• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Secret Service Agent Fights Off Carjackers

D

DickTracy1953

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 1, 2008
Messages
43
Location
Grand Rapids, Michigan, USA
imported post

Head shots are my style in some hunting situations. However, when you shoot at bad guys in a close quarter combat situation I think that chest shots must be the order of the day.

And.. if multiple bad guys are threatening then you are not slowed down with attempting carefully aimed shot.
 
W

WhiteRabbit22

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 18, 2007
Messages
275
Location
, ,
imported post

Plus, don't forget that it looks bad to many a juror if you only put one bullet straight through a man's skull. I would do the standard two to the chest one to the head just to be safe. That way (even if he was killed by the two chest shots) it will still appear to the jury that he was still a threat. (keep in mind I'm not advocating purgery, but it will still look better.)
 
I

imperialism2024

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 7, 2007
Messages
3,047
Location
Catasauqua, Pennsylvania, USA
imported post

WhiteRabbit22 wrote:
Plus, don't forget that it looks bad to many a juror if you only put one bullet straight through a man's skull. I would do the standard two to the chest one to the head just to be safe. That way (even if he was killed by the two chest shots) it will still appear to the jury that he was still a threat. (keep in mind I'm not advocating purgery, but it will still look better.)
Click to expand...
Yes, but you won't be in front of a jury if your attacker pulls off a shot at you before you can complete your series of three shots.

There's also the factor that 3 shots might look like overkill.

In thinking so much about how a jury might or might not be swayed, perhaps the most prudent thing is to think about instead how to stop a threat. As long as you have the right mindset toward self-defense (IMO, the use of deadly force only as a last resort), you should be covered against criminal charges in most areas.
 
deepdiver

deepdiver

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Apr 2, 2007
Messages
5,820
Location
Southeast, Missouri, USA
imported post

imperialism2024 wrote:
WhiteRabbit22 wrote:
Plus, don't forget that it looks bad to many a juror if you only put one bullet straight through a man's skull. I would do the standard two to the chest one to the head just to be safe. That way (even if he was killed by the two chest shots) it will still appear to the jury that he was still a threat. (keep in mind I'm not advocating purgery, but it will still look better.)
Click to expand...
Yes, but you won't be in front of a jury if your attacker pulls off a shot at you before you can complete your series of three shots.

There's also the factor that 3 shots might look like overkill.

In thinking so much about how a jury might or might not be swayed, perhaps the most prudent thing is to think about instead how to stop a threat. As long as you have the right mindset toward self-defense (IMO, the use of deadly force only as a last resort), you should be covered against criminal charges in most areas.
Click to expand...
+1

You're on a roll Imperialism and I'm getting tired of running around the forum agreeing with you. ;)
 
T

Task Force 16

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jul 20, 2008
Messages
2,615
Location
Lobelville, Tennessee, USA
imported post

In Florida, the car jacking rate got pretty high, especially down in South Florida. This was before Florida started issuing CWP's. Many victems were being beaten severely or shot if they attempted to resist the car jackers.

After the CWP's started being issued, Car jackers started getting shot in the street, either by the victems themselves or a nearby armed motorists. Car jackings declined. Then the car jackers decided it might be safer to target foriegn tourists in rentals. That worked for them for a spell, until rental agencies stopped putting markings on the cars that gave them away as rentals. The BG's also tried setting just outside the airports waiting for the tourists to drive out of the lot. That worked for a spell too, until the police started posing a tourist and driving off the lot with rentals.

Car jacking became a severely hazardous occupation in Florida. By the time I left and moved to Tennessee, we hardly heard about a car jacking occuring anymore. And after the "Castle Law" was passed in FLorida any BG activity became terribly hazardous.

Too bad, that the bad guys are such slow learners. Oh well, the growing armed citizenry have special education classes for them. ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top