Shoot to kill?
- Thread starter PILMAN
- Start date
- Status
LubeckTech
Member
Sadlly, A large segment of the population has no idea what logic is. In many states you would be required to flee your home unless cornered and in fear of death or grave injury. Some states ( I think Florida is one and the number is growing) have what are known as castle laws which do not require you to retreat but if faced with an unarmed opponent what to do is a good question. I believe it would hinge on weather or not you had a reasonable fear that you or someone were in IMMINENT danger of great personal injury. Probably the best way to learn about the subject in ypur state would be to to take a CCW course. You are wise to ask questions!
Your shooting a BG to stop them. No other reason. You can only use deadly force to stop a BG from doing something so bad it doesn't matter if they live or die in the process of being stopped. That is a simple answer. There are other factors involved most important what your state laws say.
You really need to check out the websites Pax listed and take a good course to fully understand this. I was a LE firearms instructor (state and federal) for almost 30 years and from my experience many cases are not so clear cut (doesn't mean that the person defending themselves winds up be charged with anything).
You really need to check out the websites Pax listed and take a good course to fully understand this. I was a LE firearms instructor (state and federal) for almost 30 years and from my experience many cases are not so clear cut (doesn't mean that the person defending themselves winds up be charged with anything).
PILMAN - "... I'm using Federal premium Hydroshock [sic] hollowpoints in .45 acp , would this look bad?"
Were you to be sued for using the above Hydra Shoks, your lawyer should tell the court that those are often the same rounds used for self defense by the FBI, and other Federal, State, and local police agencies.
Federal Hydra Shok cartridges are in my self defense handguns, as well as in my wife's self defense handgun. Not one bit worried about "ammo."
As for "identifying" the age, motivations, and whether or not a bad guy is armed, by the time you've gone through that stuff, if the bad guy is armed, he'll have already killed you.
FWIW.
L.W.
Were you to be sued for using the above Hydra Shoks, your lawyer should tell the court that those are often the same rounds used for self defense by the FBI, and other Federal, State, and local police agencies.
Federal Hydra Shok cartridges are in my self defense handguns, as well as in my wife's self defense handgun. Not one bit worried about "ammo."
As for "identifying" the age, motivations, and whether or not a bad guy is armed, by the time you've gone through that stuff, if the bad guy is armed, he'll have already killed you.
FWIW.
L.W.
Last edited:
CapnBald
Member
I live in the Fl. Panhandle
The new Castle law here is, if some one comes in your house illegally You don't have to retreat, and you can fire because the assumption is that if they broke in they intend to do bodily harm. If it is a good shoot you won't be arrested and can't be sued in civil court.
I would never say that I meant to kill the perp, only that I shot to stop him.From all the people that I've talked to around here, I can't remember anyone that thought it was a bad law.
The thing to remember is that you only shoot until the threat ends. The perp may or may not be dead but if the threat is over you better stop shooting.
The new Castle law here is, if some one comes in your house illegally You don't have to retreat, and you can fire because the assumption is that if they broke in they intend to do bodily harm. If it is a good shoot you won't be arrested and can't be sued in civil court.
I would never say that I meant to kill the perp, only that I shot to stop him.From all the people that I've talked to around here, I can't remember anyone that thought it was a bad law.
The thing to remember is that you only shoot until the threat ends. The perp may or may not be dead but if the threat is over you better stop shooting.
wild billz
Member
In Florida Gov Bush signed legislation where a criminal or their family can not seek a civil suit against you if they are wounded or killed. You can't pop someone in the back, and when they are incapacitated the threat no longer exists. You also don't have a duty to retreat when threatened in public. There will be an investigation into all situations to determine the veracity of the actions taken.
A word on the provisions of the laws that give you relief from civil liability. Don't bet your life savings on them. Those laws do not prevent someone from filing a suit against you. All they do is give you grounds for a motion to dismiss the suit. If the plaintiff's attorney can convince the judge that the issues involved are not covered by the law or that your conduct was so outrageous that it's not protected by the law, the suit against you can still go forward. Remember, congress passed and the president signed legislation giving the firearms manufacturers immunity, but a judge allowed New York City's lawsuit to go forward.
