FL:Thoughts on Warning Shots From a Police Firearms Instructor

Gun Watch ^ | 11 January, 2013 | Dean Weingarten

[marktwain]

Even a small gun can deter an attack  A friend said that they had to fire their mini-revolver to convince an attacker that it was a real gun.

Florida is moving toward a "Defensive Display" law that includes the possibility of a warning shot or shots being acceptable as a part of self defense, if no innocents are injured.   Arizona passed a similar law several years ago after the aggressors in self defense situations were using the criminal justice system to have the defenders arrested on aggravated assault charges.

In the case that I know of, the aggressors were following the defender in a "road rage" scenario.  At one point, they pulled up along side of him, while traveling, and threw a beverage container at him with enough force that it cause a small cut.  When he stopped at a light, boxed in by traffic, two of them got out of their vehicle and started running toward him from a couple of cars back.  He held up his defensive sidearm for them to see, and they quickly stopped their aggressive actions and ran back to their vehicle.   Then they called 911.  He was also on  the phone to 911.  The police came to his house, and eventually arrested him (he thinks that it was because, under stress, he made a bad joke that offended the investigating officer).  He was going to trial, when the prosecution informed the defense that there was a third 911 call that confirmed the defender's version of events.   The case was dismissed, but there was tremendous stress and expense involved.  The aggressors were never arrested or charged.

With the Florida law, the most contentious issue is that of "warning shots".  Here is a discussion of the issue from a retired State Patrol firearms instructor.  I have edited it a little for spelling, with permission of the author:

I think defensive display can have a place in a self defense situation.

More then one criminal assault has been stopped when it has become know that victim is armed.

Warning shots are a lot tougher because of the high probability of some thing bad happening.

When I was on my Department's firearms and use of force committee, we had a long discussion on warning shots. Some were for forbidding them all together, some were for a more modest policy.

We were trying to determine if the policy should allow or forbid them. We decided the policy should read, that they should be RARE and INFREQUENT, based on the facts at the time they were used.

This was decided mostly on the facts of two situations where warning shots were used and the suspects were taken into custody after the warning shots without harm to the officers or suspects.

Having read the use of force reports and interviewing the officers I truly believe without the warning shots the officers would have ended up shooting both suspects.

It seemed clear that both of these suspects were trying to commit suicide by cop and the warning shots jarred them out of that line of thought and they surrendered because of the warning shots and not pressing forward with their attack on the officers that would have forced the officers to shoot them.

One was armed with a baseball bat the other was not armed, but kept making threats saying he had a gun and making movements like he had a gun and was going to use it.

Both warning shots were fired into good bullet stopping areas and there was no one else around.

Warning shots good, bad, or other wise, I guess one would have to take the totality of the situation into account before determining if they were justified or not and safely executed.

This summation of warning shots seems well thought out.   I have always taught a policy of *not* firing warning shots, but with the caveat the every policy has exceptions.   The idea that warning shots should be rare, but that each circumstance should be considered in the totality of the situation, appeals to me and to my understanding that each defensive shooting is unique.

In most situations, it is a better resolution to a situation if it can be resolved without having to shoot someone.

©2013 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice is included.
Link to Gun Watch

[marktwain]

Under the current Florida law, people have been prosecuted for "warning shots". If they just said that they missed, they could have been covered under the Stand Your Ground law. Both Marion Hammer and a state representative testified that there were several examples of this.

[E. Pluribus Unum]

It’s not a warning shot if you say you were trying to hit them and missed.

[Antihero101607]

If you’re going to fire warning shots, save yourself the time, money, and effort and get a starter pistol instead of the real thing. Its been a couple of years since I read “In the Gravest Extreme” but I don’t remember Mossad Ayoob advocating warning shots.

[rarestia]

Florida has a “10-20-Life” law that dictates that if you use a gun in the commission of a crime, you get a mandatory 10 years; fire the gun, you get 20; kill someone, you get life. That law has been used to put people firing warning shots in jail for 20 years (there are 3 notable cases in Florida that were the impetus for this new legislation).

[Tenacious 1]

I expect there will be several strong opinions here on FR about “Warning Shots.” They will be... “Only pull it out to use it and always shoot to kill.”

I will always take the position that all situations are different and dynamic. Train well and let your training and instinct guide your actions if ever you must defend yourself with a weapon.

[nvscanman]

There can be no blanket statements or legal requirements that actually work in the real world. There are always
those rare instances where a situation would warrant a
person doing something that is generally considered to be
unacceptable or unwise. Warning shots would be one of these
instances. The vast majority of the time a warning shot
would be ill advised but there are certainly times when
such an act is the better choice. The laws need to reflect
this reality. The problem being of course is that those
who create laws are often unconcerned or even hostile
regarding the concepts and practices of self defense, personal freedom and right. Add in the fact that prosecuting attorneys are virtuallY always looking at cases
that come before them as a means to THEIR personal ends
and we have the recipe for persecution disguised as prosecution.

[dainbramaged]

Aim center mass.

[NorthMountain]

In The Gravest Extreme was written in 1980, in a legal climate FAR different from that which we now experience. Ayoob (or someone) needs to write a modern version of the book, recognizing the many legal changes since then. The change in concealed-carry laws, along with castle doctrine laws and deprecation of "duty to retreat" need to be addressed. The graphic below illustrates the vast extent to which the law has changed ...

[driftdiver]

Yes each situation is different. The reality is many firearms are owned by people who rarely fire them and have little training.

IMO you don’t pull a firearm unless you have cause to use it. Sure displaying a firearm can help to deter an attacker. It can also get you arrested for brandishing.

Warning shots should be the rare exception.

[Bloody Sam Roberts]

More then one criminal assault has been stopped

Good heavens. This is becoming epidemic. I've seen this at least a hundred times this week. The last time before this was yesterday on a enterprise level Linux software product. It was in an error message output. I thought some sort of college degree was necessary to become a software code writer.

Will anyone ever learn the difference between 'then' and 'than'? Or does no one care? It makes my teeth hurt.

[SWAMPSNIPER]

[riverrunner]

I don’t see any body here advocating warning shots. It is more of a specialize tool one has and only rarely uses.

[marktwain]

“If you’re going to fire warning shots, save yourself the time, money, and effort and get a starter pistol instead of the real thing. Its been a couple of years since I read “In the Gravest Extreme” but I don’t remember Mossad Ayoob advocating warning shots.”

He did not. Neither am I.

Massad Ayoob also wrote that in a certain circumstance, that he would shoot to kill an criminal who was not showing a weapon, even if the criminal had not seen him.

It was an extreme case involving an extremely dangerous sociopath that he personally knew. It just illustrates that there are exceptions to every policy.

[LadyBuck]

Mr. Dynamic Situation,

Please share the efficy of warning shots used by LEO & Military (”trained professionals”), then get back to us.

PS...please also predict with accuracy where your wild warning shot will land, or do you go to the range to practice warning shots?

And yes, I meant to be rude and sarcastic. Just be glad I didn’t address you as Mr. BFD Biden.

[riverrunner]

Defensive display is legal in many states.

[NonValueAdded]

center mass is a “good bullet stopping area,” is it not?

[riverrunner]

I sorry that your teeth hurt so much.

[Rodamala]

Best advice I have seen on FR is combined firearm and backhoe ownership.

Shoot, Shovel & Forget.

Maybe you can toss in a tragic boating accident where all your guns (and backhoes) have been lost.

[riverrunner]

Who says a warning shot has to be wild.

Depending on the location and terrain one could very well determine where a warning shot could land.

[driftdiver]

Depends on the prosecutor.