Would you take the shot?

Well.... most of the outlaws or criminals in the Old West were shot in the back

Click to expand...

Exactly what I was going to say. this whole "I'll meet you in the square under the clock tower at noon" nonsense is just as much of a Hollyweird invention as the ceramic Glock 7 that goes through metal detectors, and SAA'a that can fire 16 rounds between reloads.
Bad guys got shot in the back while drunk, or passed out in saloons and whatnot more often than proper shoot-outs.

as to whether I'd take the shot, yer damned skippy I would. If he has a gun and has already demonstrated that he's willing and able to kill people, I'm not going to give him a chance to get my name on the 11:00 news as a victim. Hell no. If I'm going to be on the news, it'll be because of something I did. Not because of what was done to me.

This is why I would prefer not to intervene and put myself in the fight, if i were not already in the fight.

If you are within handgun range of a bloodthirsty maniac who is shooting people you are already in the fight.

Would I take the shot? No, I would take shotS. Even if I only had something more brutal than I gun, you had better believe I'd use it! Did the 9-11 hijackers have the right to do what they did? Neither does Mr(s) Scumbag.

I wouldn't stop shooting until he was no longer a threat. With a madman like that, that would most likely mean until he was dead.

Yes

I would park his butt for good and not even blink. The old west idea of a face down really never happened (ok maybe one time and it was Wild Bill) but the object is stop the bad guy and end the problem. A double tap to the back all counts..........

Consider the shootings in the Tacoma Mall. One gunman with at least two weapons, a CZ52 and an AK. The CZ jammed, and was discarded. He then walked through the mall, blasting away with the AK.

A CCW holder who worked in a knife shop (Excalibur; great store, btw) came out, and had a clean shot at close range--in the back. He considered the age of the shooter (young guy) and decided he did not want to kill the kid if he could avoid it. He challenged.

The "kid" showed his gratitude by turning and shooting the good guy multiple times with 7.62x39.

Fortunately, the good guy survived--but he now faces the rest of his life in a wheelchair.

Now, to answer some quotes...

How are you going to identify the target as the shooter is they are facig away from you?

Click to expand...

They will be the one holding the metal object that's making loud noises and flashes.

The idea is to stop the threat, by just about any means available.
There is no such thing is 'fair' in a gunfight.

Click to expand...

This is the crux of the matter. Read it well, because this poster has it EXACTLY right.

Whether he is facing you or not, an armed gunman shooting at innocent people, is a threat.

Click to expand...

Exactly! Not only a threat, but a live, present, in-your-face DEADLY threat. This one can hurt. This one can kill--and probably IS killing. STOP THE THREAT.

Now, one final one...

Depends, if a family member or sig. other is in class then yes by any means neccesary. If it is just me and there is an easier way out than through the bad guy, let him live long enough to kill others. I'm not john wayne, im not getting paid to put my behind on the proverbial line. If some unfortunate soul was to be the intended victim and they were unarmed, who am I to change fate? Thats why I tell everyone I care about to arm themselves, no-one else will care if you get mugged. So they have to take care of things themselves.

Click to expand...

Sir, I will say this without reservation, and I'll be as polite as possible: This has to be the most cowardly statement I have ever heard anyone say, anywhere.

If you have a concealed weapon permit, I strongly urge you to rethink carrying a concealed weapon. Why? Because with a statement like this it seems that you will also hesitate if it DOES concern your family. This will get you AND them killed--or worse.

There are millions of men and women who have stood in the breach, and prevented evil from happening. Many, many of them gave their lives doing so. Had they not, this continent would now be a jointly owned English/German/Japanese territory instead of the nation it is today. (English because we never would have had a War of Independence.)

PLEASE say that you are trolling; maybe a student who is just making a provocative statement or someone posting under a pseudoname--because if you really and truly do feel that way then you are indeed a sorry excuse for a man--OR woman.

And, that's as politely as I can put it.

Powderman-
Now... i will try to say this as politely as I can, sincerely:

you can respectfully disagree with the quoted post (as do I... i'm with you) but i respectfully disagree that you have even come close to being polite by calling him a coward. that may be how you feel but i think that may cross the line.

Basically, the guy said "Maybe" in response to the OP's situation. aside from gray areas, there are only 3 possible replies:

"Yes" (as most people have said)
"Maybe" (as the post you decided to point out)
"no" (nobody's gone there)

If you aren't allowed to say "Maybe" or "No" in a discussion, then is it really much of a discussion? I respect our right to disagree with him, as we both do, but i think you may have crossed a line there and owe him a retraction/edit if not an apology.

