Please Help To Keep The
"Conservative News and Views"
On FR Coming By "Clicking Here"!!
Sponsoring FReepers are contributing
$10 Each time a New Monthly Donor signs up!
Get more bang for your FR buck!
Click Here To Sign Up Now!
Posted on 05/31/2014 9:23:36 AM PDT by FlashBack
For those who support warning shots, Just as a matter of philosophy - because I don’t believe in warning shots - in states where it’s not legal, it’s a fair defense to claim one tried to kill the attacker with the shot but missed. Let ‘em prove otherwise.
I prefer to say that the first one in center mass was the warning, the second was because the warning didn’t work.
Why waste a bullet you might need?
TC
Beat me to it.
Let’s assume that each of us has sufficient sense to not draw unless we are in fear of bodily harm.
From the time you draw to the moment before pulling the trigger you have sufficient time to determine whether the threat persists.
Yes? Pull the trigger.
No? Stand firm until you are certain.
Trying to evaluate all the technical details of the law is a waste of time.
“The thinking behind that is that if you have the time to fire a warning shot, you have the time to run.”
Many situations are more complex than that. Every situation is different.
I think warning shots are bad policy, but every policy has exceptions.
Me too. For someone that doesn't shoot frequently, a warm up shot helps everyone in attendance know everything is tested and good to go if things get any worse.
I agree with you. If they don’t run or surrender when they see the gun, it means they don’t think you will actually shoot them. A warning shot reinforces that impression, and puts you in greater danger of them trying something, figuring you will hesitate to fire.
Starting to shoot center mass on all targets who are not running away is safest.
Excellent advice!
I just completed my CCW training a few weeks ago. The instructor said nothing about firing a warning shot being a felony; he said it was a bad idea, in part because the bullet could hit someone or something else, and the shooter would be liable for that.
my gun lawyer in my legal class, who used to be an ada, said a warning shot can be construed at trial to indicate the shooter was not in immediate danger. there is right and there is wrong and there is the legal system, not to be confused with a justice system.
The failure to emphasize Shutting the F up, renders your advice very dangerous. You should have mention to STFU a few more times.
Warning shots? As many of the bad reasons for so doing have been mentioned, I won’t belabor the point.
Are you willing to waste a life-saving shot, risk a malfunction, use up to perhaps 20% of your available ammo, be responsible for every inch of the shot’s trajectory and everything in its path?
Having firearm in hand before it is actually needed for discharge, but not prior to being fully justified in presenting it is a fine line that needs to be fully considered. Either way, you may be in trouble or dead.
Finally, the situation is critical to understanding this paradigm. In ones house? No need to keep holstered it’s your domain, on the street in public places? Holstered until just before it is required to be employed.
Those who describe having used warning shots ought to be a bit more descriptive. In a military context I have used warning shots ( secure facility overseas) followed with lethal fire and in life as a US resident, I have used a sidearm in what thankfully ended w/o shots being fired.
No situation is so textbook that anyone of us can or ought to expect a certain set of lockstep reactions. As those who have been in such situations can attest to, nothing makes a whole lot of rational sense until it is over and you are still breathing.
Whatever you do, indeed do take the advice to have a well-rehearsed statement for the police. Make it short, sweet and easily repeatable- then say it over and over until your attorney advises you further.
Be safe, trust God.
My fault for omitting the key parts of the Kenny Bunk Righteous Shoot Doctrine. Sorry.
Steps (6) through (45) should read, "STFU!", closely followed by legal advice steps (46) through (212), which read. "Please STFU!"
In any righteous shoot confrontation, there should be two very silent people present. The Shooter, and The Shootee.*
*Others will be only too happy to speak for the Shootee....usually a good boy, an aspiring Rapper who was turning his life around and was viciously stalked by the shooter while on his way to (pick one) Nuclear Physics Class, Bible Study, A Meals on Wheels Delivery.
Even Joe Biden recommends firing warning shots, what other authority do you need? (sarc)
yup.
I several self dense case I have read about the defender fired warning shots and the bad guy claimed it was all a miss understanding and the defender over reacted.
Wasn’t a woman in Florida given a few years in jail for this recently?
If she’d fired those warning shots center-mass I think she would have fared better in court.
Hell no , then the perp sues you or his homies come back for revenge.
No warning shots. They waste ammo, and if you are using a semi-auto, it might jam. Plus it is confusing. Just make the shot, make it count, put him down, pick up your brass, and get out of town.
Within the last couple days, a music store owner in Detroit shot at a guy in his store he thought was trying to rob him. He missed the robber, the round went thru the store front window and killed a pedestrian outside the store............
Facts will eventually be determined but here's a case where an innocent bystander WAS killed
Warning shots are a waste of ammo you might need when they decide to ignore your warning, not to mention you’ve got no idea where that bullet is going. Verbal warnings are fine, warning shots are just plain stupid always.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.