Quantcast
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Your intentions should you have to pull the trigger.

Discussion in 'General Gun Discussions' started by Diesle, Dec 31, 2002.

?

How do you intend to respond to attack?

  1. Shoot to kill

    38 vote(s)
    63.3%
  2. Shoot to maim

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  3. Shoot away to warn

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  4. Asses each situation as it arises

    22 vote(s)
    36.7%
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Diesle

    Diesle Member

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2002
    Messages:
    495
    Location:
    MN, USA
    Simple poll on how you intend to respond to a deadly force senario.

    Elaborate if you like...

    EDIT: I cant edit the poll, sorry. I would certainly add to stop the threat, whatever the outcome may be. I knew i would nd up flubbing this thing up.....

    But in its simplest form, when you are shooting to stop the threat your are pointing at a limb (maim), center of mass/head (kill), away warn). Or is that just too damn simple???

    Diesle
     
    Last edited: Dec 31, 2002
  2. 11xray

    11xray Member

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2002
    Messages:
    28
    None of the above. We shoot to stop the threat, and only to stop the threat.

    The side effects of shooting to stop the threat may well be death or maiming, but that is not our intent.

    The intent is to stop the threat. Nothing else.
     
  3. Stephen A. Camp

    Stephen A. Camp Moderator In Memoriam

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    2,430
    Hello. EXACTLY what 11xray said.

    Best.
     
  4. 2nd Amendment

    2nd Amendment member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    1,929
    Location:
    Indiana
    The intent on my part is to stop the threat AND make as sure as possible I don't get sued afterwards.

    Straight from the mouth of an ISP Trooper "Dead men don't have a story, remember that..."

    I know that doesn't sound good but in the context of todays law suit happy society you fail to consider it at your own peril.
     
  5. Triad

    Triad Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2002
    Messages:
    810
    Location:
    Texas
    One of the mods can probably edit the poll for you.
     
  6. JMLV

    JMLV Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    233
    Location:
    Morrisville PA
    AS SAID BY OTHERS

    SHOOT TO STOP THE THREAT. :ar15:
     
  7. Schuey2002

    Schuey2002 Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    3,388
    Location:
    The Oregon Coast..
    11xray summed it all up ..

    This discussion doesn't lead to responsible "RKBA", in my opinion.

    Just my 2 cents... :)
     
  8. Mike Irwin

    Mike Irwin Member

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2002
    Messages:
    7,956
    Location:
    Below the Manson-Nixon line in Virginia...
    My reply would be shoot to stop the threat, but since that sort of thing means shooting at the center of mass, shoot to kill is close enough.
     
  9. Diesle

    Diesle Member

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2002
    Messages:
    495
    Location:
    MN, USA
    Dont mistake this as patronizing you....

    How is asking the question or engaging in the discussion irresponsible RKBA? Or did I miss your point....?

    Diesle
     
  10. CRUSHER

    CRUSHER Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    90
    Location:
    Kentucky
    As others have already said, Shoot to stop!
    Ans aim for COM
    If that dosent work go to plan B
     
  11. 2nd Amendment

    2nd Amendment member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    1,929
    Location:
    Indiana
    Like I said, it doesn't sound good. Stating one will "shoot to kill" is just fodder for the kind of mind-set that sees any gun owner as a bloodthirsty vigilante. But still, failure to consider the repercussions of doing otherwise is foolish.

    Anyone worth shooting is probably worth killing or you probably shouldn't be shooting at all. That said, it's still not polite conversation. :D
     
  12. 10-Ring

    10-Ring Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    12,037
    Location:
    California
    To end the threat as quickly as possible would be my response.
     
  13. cratz2

    cratz2 Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    4,233
    Location:
    Central IN
    Two shots to center of mass. If God is really on his side and the bad guy is still coming, a couple in the head should end it.

    I am shooting to stop - to stop for sure! If he ends up dead or twitching or whatever, so be it.
     
  14. Diesle

    Diesle Member

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2002
    Messages:
    495
    Location:
    MN, USA
    My applogoies if this thread ends up being veiwed as poor taste on my part. To me it seems unpleasent, but very real and certainly possible.