What you should take from this is, don't do anything reckless or stupid and think that the immunity written in the law will protect you. It might not.
Jeff
What you should take from this is, don't do anything reckless or stupid and think that the immunity written in the law will protect you. It might not.
Jeff
ArfinGreebly
Moderator Emeritus
. . . hollowpoints in .45 acp , would this look bad?
In my estimation (no credentials or legal standing) you may find a local sheriff or similar agency who will answer the question, "what round do you recommend for effective home defense?"
It would seem to me that if you found yourself having to answer the "why did you use hollowpoints" question, a reply of "it was one of the ammo types recommended by my local police" would show you weren't shopping for "killer bullets" or that kind of thing.
Careful how you ask certain questions of LE personnel, and listen carefully to how they phrase their answers.
Wife and I were once advised by a deputy, "If I were you I'd get a gun. If they come after you, and actually come into your house, and you're scared for your life, the only way you can be sure is to empty the clip. People do that when they're real scared."
In the context of the moment, we understood clearly what he was saying. It was a "just between you and me" kind of remark, in the spirit of "you never heard this from me."
We considered this carefully, and decided to completely avoid a confrontation with the evil jerks in question, despite the damage they had done. We grasped his "advice" but we also grasped that what was implied by this was a whole bunch of very messy red tape and potential liability.
We elected to skip that whole thing and just absorb the [$50,000+] loss without further interaction with the evil ones. I might mention that if we HAD taken confrontation to the next level, a) we would never have recovered our losses, b) $50,000 would have been truly cheap alongside what attorneys, lost employment, and jail would have cost.
Educate yourself well in advance of ever needing it. Ask a LAWYER, not a COP about your options and exposure. The answers will be different. And then, once you're properly educated on your options, make sure you never need that advice, inasmuch as that's possible.
In my estimation (no credentials or legal standing) you may find a local sheriff or similar agency who will answer the question, "what round do you recommend for effective home defense?"
It would seem to me that if you found yourself having to answer the "why did you use hollowpoints" question, a reply of "it was one of the ammo types recommended by my local police" would show you weren't shopping for "killer bullets" or that kind of thing.
Careful how you ask certain questions of LE personnel, and listen carefully to how they phrase their answers.
Wife and I were once advised by a deputy, "If I were you I'd get a gun. If they come after you, and actually come into your house, and you're scared for your life, the only way you can be sure is to empty the clip. People do that when they're real scared."
In the context of the moment, we understood clearly what he was saying. It was a "just between you and me" kind of remark, in the spirit of "you never heard this from me."
We considered this carefully, and decided to completely avoid a confrontation with the evil jerks in question, despite the damage they had done. We grasped his "advice" but we also grasped that what was implied by this was a whole bunch of very messy red tape and potential liability.
We elected to skip that whole thing and just absorb the [$50,000+] loss without further interaction with the evil ones. I might mention that if we HAD taken confrontation to the next level, a) we would never have recovered our losses, b) $50,000 would have been truly cheap alongside what attorneys, lost employment, and jail would have cost.
Educate yourself well in advance of ever needing it. Ask a LAWYER, not a COP about your options and exposure. The answers will be different. And then, once you're properly educated on your options, make sure you never need that advice, inasmuch as that's possible.
In my CCW course that I took just a couple weeks ago, my instructor said, "shoot to stop the threat", don't "shoot to kill". It will also look good to LE if you are the first to call 911 and try to give medical aid to the bad guy. Doing all the "right things" will probably be better for you than to silence the BG forever. Besides, his family can still sue you.
Cosmoline
Member
Who's telling you to shoot someone on the ground incapacitated? That's complete hogwash. It's DANGEROUS hogwash. The rule is very simple. You may only use deadly force in self defense to the extent you are threatened with imminent unlawful deadly force. Once the guy is incapacitated, he can no longer threaten you with imminent deadly force. So you can no longer use deadly force against him. Comprende?
This has NOTHING to do with hollowpoints vs. FMJ or your "intent" Take those notions out and shoot them. They are totally irrelevant and will only confuse you. If the man is down and out, you can't shoot him with FMJ's or HP's or evil black talons. You can't beat his head in with a stick, either. That's the point you need to take away from this discussion.