I mean no beef with you or anybody... just seemed a little harsh for a new member with a relatively well-written reply given some of the poor quality posts from teenagers i've seen pop up of late.

In this particular situation, I will not be thinking about the law in any, shape, way or form, the shots will be taken with the intent to kill but I will not take the shot if I was a little unsure as to what will go through him. Meaning if there were innocents in the line of fire beyond him then I might wait a few seconds for me to maneuver to a better trajectory. Other than that, I will shoot in the back, balls, ass, face it won't matter.

Damian

Since we're able to calmly talk about this (I hope), in a situation that fighter pilots would say is Zero Knots and One G, let me throw a different mindset into the mix.

Shoot a threat in the back? - was the original question. A threat to who? If the there is no way to get out of the situation without going through this guy, then I'm dropping him. However, if I'm next to a door with my wife and baby, we're outta there, and I'm not firing because I may miss and attract his attention to me and mine. Once we're out, we're out - I'm not going back in to take him out as all my movie heroes do, I'm the hero of my wife and daughter PERIOD.

I live in a state where CCW is not only rare, but frowned on by EVERYONE except CCWers and a few LEOs. This has come about by the majority RE- electing those who push for gun control. If Mr Bad Guy is coming after you in my state, I'll do just like my Chief of Police says, I'll call 911 and be a good witness. If that means that those who chose to not go through all the hassles of obtaining a firearm will be murdered, tough cookies. I've got mine, I'm pulling up the rope.
My firearm is to protect myself and my loved ones. I'm not using it as an excuse to go off like a demented lone ranger to clean up society - because then, I'm likely a) going to jail or b) going to spend a lot of my family's money to avoid option a, or c) dead, because the good guy doesn't always win the fight.

Unless there is no way out, I'm outta there. Those who tell me to rely on the police for protection can wait till SWAT shows up. And if they survive the massacre, then I'll help them with the paperwork to get a LTC.

Like the previous poster said, our duty is not to be the Lone Ranger. If I can help those around me to safely escape, then I am not going to draw my weapon and go hunting. If a maniac presents himself as a target in the kind and polite manner that lets me line up my shot or walk up behind him and do a point blanker, I'll be glad to oblige. If I have to put one in his nose, I'll oblige then as well.

My job is not to go hunting. I feel a responsibility to those around me and I will help as I can. I will not abandon the strangers near me to save those far away.

I guess you should stop the threat but is it just the "Old West" speaking about not shooting some one in the back that makes me uneasy.

Click to expand...

From a legal standpoint - as long as he's still shooting and not running away...you should be fine (provided of course you have positively identified him as the "bad guy" and not a guard or somesuch.

From an eithical standpoint - The concepts of "dirty" and "fair" have no place in a fight where people's lives are on the line. Fight to WIN.

Besides, you don't live in the West.

There is a difference between an isolated incident of violence which does not, need not, nor will not concern you, and a public act of random violence in which the shooter will repeatedly kill until he is stopped. Most violence falls under the former. This doesn't mean the latter will not occur.

I would say it's so rare as to be negligible, but then I met the off-duty cop who stopped the trolley square shooting. My first priority is to secure the safety of my family. but if I have done that, and the violence hasn't stopped, accountability for every shot that's fired that I DIDN'T act to stop is on me. If you carry, you have a moral obligation to at least assess if there is anything you can do. There might not be. If you're not willing to at least look, you shouldn't carry.

In the spirit of Uncle Fester of the Addams Family, I say "shoot'm in the back"

I would shoot him in the back only because his back was towards me lmao

Whether you choose to enter the fight or leave the scene is a complex issue. Both actions are morally viable IMHO and I have little use for the emotional rhetoric of cowardice or rambo-itis.

However, I do think if you are going to intervene, you should have trained a touch to know what to do. Both in the Tyler and Tacoma cases, brave men failed partially as they had an inadequate tactical grasp of the situation and actions to take.

Wilson left cover and didn't consider failure drills. He hit the guy once and then went after him - or so some accounts indicate.

The Tacoma mall person didn't have the mental set to take the shot and shouldn't have exposed himself.

Everyone must evaluate their own identities. A 40 year old man with a wife and 3 daughters at the mall is probably not going to want to risk his life when he could be using that time to get his family out. That's understandable. I'm a 24 year old unmarried soldier. And I can say that I would most definitely do what ever I could to stop the threat, even if I was unarmed. I'm at the point in my life where that kind of thing is the priority for me. Later on when I get married, I can see me wanting to take less risks. But for now, I'd go for it 100% without hesitation. To be completely honest that kind of danger/excitement while doing the right thing and saving the lives of others is exactly why I joined the Army.

