Replies

You can't plan to shoot to wound.

From "three steps" away? If you can't hit someone in a lower extremity from that close, you don't deserve to be carrying a firearm. Period.

From "three steps" away? If you can't hit someone in a lower extremity from that close, you don't deserve to be carrying a firearm. Period.

Dead, I often agree with you, but you are wrong here. If a person is justified to shoot, they are justified to use deadly force, and there is always a reasonable chance of death resulting. Shooting for an extremity is a good way to get yourself killed or injured. I counsel people to consider shooting for the pelvic girdle if the threat is using a contact weapon, not because it is less likely to be fatal, but because it is more likely to remove them as a threat before they severely injore or kill someone.

You know that I am not a police uber allis type from my past posts, but this article was clearly written to sensationalise the shoot.

I don't think we have enough information to decide if it was justified or not.

Find me a quality training program ANYWHERE that advocates/trains for shooting to wound. You won't find it. How fast can you move your hands/feet/head? Now hit that target. That's Hollywood/trick shooting, and you can't plan on it.

Now-

Maybe the trooper was justified in using deadly force, maybe not. I/we don't know for sure. But you've never heard the term "painful force/wounding force", have you?

If it is warranted that you pull the trigger, you shoot to kill. Period. I hope for your sake that you train the same way. Any hesitation, especially from only 10 feet away may cost you your life.