so we universally agree shooting to wound is retarded, but i was thinking about it. where would you even aim for best chance to wound?
i'm thinking probably not legs, you could damage the femoral.
what mass of the human body would you aim at for the best chance to wound?
>what mass of the human body would you aim at for the best chance to wound?
center
The foot if you aren't worried about them shooting back in this hypothetical scenario
best wounding would be legs and pelvic area, though in the USA, doing that is considered a terrible idea in court, because that upstanding future astronaut can never achieve his potential in a wheelchair
For absolute best odds of not killing someone you'd have to shoot in the hand or foot. Realistically though hip or low torso shots usually arent fatal provided there's medical services available and hip shots especially will cripple people.
Well, honestly center mass. Modern medical practices are good enough that so long as you didn't hit anything too terribly vital i.e the heart or spine they're probably going to make it if an ambulance gets to them in under half an hour.
>hit femoral
>they die within the minute
Most "shot 2 wood Imma peas full" people don't realize that the human bodies in general are pretty fragile against the tool designed to launch projectiles at incredible speeds with lots of energy. Unlike vidya characters who can tank damage as long as their health bar isn't empty, real people can be killed by calibers as small as .22 via bleeding, shock, infection, organ failure, or the lack of immediate medical attention. If you are going to intentionally shoot an unarmored person, there's definitely a probablility for them to die as a result.
I'd wager a .22 to the foot wouldn't kill many people but it would probably take the vast majority of them out of the fight. Unless they could return fire
Shoot to wound is good for if you wanna lynch them later.
So shoot a little below center mass. So you get the gut.
Literally a target smaller than your thumb.
If the threat is so real that you need to use a firearm, you have no excuse for attempting to "wound." Either the situation calls for deadly force, or it didn't. Same goes for pulling a firearm to gain an advantage. You don't touch your weapon until its use to cause death of the attacker is absolutely necessary and fully justified. From holster to center mass to a trigger squeeze should be as quick and smooth a motion as possible. To do otherwise invites argument that the bad guy hesitated, tried to stop, or otherwise reduced his threat level and you failed to compensate for that. Besides that, any momentary hitch in the attacker's step is just as likely his recalculation of tactic for your newly introduced factor of a gun, and you're going to be in a position where its use is no longer within your control.
Pretty close to the center of mass if there's medical attention available. Unless you hit them in the heart, it's unlikely that they will die immediately.
What, are you using 9mm?
Or just quit being a little bitch and pop that kneecap
lol, it wouldn't even disrupt function. Good way to infuriate Tyrone so that you can be sure he'll rape you as well as your wife and daughter.
The best place to shoot "stopping" shots is in the hip area. Of course, this area is loaded with blood vessels, but shooting the leg to stop someone if your life depends on it is pretty retarded.
Genitals.
center mass, but with 9mm
Holy shit are you braindead, literally everyone here knows that, how lacking in self-awareness are you to not see how spergy you sound? The topic of discussion is that what area is least likely to kill a nigger when shot. OP specifically said he knows it's a stupid concept, but for the sake of curiosity what would the answer be. For fucks sake people like you ruin this board I hate you so much eat a big tumor you gigantic nigger loving communist faggot.
Shoot to Wound = Shoot like a normal human being with actual training.
Shoot to Kill = Magdump like a madman.