Posted by GEM:

I think you should talk to him calmly

or

google the Tacoma mall shooting - check it out.

Then decide.

Click to expand...

Your kidding, right? I am not a trained negotiator. If I have a chance to take this guy out and stop the massacre of innocent people, then I hope that is what I would do - back, front, doesn't matter. You try to "talk to him". His gun was doing the talking, mine will talk to him.

Not even police negotiate with an active shooter. Do you really expect people with no backup, no training, and no body armor to do what police negotiators leave to SWAT?

I think you should talk to him calmly

Click to expand...

Yes, then you could end up crippled for life too!

google the Tacoma mall shooting - check it out.

Click to expand...

Good plan

My sly wit eludes some. Why - I must be some kind of college intellectual!

Didn't I say earlier in the thread to take the shot? - Oh, I just looked that was in a church shooting thread like Denver. There I opined that you just do the deed in an active shooter instance. I get confused - so many threads. Tsk.

Take the shot

If no question of who this person was, deranged person shooting at customers, as was asked, would I shoot him in the back? under 10 yds, take a knee, head shots.

More than ten yards, check out the area behind the target carfully, from a braced position of cover fire at COM.
My Wife would be with me, 911, by her, stay put, holster pistol after active shooter is down, do not go to see if you could render first aid to gunman.

Be aware of your position in this act, once you had produced a firearm here?

No situation is simple. The original question is however, "Would you shoot him in the back?" In a heart beat, as I carry a 9mm and we all know they are akin to a BB gun? multiple applications would be called for.

Short answer: Yes.

The mall shooting in Nebraska last year was close to home and was the single event that made me decide to get a carry permit, so I've thought of this quite a bit actually.

In the "mall situation", I'd be with my family (given my disdain for shopping malls), and I wouldn't leave them without giving them one of my carry guns.

I'd PREFER to shoot the deranged fellow in the back for obvious reasons.

If I could do so safely, with adequate cover (depending on if he has a rifle or not), I would move toward him, attempting to get as close as possible without being noticed. The closer the better. There are no "rules" except for those written in the law.

If I'm up against a nut with a rifle, the sad truth is, I might have to wait for an opportunity. If I can get within 15 yards, I'll know what kind of gun he has, know how many rounds the magazines hold, and I'll know how long it takes someone with a small amount of training to reload the weapon. If I have to, I'll count rounds, and run at him when I'm given the chance.

If the deranged is on the second floor and I on the first, I've got some decisions to make depending on the situation.

Call me paranoid, but I'm not going to be sweating in a corner with a gun in my hand trying to figure out how to get out of hell.

I hope and believe that I would take the shot, assuming that there is no question that the perp is readily identifiable. If my wife and kids were with me, I'd be pushing them towards the nearest cover and or at the very least, away from both me and the BG.

I don't believe I'd have a problem shooting the BG in the back because at this point they've already made the decision to start killing people.

BTW, an LEO friend of mine told me that the police in our area are now being trained to assume that a shots fired situation is an active shooter scenario. They're being told to basically take the shot if they have it. Disclaimer***All of my training has come from trainers who train for local LE so my ideas on this may be a little different.

Powderman, I cant seem to understand your logic.
Let me start off, I am 24 years old, have had a Carry permit for 3 years and NRA pistol instructor 1 year.
I would not engage if I was not in danger (meaning I could walk away without a boo-boo). Why would I? It is not my responsibility to protect other "Innocent" life. If it was my family that is one thing, I know them and I know who they deal with. Strangers are exactly that, strangers. I DO NOT have to explain to Mr. and Mrs. Smith why I am a "coward" and didnt take the bg down before he could kill his daughter, not my reponsibility.
Furthermore I have never been in a gunfight (not that I would want to) But, given that adrenaline would certainly be pumping through my system getting me all amped up, I wouldn't want to risk missing a shot and hitting someone I dint intend to destroy. Even if you do everything right (take a knee to ahve a high angle shot) Just think of the possibilities concerning the after affects, You lose your Car, your Home, Job, Family, Life on the outside (free world) just because YOU thought it was a good idea and morally the right thing to do to get involved and be the hero of the day. Too much to lose when it is not really Your Fight also assuming you can escape without harm.
Do I disagree with you for wanting to kill the bg, yeah I do, But that is the difference between you and I. I can hear other peoples opinions and not get bent out of shape about it. Agree to disagree, What about you?
I am not going to give up my life for a stranger, sorry not happening. If it were to happen to me, or my family let the god and goddess or whoever you believe in help you, cause I'm certainly not.
You may think I'm a coward, or a poor excuse for a man. Thats fine you have your opinion, I just dont give two cents about it. Opinions are like ... you know the rest.