This has NOTHING to do with hollowpoints vs. FMJ or your "intent" Take those notions out and shoot them. They are totally irrelevant and will only confuse you. If the man is down and out, you can't shoot him with FMJ's or HP's or evil black talons. You can't beat his head in with a stick, either. That's the point you need to take away from this discussion.
03Shadowbob
Member
the perp can't sue you in Florida as far as I know and I am almost 100% positive on that. More than likely the guy won't go down after one shot (only in movies) so you better practice emptying the mag as quick as possible and as accurate as possible. Then if you can't happen to find your phone to call 911 for the next 15 minutes because you misplaced it and the guy bleeds to death, well...it happens. 
Cosmoline
Member
No, you can't let the guy bleed to death while you pretend to lose your phone. That's both profoundly idiotic and sadistic. A person who survives a COM bullet or two is going to be in horrible shape, and you'd have to be a subhuman monster to stand by and make a joke out of his death.
03Shadowbob
Member
quote "Just being in your house does not give you the right to shoot someone."
in a case of home invasion in the great state of FL it does.
in a case of home invasion in the great state of FL it does.
Cosmoline
Member
You are confusing a presumption with a right. No law gives you a right to kill someone just for being in your house unlawfully. The laws you're talking about allow you to presume, up to a point, that someone breaking into an occupied home in certain conditions is presenting an imminent unlawful deadly threat. Once you've shot the person and they're down, no law allows you to keep pumping bullets into them because they're bleeding on your rug.
03Shadowbob
Member
Cosmoline, loosen the belt man, I am not being serious about losing the phone. Of course I would call 911 when it was safe to do so and not until then. I am no monster, just been in my share of situations where someone wanted to do great bodily harm to me so maybe I am jaded. I would have no problems watching someone die in my home who broke in and could do harm to my family. I would not be joking about it either.
Everyone is different.
Everyone is different.
Lupinus
Member
you shoot to stop the threat. If he is half dead and pointing his gun at you? shoot agian. If he is on the ground without a weapon about three breaths from passing out? leave him be.
And never under any circumstances should you have to shoot someone say you shot to kill, you shot to stop the threat.
As for being sued? You are better off without using excessive force. His family will have an even easier time suing oyu if they can prove you used more force then needed.
And never under any circumstances should you have to shoot someone say you shot to kill, you shot to stop the threat.
As for being sued? You are better off without using excessive force. His family will have an even easier time suing oyu if they can prove you used more force then needed.
03Shadowbob,
THR is different then other forums, and the Strategies and Tactics forum is a bit different from the rest of THR. We don't joke about doing illegal things here. We don't joke about about taking a life.
Someone who claims to have had his share of situations where someone wanted to do great bodily harm to him should realize that. By the way, I'm a bit curious, how many of those situations is one guy's share?
If you haven't already done so, I suggest that you read the thread entitled Bloodlust, Read this thread before posting in this subforum before you post here again.
After you read it, think about what a fence sitter, someone who really couldn't care less if we legally own guns or not, because the issue isn't important to him, might think when he read your comment.
Jeff
THR is different then other forums, and the Strategies and Tactics forum is a bit different from the rest of THR. We don't joke about doing illegal things here. We don't joke about about taking a life.
Someone who claims to have had his share of situations where someone wanted to do great bodily harm to him should realize that. By the way, I'm a bit curious, how many of those situations is one guy's share?
If you haven't already done so, I suggest that you read the thread entitled Bloodlust, Read this thread before posting in this subforum before you post here again.
After you read it, think about what a fence sitter, someone who really couldn't care less if we legally own guns or not, because the issue isn't important to him, might think when he read your comment.
Jeff
10-Ring
Member
IMO, you stop shooting when the threat is gone. I wouldn't shoot if the intruder is no longer moving.
03Shadowbob
Member
Jeff
Duly noted.
IMO, if someone has had more than three situations where they have been in life or death situations and had to make a decision on what to do, that's what I consider a fair share unless everyone here on THR has been in at least 3 then it goes to 10 maybe??? Who knows.
I did not once write that someone should do something illegal. If I did please point it out and I'll apologize.
Duly noted.