    I view this board as a medium to discuss gun realated topics that would be very difficult to discuss in normal conversation.

    Personally, I occasionally go over drills with myself ( in my mind ) that breach this very question. As Im sure many of you do. "Am I prepared to pull the trigger", "how far am I willing to go...". I hope the answer to those questions is always just out of my grasp. Because, I beleive that the only way to really find out is to go through the experience. Not where I ever want to be.

    Ill pray i make the right decisions and that I have a fair amout of luck on my side if and when needed.

    Diesle
     
  15. JPM70535

    JPM70535 Member

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2002
    Messages:
    667
    Location:
    Sunny Florids
    The only answer is to shoot to stop the threat. If in the process the BG expires, remember, that was not your intent.
     
  16. telewinz

    telewinz Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    2,305
    Location:
    Ohio
    With the liability laws and the court system its a very tuff decision to make. Most often you don't have time to think, just react. Fire 1-2 warning shots and see what happens. Life and death is often a compromise, the prisons and cemetaries are full of people who have never learned that.
     
  17. 11xray

    11xray Member

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2002
    Messages:
    28
    Re your latest editing: cratz2 is correct.

    Two rounds to center of mass (the Hammer), pause,and take precise aim at the head while evaluating.

    This is the Mozambique drill.

    If the threat is stopped after the double tap, the more precise head shot is not neccassary.

    For me, the target would be a triangle drawn between the nipples and upwards toward the declivity at the base of the throat where the collarbones meet. ( don't know what it is called)

    Two rounds into the center of this triangle will usually stop a threat.

    The end result would very likely be death.

    But that is not the intent.

    To the others who have questioned the validity of the topic, allow me a question:

    If one does not know, how else shall he come to know, without asking?

    Is not one of the purposes of this board education, which in the end will only strengthen our RKBA?

    Truth can never harm us, if we are in the right.
     
  18. Schuey2002

    Schuey2002 Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    3,388
    Location:
    The Oregon Coast..
    Diesle,

    I'm not trying to start a flame war or anything.. :)

    But, it's just that every thread on this subject on TFL has a little locked symbol on it. Now, one has to ask themself why that is.
    Threads like these head down hill fast,as it is a slippery slope.

    All you have to do is look up "shoot to Kill" threads on TFL and you will see my point. What was said over there applies just the same as it does over here.. :)
     
  19. Matthew Courtney

    Matthew Courtney Member

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2002
    Messages:
    723
    Location:
    Lake Charles, Louisiana
    Shoot to stop the bad guy. Shoot to save the good guy. Injury or death of one's assailant is merely a side effect, certainly not intended by the shooter.
     
  20. 11xray

    11xray Member

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2002
    Messages:
    28
    telewinz, I must respectfully disagreee.

    Never fire warning shots.

    It can be very bad , afterward, from a legal point of view.

    The only justification for the use of deadly force in most states is to stop a deadly threat ar the threat of great bodily harm.

    In a courtroom, it may be found, however wrongly, that if you had time to fire warning shots, then the threat could not have been as imminent as to require the use of deadly force.

    This is why the police never fire warning shots.

    Someone please correct me if I am wrong about the legal reasoning above.
     
  21. Diesle

    Diesle Member

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2002
    Messages:
    495
    Location:
    MN, USA
    Schuey2002,

    Understood.

    I take full responsability for the thread and the thought, whatever becomes of either...

    Diesle
     
  22. MitchSchaft

    MitchSchaft member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    606
    Location:
    Memphis, TN
     
  23. jjmorgan64

    jjmorgan64 Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2002
    Messages:
    202
    Diesle the thread is not the problem, the problem is that you are asking others opinions, when there is only one right answer, Shoot to stop the threat, never do anything other than that. There are many ways to stop the threat, however very few work better than shooting center of mass. If this leads to death, than the BG has taken responsibility for his actions.
     
  24. King

    King Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    218
    Location:
    Austin Texas........
    None of the above (poll not posts), Shoot to "stop" the threat.
     
  25. Hypnogator

    Hypnogator Member

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2002
    Messages:
    1,801
    Location:
    AZ, WA
    None of the above. Shoot to stop the threat. That's all you are legally and morally entitled to do.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page