New Years trouble
- Thread starter Ron-Bon
- Start date
- Status
alaskanativeson
Member
Yes, police should shoot to wound/incapacitate. The wound should result in death. Incapacitation is then assured.Mr.1973 said:
Correct me if I'm wrong, but if something has NO velocity, it isn't falling, it's sitting still.Mr.1973 said:
In my little village on the Yukon Delta in rural Alaska, New Year's Eve sounds like a war zone. Not my idea of fun.
TexasRifleman
Moderator Emeritus
Mr 1973 said:
This is an ignorant statement, as are your other couple of posts on the subject.
How exactly do you shoot to wound? How would you train someone to do that? Would you want your tax money to pay every lawsuit where the police, even unintentionally, killed someone because they are only supposed to "wound"?
No, that's simply not possible.
Police are trained to shoot to stop, as are non cops who take just about any firearm training out there.
You shoot at the center of mass and shoot until the threat against you has stopped. If that results in a wounded person that's great, but it's just as likely to result in a dead person. You can't possibly control the effects of a firearm enough to force it one way or the other and still protect yourself.
It's a goofy statement and a goofy idea.
The real world does not work that way. In the real world you should behave in such a way that cops or armed citizens have no reason to shoot at you. If people would behave that way we'd have this happy world you talk about.
Unfortunately there are many people (we call them criminals) who don't behave properly and sometimes they get shot.
If I ever have to use a firearm to protect my own life I will not be thinking about how I can preserve the life of the person threatening me, nor should I.
Ok.
You win by default.
Everytime a person is threatened and has to shoot a gun, they MUST KILL!
and the New Years Eve shooters in the air, unintentional discharge, COPS,
All Gun handlers,
EVERYONE!!!
Oh, I forgot, HUNTERS!
THAT IS WHAT GUNS ARE FOR, RIGHT?
Sorry but your logic is flawed.
2+ cops, one threat..... always = one death.
You win by default.
Everytime a person is threatened and has to shoot a gun, they MUST KILL!
and the New Years Eve shooters in the air, unintentional discharge, COPS,
All Gun handlers,
EVERYONE!!!
Oh, I forgot, HUNTERS!
THAT IS WHAT GUNS ARE FOR, RIGHT?
Sorry but your logic is flawed.
2+ cops, one threat..... always = one death.
Nathanael_Greene
Member
Before this highjacked thread gets locked, I'd just like to chime in that my neighborhood gets pretty gun-happy at holidays, too.
In fact, you can almost tell the changing demographics by how much noisier it is around Cinco de Mayo compared to a few years ago.
Shooting in the air is an unbelievably bad idea that somehow doesn't go away despite enforcement, public education, and an increasing number of innocent victims.
In fact, you can almost tell the changing demographics by how much noisier it is around Cinco de Mayo compared to a few years ago.
Shooting in the air is an unbelievably bad idea that somehow doesn't go away despite enforcement, public education, and an increasing number of innocent victims.
TexasRifleman
Moderator Emeritus
Apparently you can't read, so this is a pointless discussion.
One last thing though, you do need to understand that guns happen to be good at causing trauma, which can often result in death.
As I said, but which you can't seem to understand, the proper thing to do is to avoid being shot in the first place.
But, if someone is shot, there is little the shooter can do to control what damage is done. That's why this shooting in the air business is such a bad idea.
If you can think of a way to control a firearm in such a way as to guarantee the outcome, please post that.
But you can't, so this is done.
BHP FAN
Member
Police are trained to shoot center of body mass until the threat is neutralized.
No Texas... Apparently YOU can't read.
The best thing to do is not be dumb.
COPS shoot to kill. They didn't always do it. But, they do now.
Drunks will usually fight. They don't want to do it but they do.
People have the RIGHT to defend themselves.
Internet boards are for learning not debate.
YOU are right and I am wrong.
Peace.
The best thing to do is not be dumb.
COPS shoot to kill. They didn't always do it. But, they do now.
Drunks will usually fight. They don't want to do it but they do.
People have the RIGHT to defend themselves.
Internet boards are for learning not debate.
YOU are right and I am wrong.
Peace.
woodybrighton
member
basra palace the night after uday and his brother got the goo news lots and lots of happy fire
ak rounds do not fall to earth harmlessy
rpg rounds blow up as there fuzes detonate unfortunatly there on there way down at this point
heavier MGs rounds also do not fall harmlessly.
several deaths.
FIRING ANY FIREARM WITH LIVE AMMO IN CELEBRATION IS MORONIC.
unless your miles form anywhere inhabited.
ak rounds do not fall to earth harmlessy
rpg rounds blow up as there fuzes detonate unfortunatly there on there way down at this point
heavier MGs rounds also do not fall harmlessly.
several deaths.
FIRING ANY FIREARM WITH LIVE AMMO IN CELEBRATION IS MORONIC.
unless your miles form anywhere inhabited.
alaskanativeson
Member
Mr.1973, I disagree with your statements and your opinion about how this situation was handled. Since this is a free country, the exchange of ideas and disagreeing opinions is allowed. We both agree we are welcome to our own opinions, right?