IMO, if someone has had more than three situations where they have been in life or death situations and had to make a decision on what to do, that's what I consider a fair share unless everyone here on THR has been in at least 3 then it goes to 10 maybe??? Who knows.
I did not once write that someone should do something illegal. If I did please point it out and I'll apologize.
brownie0486
Member
PILMAN;
I think it is very scary that someone owns a firearm AND has not researched the use of force/self defense laws in their state.
I suggest you do so post-haste, and learn them well. Then get some real training and stop listening to "everyone keeps telling me" crap, as they obvously don't have the first clue about the use of force continuum or self defense criteria.
Brownie
I think it is very scary that someone owns a firearm AND has not researched the use of force/self defense laws in their state.
I suggest you do so post-haste, and learn them well. Then get some real training and stop listening to "everyone keeps telling me" crap, as they obvously don't have the first clue about the use of force continuum or self defense criteria.
Brownie
There is another post like this one a couple months ago. If I remember right, most of the posters were of the opinion that if you had to shoot a bg in your home and he did not have access to a weapon, you still should not get too close, because he could still grab you and do you harm. I suppose the best thing to do is have a talk with a lawyer first.
bogie
Member
Shooting?
Never more than your share, never mix tequilla and scotch, and make sure you have a designated driver.
Oh, that...
If they're trying to harm you or someone, whatever it takes to get their attention and make them stop. I'm a good shot, but I'm not a good enough shot that I'm not going to go for center mass. For shooting for extremities, shooting guns out of peoples' hands, etc., etc., all that crap you see from hollywood, there _might_ be a few dozen folks in the WORLD who are capable.
My first step is to talk. My second step is to run away. Somewhere around step 48 or so, things start to get noisy.
I've never been past step 5.
Never more than your share, never mix tequilla and scotch, and make sure you have a designated driver.
Oh, that...
If they're trying to harm you or someone, whatever it takes to get their attention and make them stop. I'm a good shot, but I'm not a good enough shot that I'm not going to go for center mass. For shooting for extremities, shooting guns out of peoples' hands, etc., etc., all that crap you see from hollywood, there _might_ be a few dozen folks in the WORLD who are capable.
My first step is to talk. My second step is to run away. Somewhere around step 48 or so, things start to get noisy.
I've never been past step 5.
This isn't a 'legal' question, but a moral one. Shoot early, shoot often, but once the threat is truely neutralized, you already know in your heart that it would be wrong to shoot again. You couldn't go over to the dark side and live with yourself.
Lupinus
Member
Castle law varies from state to state. The premis is the same, someone breaking into your house can be considered interested in doing you great bodily harm. You will still want to review the specifics though of your individual states law.
As for it being "right" to shoot someone in your house? Yeah, I would say it is. Take it as blood thirsty if you want but someone breaks into a house they give up their right to live and frankly deserve what they get. Neutralize the threat in the most effective manner possible and then worry about calling 911 to save the guy. As for helping him? It's not my job to get that close to someone I just had to shoot and risk him still being in any shape to hurt me or get only God knows what floating in his blood on me.
As for it being "right" to shoot someone in your house? Yeah, I would say it is. Take it as blood thirsty if you want but someone breaks into a house they give up their right to live and frankly deserve what they get. Neutralize the threat in the most effective manner possible and then worry about calling 911 to save the guy. As for helping him? It's not my job to get that close to someone I just had to shoot and risk him still being in any shape to hurt me or get only God knows what floating in his blood on me.
Shoot to kill ?
If you shoot someone in the chest with a .38/357, 9mm, or .45 and they live your ammo sucks. Good expanding ammo is a must for self defense. I have two pair of handcuffs in addition to my firearms. After shooting the perp I'd roll him over checking for more weapons with my gun to his head and cuff him as I call 911. By the time the police or ambulance comes he'll probably bleed out anyway.
A dead perp in your house can't testify against you.
If you shoot someone in the chest with a .38/357, 9mm, or .45 and they live your ammo sucks. Good expanding ammo is a must for self defense. I have two pair of handcuffs in addition to my firearms. After shooting the perp I'd roll him over checking for more weapons with my gun to his head and cuff him as I call 911. By the time the police or ambulance comes he'll probably bleed out anyway.
A dead perp in your house can't testify against you.
Last edited:
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
