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.)
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.