However, I believe your sarcasm and statements of hyperbole do a disservice to your point of view. While I disagree with your opinion, I believe I can understand why you feel the way you do. You would have better results explaining yourself if you took a more High Road approach. I may disagree with you, but I'll try to do so in a constructive and respectful way. I do occasionally lose my temper and post in anger, but reason wins more arguments than brute force.
However, I believe your sarcasm and statements of hyperbole do a disservice to your point of view. While I disagree with your opinion, I believe I can understand why you feel the way you do. You would have better results explaining yourself if you took a more High Road approach. I may disagree with you, but I'll try to do so in a constructive and respectful way. I do occasionally lose my temper and post in anger, but reason wins more arguments than brute force.
308win
Member
Turns out one of the revelers who was incapacitated by the Columbus PD was a convicted felon. Now Columbus is one of the most unfriendly firearms ownership cities in Ohio; my question for Mayor Coleman would be: "With all of the laws to restrict firearms ownership, how does a prohibited person even have a firearm?" And of course said miscreant's mother said her poor boy was trying to drop the firearms when the police were forced to shoot him.
Claude Clay
Member
""news footage of Arabs celebrating in the Middle East by shooting their AKs in the air. I often wonder if anyone really care about what happens to all of those bullets in the air?""
i care about the bullets in the air and
one can but hope that their bodies intercept the bullets before they are horribly deformed upon contact with the ground.
Darwin and Murphy are 2 dudes not to be trivialized
i care about the bullets in the air and
one can but hope that their bodies intercept the bullets before they are horribly deformed upon contact with the ground.
Darwin and Murphy are 2 dudes not to be trivialized
I can't answer for any other state but in Ohio you shoot to stop, not kill, wound, or scare. If you admit any statement other than "stop", you've opened a Pandora's Box of allegations and possible charges. Every cop, DR&C employee, and just about anyone else involved in armed security, has that pounded into their head.
TexasRifleman
Moderator Emeritus
I'm waiting for someone to explain how you shoot to kill vs shoot to wound. Do you aim at different places? Do you use special "wound only" bullets?
I am fascinated by this idea that somehow you can control the damage caused by a firearm willingly to the point where you can consciously decide when you shoot whether you want it to kill or not.
People have survived head shots and died bleeding out from shots to the hand, so I am really wanting to see how this whole "shoot to only wound" thing works.
expvideo
Member
Is he gone? Can we get back to the discussion?
Anyway, I would love to fire a few celebratory rounds into the air, but I live in a densely populated area, and even I didn't it violates rule #4. It sounds like fun, but I am personally accountable for every bullet I fire, and risking the safety of others is never a decision that I should be making.
Anyway, I would love to fire a few celebratory rounds into the air, but I live in a densely populated area, and even I didn't it violates rule #4. It sounds like fun, but I am personally accountable for every bullet I fire, and risking the safety of others is never a decision that I should be making.
natecade1
Member
ok here is a thought.
Isn't birdshot supposed to be fired in the area. If you live in a rural area and notify your neighbors where is the harm in firing a box of $5 bird shot?
Isn't birdshot supposed to be fired in the area. If you live in a rural area and notify your neighbors where is the harm in firing a box of $5 bird shot?
expvideo
Member
It violates rule #4. But if you must fire a gun into the air, birdshot is definitely the way to go.
Owen Sparks
member
- Joined
- May 27, 2007
- Messages
- 4,523
Not a real problem where I live as fireworks are still legal and fireworks stands are everywhere.
The tradition of shooting guns in celibrations and parades was started way back in the days of black powder muzzel loaders. It was entirly safe as people just stuffed a wad of paper or cloth over the powder charge rather than a lead ball.
The tradition of shooting guns in celibrations and parades was started way back in the days of black powder muzzel loaders. It was entirly safe as people just stuffed a wad of paper or cloth over the powder charge rather than a lead ball.
As in all cases, the cops (and legal defensive shooters) shoot to stop the aggressive/threatening act, not to wound or kill. The fact that an effective stop has significant overlap with fatal injury is the BG's and EMS' problem.
I don't know about the third case, but the two instances where the "reveler" was shot in the arm and hand were cases where the arm was in front of the torso at the time. Add in the fact that police go through a threat-ID routine before shooting, and it often results in the officer looking at the BG's gun when he shoots. You tend to shoot where you're looking. The best procedure is ID the threat and move your eye to COM, but it gets messy when you're doing stuff fast.
What was not revealed in that article was the fact that CPD handled fourteen shootings (legit shootings, not just 911 calls...fourteen people with fresh holes in them) in a two hour timespan, three of them police-involved. Officers working the area where one of them occurred stated that they have never heard so much gunfire (and not all of it was going upwards) in their lives. These were people that served in Iraq saying this.
Mike
Last edited:
pbearperry
Member
Shootings by cops
Cops shoot to stop,not to wound.If they die,they die.Stupid people die before smarter ones.That's how you keep the gene pool stronger,and more pure.Any questions?
Cops shoot to stop,not to wound.If they die,they die.Stupid people die before smarter ones.That's how you keep the gene pool stronger,and more pure.Any questions?
Lived in San Diego many years ago. There was a news report about a young girl leaving a public new years eve celebration with her family when she was hit on the top of the head by a bullet. She died at the hospital several hours later. There was no gunfire at the scene so it was determined that the bullet was most likely fired my someone celebrating new years eve at another location.
- Status
