Negative.
Outside of a "psychological stop" - which is subjective to the individual shot - objectively, either of these three highlighted vitals (in terms of the neck, yes, a shot severing or otherwise sufficiently damaging the spinal cord can cause immediate incapacitation, but given that you'd separated out brain and spine - the latter of which the anatomy affected depends on the height at which the column is damaged/severed - I am guessing that you're instead referring to trauma outside of the CNS) will require the passage of time for the individual to succumb to its physiologic fallout - be it a drop in blood pressure (i.e. holes in the heart or the severing of major blood vessels supplying the brain, heart, or lungs) or hindering oxygenation (organ injury to the lung, pneumothorax, or perforation of the upper airway passages).
There's a reason why the "failure drill" (or "Non Standard Response" - NSR, as the late Pat Rogers used to call it) is the "failure drill."
If you're trying to
burn the threat down with a cadence of shots to the center mass (another question that the OP's video poses is the cadence at which the officer shot) and you see that it's not doing the trick, it's time to switch him/her off with a CNS shot (more on this, below). There's both physiologic reasons - as well as the possibility that the threat is somehow armored - why center-mass shots may not work, and even in Force-on-Force, instructors not infrequently cite the inability of students to transition to the head-shot, even when it is plainly necessary: that they'll literally end the scenario with all shots expended to center-mass.
In the Gramins-Maddox shootout, that was a .45 ACP -
Officer Tim Gramins let loose with a barrage of rounds hoping that what he might lose in accuracy would be compensated for by its suppressive nature. The only thing separating Gramins and his assailant was a windshield that was fast disintegrating from ingoing and outgoing rounds.
www.policemag.com
From the article:
Sergeant Timothy Gramins faced a murderous attacker who would not go down, even though he was shot 14 times with .45-cal. ammunition
www.police1.com
^ Shot placement is always king.
And to turn off the switch, one absolutely
must engage and sufficiently damage the threat's central nervous system.
This is why training towards marksmanship
always pays.
This is why any time a supposed "self-defense handgun instructor" says to you that those shots you've buckshot-sprayed - static, belt-buckle-to-belt-buckle at 7 yards on a flat range - onto a full-size silhouette target is a "good job," you'll want to ask him/her if he/she really thinks that's the case, or if you should actually be doing much better. If that "instructor" says "no," that the level of performance shown on that target means that you're prepared for the fight of your life, you should seek a different instructor/school.
www.xdtalk.com
and
It never ceases to amaze me how stupid conversations on gun fora are when it comes to the difference between combat accuracy and competition "bullseye" shooting. Combat shooting is about placing EFFECTIVE hits on target, as much as necessary, to NEUTRALIZE the threat. What does "neutralize'...
www.xdtalk.com
^ With the above two threads as background, let's revisit that critical shot that I spoke of, above.
Let's take a step back and let's play this game with "center mass," first. Here, ostensibly, we're going for a fist-sized organ that's more or less high-center-chest.
What happens when the individual presents sideways, instead of as that belt-buckle-on-belt-buckle silhouette target that's the flat range?
What happens if that individual presents above you - say, he's an active shooter in a mall, on the story above or on the escalator above?
What happens if you managed to shoot that individual to the ground, but he's still in the fight?
Now think of how much more challenging it is to engage the "eyebox," which is the belt-buckle-to-belt-buckle presentation what is actually the CNS "kill zone" laying "behind" the individual's face. Why do we want to hit the "eyebox?" It's less because the "brainstem" is there, but more because that, from that belt-buckle-to-belt-buckle presentation, that is the least ARMORED part the anatom y that protects the brain. Perpendicular to that, from the side of the individual? The top of the ear represents a similar area of less bone density (and is also "flatter," as bullets tend to do weird things when they hit hard, curved surfaces:
One To The Brain ). As that head dance and rotates around in space, shot placement becomes even more critical.
Oh, and getting back to that spinal cord shot "in the throat/neck"....the width of the spinal cord at that area is about that of your thumb or middle finger. Think that's an easy target?
