stick.  A .380 to the foot will slow down or stop this threat especially if the Achilles is taken out.

Your post has caused me to investigate the 165gr projectile v. 180gr.  The foot pounds loss of the 165 v. Speed gained doesn't justify the change for me.  I do like the all copper of the Corbon DPX, but they only are in 140gr.

When I shoot a simple steel tree with my different calibers I see a difference.  My 9mm barely moves the 6" plate & my 230gr .45 ACP doesn't have any trouble.  The 180's don't have any trouble which led me to believe that if I ever had to shoot through something I'd want the heavier projectile.

I'm still open for suggestions.


NRA Life Member
SAF Life Member
GRRN Supporter

Heavier bullets have more momentum (that's what you're seeing when you shoot the steel tree, although I'm sure the 9mm also has less energy in this case), but lighter bullets such as 155 gr. vs. 180 gr. .40 cal. have more energy when loaded hot. There are many reduced power loads in .40 available and , IIRC, particularly in the 165 gr. weight range. Take a look at the specs for the Corbon 135 gr. .40 cal load.

http://www.shopcorbon.com/Self-Defense-JHP/40-SandW-135gr-CORBON-Self-Defense-JHP/SD40135-20/100/Product

Now take a look at the 165 gr. offering.

http://www.shopcorbon.com/Self-Defense-JHP/40-SandW-165gr-CORBON-Self-Defense-JHP/SD40165-20/100/Product

Contrary to popular misconception, the heavier bullet doesn't pack as much power (fpe). Studying Corbon, or any number of other ammo maker's full power loads will reveal the pattern.

I would highly recommend listening to the Keith Jones podcast. It delves heavily into this kind of stuff and .40 cal. in particular.

http://proarmspodcast.com/2009/08/16/031-a-conversation-with-keith-jones/

I would think that rather than drifting this thread into
the minutia of ballistic theory we ought to discuss this in a different thread, or take it to PM, both of which I would be more than happy to do. 

[Charlie Foxtrot]

The wifey tells that a major news nitwork is reporting that the body armor was not actually body armor.  It sounds like it was Molle gear. 

Tom Gresham interviewed Ted Nugent on Guntalk this morning.  Uncle Ted always carries a 10mm and 70 rounds. A Ten might not be able to penetrate body armor, but all the battering won't be good for the perp.   

[MasAyoob]

While reference has been made to groin guards and "armored leggings," it's still unclear whether or not he might have been vulnerable to a pelvic takedown shot.  The face was PROBABLY unprotected.

More to learn, of course, and too early to speculate...

sadly,
Mas

[SirBrass]

The wifey tells that a major news nitwork is reporting that the body armor was not actually body armor.  It sounds like it was Molle gear. 

Tom Gresham interviewed Ted Nugent on Guntalk this morning.  Uncle Ted always carries a 10mm and 70 rounds. A Ten might not be able to penetrate body armor, but all the battering won't be good for the perp.   

HOW does he carry 70 rounds?  How many spare mags can he comfortably carry?  I'm assuming a 15rnd double stack of some sort.  70 rounds would be a bear to carry around.  Most I could manage would be 61: 15+1 in the gun and 3 spare mags.

[Devereaux]

Brass,

This guy wasn't outfitted for the local barbecue - he was purpose dressed to bring ammo to the scene. The usual load for an American soldier in combat is something like 400+ rounds. My guys in the jungle carried 700+ rounds per man, and no one complained.

[SirBrass]

I meant Uncle Ted.  How was he carrying 70rnds of 10mm?  I'd like to know his secret.

[PoliticsAndGuns]

I meant Uncle Ted.  How was he carrying 70rnds of 10mm?  I'd like to know his secret.

Deep pockets?

I would give my left ummm big toe for spell check in Tapatalk.

[SirBrass]

You can still only comfortably fit 1 or 2 mags in a pocket no matter how deep after you reach a certain depth.