Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Should You Threaten the Use of Deadly Force and Fire Warning Shots?
USA Carry ^ | May 21, 2014 | Col (Dr) Benjamin Findley

Posted on 05/31/2014 9:23:36 AM PDT by FlashBack

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-55 last
To: FlashBack

The price and availability of ammo prevents me from firing a warning shot.


41 posted on 05/31/2014 12:24:29 PM PDT by bikerman (SWAT = Shoot Without Any Thinking)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FlashBack

First things first - if you are carrying for self-defense, establish a relationship with an attorney and/or avail yourself of the services of an org like ccwsafe.com or similar. Be prepared!

When circumstances cause you to conclude, “I’ll have to shoot this guy to stop him,” then here is the philosophy that I was taught/trained to live by (if I wanted to continue living):

Start shooting and continue shooting until the threat stops doing whatever it was that made you start shooting in the first place.

Comprehend that there is no such thing as shooting someone “just a little bit”.

There is darned little positive value and a metric-ton of negative value in wasting a round — a round you may desperately need later — as a warning shot.

You don’t shoot to kill; you shoot to *stop* - understand the difference.

When you meet with your attorney, you had better be able to articulate:
You fully believed that the threat was, right then and there, going to kill you (or someone else if you were intervening) and that you had to shoot to stop him.

Best of luck to you!!


42 posted on 05/31/2014 12:46:15 PM PDT by jaydee770
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FlashBack

I never waste ammo!


43 posted on 05/31/2014 1:15:24 PM PDT by SWAMPSNIPER (The Second Amendment, a Matter of Fact, Not a Matter of Opinion)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kenny Bunk

1)Shoot
2)Shovel
3)STFU


44 posted on 05/31/2014 1:25:40 PM PDT by Rodamala
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Wyrd bið ful aræd
Warning shots are appropriate in certain situations, IMHO, where legally permissible of course.

I agree, though many don't. Situational awareness is critical so you know what is needed; is there room/time for the possibility that the person need not be killed :: Is there a safe place for the shot to be spent without a ricochet or having the round go through something and hitting an unintended target :: Is it going to get you into more legal trouble than a kill shot would?

Most of the arguments I've seen against it assume that you are stupid and will inadvertently kill/harm someone else - make me wonder about their own situational awareness abilities and whether or not they are just waiting for their first chance at taking a "trophy".

Me personally, I will kill if necessary to protect me and mine, but I won't do it just because I can legally get away with it. Not only is life sacred, but I prefer to think that, if a person hasn't been saved, and I have a choice, I don't want to be the one that ensured he won't ever be saved.

45 posted on 05/31/2014 1:27:09 PM PDT by trebb (Where in the the hell has my country gone?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: FlashBack
I'll tell you what my CCW instructor told my wife and I when we went through our CCW training earlier this year:

"If you find yourself in the position of firing a warning shot, aim for center mass."

In short, he said he didn't believe in "warning shots" and that firing one just gave a determined perp more time to physically get at you, often resulting in one becoming a victim.

My CCW instructor is a Retired Marine and retired IL State Police officer. I take him at his word.

46 posted on 05/31/2014 1:42:25 PM PDT by usconservative (When The Ballot Box No Longer Counts, The Ammunition Box Does. (What's In Your Ammo Box?))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SauronOfMordor
"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."

Or they are so stoned that they can't think.

47 posted on 05/31/2014 2:19:54 PM PDT by The_Republic_Of_Maine (Be kept informed on Maine's secession, sign up at freemaine@hushmail.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: FlashBack

About the only purpose I can see to warning shots, is to warn an unaware person of imminent danger, assuming they are oblivious to warning cries.

As far as giving a warning shot to a criminal, I could say that it is situational, but I would be hard pressed to imagine a situation where it would be needed.

An important factor is the civilian Tueller distance. This is why I would accompany my pistol with a knife in the other hand. I do not need to ponder any philosophical implications about using my gun if an aggressor runs headlong into my knife.

If that is not an issue, warning shots would likely be frivolous.


48 posted on 05/31/2014 2:33:01 PM PDT by yefragetuwrabrumuy ("Don't compare me to the almighty, compare me to the alternative." -Obama, 09-24-11)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: umgud

49 posted on 05/31/2014 3:26:33 PM PDT by Delta 21 (Its my freedom. YES. I will be keeping it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: FlashBack

“Should you fire a warning shot when confronted by an attacker?”

No, no and Hell no.


50 posted on 05/31/2014 5:34:58 PM PDT by Georgia Girl 2 (The only purpose o f a pistol is to fight your way back to the rifle you should never have dropped.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FlashBack

The only warning shot an attacker deserves is the one that puts him down permanently.


51 posted on 05/31/2014 8:04:45 PM PDT by RWB Patriot ("My ability is a value that must be earned and I don't recognize anyone's need as a claim on me.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FlashBack

A lot of great comments here, I read the article this a.m. and had to share.


52 posted on 05/31/2014 8:29:33 PM PDT by FlashBack (http://www.gunownersldn.com/glory/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Rodamala
1)Shoot
2)Shovel
3)STFU

Brevitas anima scientiae

53 posted on 06/01/2014 5:51:36 AM PDT by Kenny Bunk (Vote for a gay African Marxist for POTUS? Sure. What could go wrong?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Hot Tabasco

Robber could still be charged for manslaughter or murder on the grounds that a death occurred during the committing of his crime. The robber was committing a criminal act, got shot at but while the shot was missed, another person was killed. If the robber was there to buy records only, then no shot would have occurred and no one would have been killed.


54 posted on 06/01/2014 6:04:39 AM PDT by mdmathis6
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: mdmathis6
Robber could still be charged for ...

Could be......

55 posted on 06/01/2014 3:39:47 PM PDT by Hot Tabasco (By now, everyone should know that you shoot a zombie in the head. Don't try to reason with them...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-55 last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson