Fire Twice -vs- Empty the Magazine?

bvet4dog said:
dont forget... the placement of your shots are very important. you cant just randomly shoot them. they have to to be virtually attacking you.

for instance, if you stopped that person and he's standing right there in shock seeing that you have a gun and you're armed meanwhile he got nothing or a knife... Then you take a shot at him because you were nervous or just wanted to get rid of that burglar...... You can get in trouble for that because he/she DID nothing to harm you. That'll put you to life in prison. My gramp best friend gone through that and he's still facing numerous of trails.

OR

If the attacker/burglar IS coming after you or attacking in any sorts of ways. Yes take the shots the person untill he/she is down. Dont forget, your placement of shots are important. dont shoot sideways/behind of the person head. And DO NOT shoot behind that person. Because it's very hard to prove that he didnt start walking away and you just shot him. Anyways, if you're going to take a shot at him, better off having him dead than alive because if he's alive... it'll make your life even harder in court.

just think about it thats all. You still wouldn't want to take a life away. Just give 2 options and it'll be fine.

"get ouf of my house, go on and live your life. dont break into any one's house again... or you can die here right now on my floor. What is it gonna be?"

he will i mean WILL WALK! because he knows you mean business and you are not messing around.
Click to expand...


Drugs are bad, mmmmmmkay?????
 
Jaxon said:
An iffy scenario at best. What's to prevent him/her/it/them from becoming a threat with the thought of arrest? All this while you're on the phone? [thinking]

Of course, YMMV [grin]
Click to expand...

Nothing, but until they are a direct threat to you or someone nearby, you will have a very hard time defending shooting someone.

Basically, you come upon an intruder and take aim at him. He drops to the floor and starts crying, pleading. At this point in time, he has surrendered but could at any moment become hostile.

Without offense, its not defense.
 
umm... dont forget that doesnt give the excuse for you to take a life away. I also mentioned that, go ahead take the shot(s) if the person is virtually attacking you.


if he was pleading or surrendered. you have to let him go or try your best to hold him down untill cops comes. If he starts walking off or for what ever reason you shot him while he was not attacking you..... you're finished.
 
Very interesting scenarios.... lots of variables, but nothing is every black and white.

How does one interpret intent when its zero-dark thirty, and an unknown - probably hostile has forcibly entered your domicile?

Perhaps they do freeze at the sound of your voice and the blinding light of your (name your brand here) flashlight. Perhaps they run away. Perhaps neither.

For most, the time to react intelligently is fleetingly small. Even for those "trained", the scenario isn't one usually taught, or easily simulated.

Is easy to say we could make an intelligent, well thought out resolution to this issue, but another to actually live it. The best you can do is make the best plans you can, have your equipment readily at hand and hope you never have to implement it.

And no, while over the course of my life I haven't actually fired a weapon in fear for my life, I've pointed at a number of people and come reasonably close in a few. A couple of those wishing I had a bigger caliber.

[thinking]
 
DontForgetJune4th said:
I think the cop got it wrong when he reholstered. He should have the gun trained on the assailant till support arrived and fired again if necessary (I wouldn't even trust a downed assailant as being dead).
Click to expand...

He definately got it wrong by reholstering. Police are trained specifically to not reholster in a situation like this in case the attacker becomes a threat again or if there could be another assailant.
 
The more I read the more I wonder what I would do....The answer..."I don't know" I see myself awaken in the night, adrenaline, panic.....When your scared shitless firing 11 rounds in less then three seconds seems viable to me. I don't know if I would even rationalize ramifications at a later point.

I guess I am saying I don't see myself firing and waiting to see if the shot was effective or not. I only wish I could be that disciplined
 
clinotus said:
KMaurer said:
If that's your plan going into it, I hope you get a nice bunk mate at MCI. All the prosecutor has to do is enter the training syllabus from any well-known school showing that that's not the way they train. It's always fire to stop the attack. If you've had to fire a second shot to the center of mass, and that still hasn't managed to stop the attack, then shift aim to the head. An automatic 2+1 is almost per se excessive force. Just as you own each shot fired, you have to assess whether additional rounds are needed before every shot, not after every group or 2 or 3 or after each magazine.

Ken
Click to expand...
I cannot agree with this, I certainly understand that in the eyes of a non-shooter a perfectly executed 2+1 drill will seem like excessive force...the fact remains it is a deadly force situation. Not partial, not moderated, not exploratory, but deadly force. If your shots happen to line up perfectly and he drops on the spot its game, set, and match. If your shots dont and he still drops on the spot with severe wounds, again its game, set, and match. No matter how the situation plays out you have employed deadly force towards someone in situation where it was legally allowed.
Click to expand...

What exactly is it that you disagree with? As Darius posted, and you agreed, you own every shot you fire, regardless of the circumstances. The fact that it's in response to lethal force doesn't mean that you get to shoot 2+1 regardless of the necessity. If the first shot puts the assailant down, the next 2 are excessive; if the first two puts him down, then the third is excessive. In contrast, if the first 15 don't put him down, then the 16th is entirely justified. You don't go into the fight planning on shooting a Mozambique Drill just because you think it's cool or that it's what all the good schools teach. It isn't; they don't. You go in planning on doing whatever it takes to stay alive, whether that's kicking him repeatedly in the balls; firing a single shot that, despite your intentions, misses, but scares him off; shooting him once, twice or three dozen times. You don't keep shooting just because that's part of your plan any more than you stop shooting after 2+1 because your plan says that will always do the job. You keep shooting until you've stopped the attack -- nothing more; nothing less.

Ken
 
If you label the Mozambique Drill as automatically excessive, then under the same terms any shot discharged after the first shot would be considered excessive force since you are only shooting to stop the threat.

I do see you expanded though, so its a wash.
 
Go back and read the original post to which I responded, Don. The poster wrote about automatically responding to the threat by firing 2 to the center of mass and one to the head. Those three shots may or may not be excessive, but you simple don't go in firing on autopilot. Each and every shot is justified if and only if the previous shots (whether none or a hundred) have failed to stop the threat. If you think I've labeled the Mozambique excessive in every instance, you don't get it. No grouping or cluster of shots is ever justified as such; each and every shot stands or falls on its own, and needs to be justified on that basis. It's the difference between shooting 2 free throws versus shooting 1 and 1. You only get to shoot the second one if the first didn't solve the problem.

Ken
 
We all can get theoretical so here's mine: if you follow Tueller drill and start to draw from holster at 21ft, a trained person can get the shot off in 1.3-1.4 sec while an avg person does it in 1.5 (I don't trust everything on Wikipedia, but it's a start). Tueller drill assumes one-shot stop but let's say you get your shot off while assailant is 8 ft away, it's safe to assume that inertia alone will carry the knife-wielding assailant to stabbing distance.

So unless you fired EddieCoyle's .500 or a 12GA and the guy flew back airborne (I love Hollywood!), a GOOD attorney SHOULD be able to justify that your first (and second) shots didn't stop the assailant enough and the head shot was justified because the BG was still coming and you were fear for your life.
 
Last edited:
Sleepytime said:
Dead men tell no tales.

If you shoot and the BG gets back outside, shoot him again and then drag the BG back in. When the cops ask how the blood got outside just say that he must have been bleeding before he broke in. Your word against his...

As far as if I feel like my wife and child are in mortal danger... Heck yeah! If someone busts my door down at 2 in the morning they sure as hell aren't coming in for a spot of tea! I live in a condo. There is only one way in and out of my unit. My bedrrom is at the 'furthest corner', so I'm coming out with my S&W barking and then I'll ask questions. JMOFUO
Click to expand...

I really wonder how smart it is to talk about this particular topic on an online forum. There is no doubt that anything you say is cataloged somewhere (see earlier thread about the biking guy who was harassed because someone on his bike forum saw that he posted here from a google search). Take the comment above for instance:

If you shoot and the BG gets back outside, shoot him again and then drag the BG back in. When the cops ask how the blood got outside just say that he must have been bleeding before he broke in. Your word against his...

I can imagine a comment like this making it easier for a prosecutor, even in some obvious case where some assailant came into your house with a chainsaw and was hopped up on pcp... even if you did 'everything by the book' when defending yourself and your family. A comment like this is most likely not a determining factor, but a juicy tidbit to display to a jury. Again, not trying to make anyone an example, but the things we write live on for years and years. I'd hate for a comment that was said half-jokingly to come back and bite someone in the ass.
 
William Wallace said:
I really wonder how smart it is to talk about this particular topic on an online forum. There is no doubt that anything you say is cataloged somewhere (see earlier thread about the biking guy who was harassed because someone on his bike forum saw that he posted here from a google search). Take the comment above for instance:

If you shoot and the BG gets back outside, shoot him again and then drag the BG back in. When the cops ask how the blood got outside just say that he must have been bleeding before he broke in. Your word against his...

I can imagine a comment like this making it easier for a prosecutor, even in some obvious case where some assailant came into your house with a chainsaw and was hopped up on pcp... even if you did 'everything by the book' when defending yourself and your family. A comment like this is most likely not a determining factor, but a juicy tidbit to display to a jury. Again, not trying to make anyone an example, but the things we write live on for years and years. I'd hate for a comment that was said half-jokingly to come back and bite someone in the ass.
Click to expand...

no and no.... that's asking for prison time.

never go outside... never shoot the person who runs away.... if he runs, let him. call the police and report whats going on. police will be waiting at the hospital for anyone who has a gunshot wound.
 
WW and bvet4dog,

I should have put j/k. It was ment in jest (see earlier posts). I know shooting a guy running away is wrong. Not just a slap across tht knuckles by a nun wrong, but 'You gonna take it up the 'ol highway in prison' wrong.

I would only fire if I see the assailant is coming at me in a threatening manor. I'd warn him, only once. If he didn't retreat then I would do what was needed to make him stop. So that any other people who read my post won't take it as I am an idiot just waiting to be another black-eye on the 2nd Amendment I will go back an edit my comment.
 
Sleepytime said:
WW and bvet4dog,

I should have put j/k. It was ment in jest (see earlier posts). I know shooting a guy running away is wrong. Not just a slap across tht knuckles by a nun wrong, but 'You gonna take it up the 'ol highway in prison' wrong.

I would only fire if I see the assailant is coming at me in a threatening manor. I'd warn him, only once. If he didn't retreat then I would do what was needed to make him stop. So that any other people who read my post won't take it as I am an idiot just waiting to be another black-eye on the 2nd Amendment I will go back an edit my comment.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I gathered you were just messing around. trouble is, some terrible event happens and all of a sudden you're being questioned because you "advocated shooting an unarmed person who was running away in the back". even though you and I both understand it wasn't a serious comment. friggin' google
 
Like X fire said, shoot to stop the attack, say nothing until attorney is present, make sure human life was in imenent danger and that you had no other alternative means of escape, and the attacker had a weapon.... remember, there is such a thing as forensics, and excessive force could be very easy to prove.... I practice 2-3 shots CENTER MASS, MOVE, CENTER MASS 2-3 shots, move.....if the last group didnt stop the attack, bean shot... finger on frame, look around for more hostiles, call 911, only drop firearm when police have arrived....
 
I think these threads are stupid because:

You're not going to have time to make decisions about how many shots you should fire and what the legal consequences will be.

Training is good, but you shouldn't plan to defend yourself using some cookie cutter drill template because well, reality likely won't play out the way a drill did in a controlled environment.

The leagal consequences better be the LAST thing on your mind when in a real life or death defense situation because if you take your mind off the situation for a second it could mean your death.

Pretending like we can make shot after shot assessments of the threat level during a high stress high adrenaline situation is stupid. You're not going to shoot once, stop and assess, and decide if a subsequent shots are needed. If you want to live, you're going to pull the trigger in succession until the BG is on the ground in front of you. Any assessment delays and well, have fun pushing up daisies.

In MA, we have bad gun laws and no one can argue that. However, to automatically assume that if you ever use your gun in self defense you're guaranteed to be facing charges is stupid. That is not a guarantee. A possibility? Yes. Focusing on the potential legal battle will cloud your judgemnt in a REAL situation.

Stop bringing this topic up every other month. It's all horseshit and makes gun owners look like loonies who are just itching to shoot someone.
 
In all fairness, bringing up the topic every once in a while is good for new members who werent in on the original conversation, and it might make a difference from post to post on the intel, and it has been proven time and time time again, that most people will instinctively resort to their training when in a fighting for their life scenario... thats why you train the way you fight.... the more training, the knowledge you possess, knowledge can save your life... I agree with you jh on the not dwelling on the leagal aspects, could get you killed... remember one thing, youll never be able to understand the human phsycy....
 
I have no idea what it would be like to wake up to someone kicking my door in. I know what it's like to wake up to someone throwing a bunch of metal into the back of a truck bed when I've only had 1.5 hours of sleep and then waking up to a little girl hitting me on the legs saying, "Dada, get up! Pee pee!' an hour later... But as to the first one, I only hope I don't freeze up or hesitate. That would put my family in worse danger! If I got someone kicking my door in I am going to take that as imminent danger, but like I said, I hope I don't hesitate when I need to have big balls.
 
FunYun said:
The defense is not based on the intruders intent but your 'reasonable belief' that he is going to inflict harm. Its also pretty much assumed that breaking into an inhabited dwelling is intent to do harm.
Click to expand...

I disagree. What if the criminal is only after your TV and VCR?

In that circumstance, your use of deadly force would not be justified.
 
Jaxon said:
Its gonna be tough to determine intent if there's no one to answer the question. [thinking]
Click to expand...

1) 80% of people shot with a handgun survive.
2) Most shots fired don't actually hit the intended target.
3) Forensic evidence can determine where you were with respect to the perp when the shooting occurred. It can also determine the relative position of the perp's body when he was shot.
4) There was a witness to the incident that you did not see.

Every single shot you fire must be justified. If at any time during the encounter the perp no longer poses an immediate danger of death or grave bodily injury, then you must stop shooting.
 
As a basic rule of thumb, we shoot to stop a threat. Once the threat is gone there can be no more shooting.

We're accountable for each and every bullet that leaves the gun. Emptying the mag is fine if the threat is still in front of you. If that threat is gone and more bullets are flying then there's a problem.
 
FunYun said:
Nothing, but until they are a direct threat to you or someone nearby, you will have a very hard time defending shooting someone.

Basically, you come upon an intruder and take aim at him. He drops to the floor and starts crying, pleading. At this point in time, he has surrendered but could at any moment become hostile.

Without offense, its not defense.
Click to expand...

This is part of the overall problem. Someone invades your home. I don't care what his "intentions" are/were....he invaded your home...your sanctuary...your "castle". This is where you live, raise your family and have a life.

The PC crap (to me) is sickening. Would I blast someone away for the hell of it?....no. However, any threat in my own home, my sanctuary, my castle, where my family lives....will be met with deadly force. PC be damned.
 
Ray-500 said:
This is part of the overall problem. Someone invades your home. I don't care what his "intentions" are/were....he invaded your home...your sanctuary...your "castle". This is where you live, raise your family and have a life.

The PC crap (to me) is sickening. Would I blast someone away for the hell of it?....no. However, any threat in my own home, my sanctuary, my castle, where my family lives....will be met with deadly force. PC be damned.
Click to expand...

Make sure you have my cell phone number in your wallet!
 

Similar threads

Study Confirms 10+ Firearm Magazine Capacity Is 'Standard'
Replies
8
Views
446
tuna
tuna
Californians Arming Up for Self-Defense as Illegals Flood into Cities
Replies
23
Views
461
mothybee
mothybee
Washington state high-capacity magazine ban remains on books for now
Replies
1
Views
120
pastera
pastera
New Orleans Police Chief Pushes More Gun-Free Zones — Where Tourists Can’t Be Armed for Self-Defense
Replies
21
Views
337
Dennis in MA
Dennis in MA
Arlington, MA school locked down - empty cartridges found
2
Replies
39
Views
1K
Asaltweapon
Asaltweapon
Back
Top Bottom