• 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.

Self defense shooting in Manassas

nitrovic

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 8, 2008
Messages
935
Location
, ,
imported post

Hawkflyer wrote:
TFred wrote:
In the CHP class I took earlier this year (before I decided not to get a Virginia CHP), it was presented that you will be in a much less tenable position for "shooting to wound" than for "shooting to stop the attacker".  You need lethal or potentially lethal force do do the latter.  The former will just land you in front of a jury trying to explain why you shot someone if you didn't feel your life was in danger.

TFred

Actually the reverse may be more likely.  We do have a law on the books 18.2-51, malicious wounding.

Under this code section shooting someone with the specific intent of wounding them could really get you in a crack.  It should be noted that while there might be an exemption elsewhere in the code, there is no self defense exemption in this section itself.

Regards

There is even an "aggravated" portion of that code section that will land you in jail for more time than the manslaughter charge.
 

Task Force 16

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

Our instructors told us that if we shoot to wound we will probably miss. Aiming for center mast was the best way to stop a threat.

If the OP is true, the shototer may have aim for center mast, but the robbers ducked down and caught the rounds in the head. It's hard to hit a moving target exactly where you want to.
 

Hawkflyer

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Feb 21, 2007
Messages
3,309
Location
Prince William County, Virginia, USA
imported post

More often than not an inexperienced person involved in an actual shooting incident will hit the other guys weapon. This happens because people focus their attention on the weapon and they aim where they are looking.

Regards
 

gotm4

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Mar 1, 2007
Messages
89
Location
Woodbridge, Virginia, USA
imported post

I agree.

Lots of times cops shoot people in the hands because that's where the cops are looking.

A few years ago I shot in a low light 3gun match. We had IDPA targets with different t-shirts on them and each had a face (copies of police sketches). Many looked similar to others. My enemy was a guy with glasses. I was only supposed to shoot the guy with dark hair and glasses. The shots were to be in the COM and not the head. I shot everyone in the face that had glasses......because that's where I was looking.

We had something similar last month at the Magpul Dynamics Advanced carbine class . We were shown the bad guy, and then had to run from 100yds to them and stop behind a line which put us within 15-20yds and engage the bad guys. Out of 15 targets I had two bad guys. I didn't screw up too much this time but I did shoot one of the bad guys in the body and head.
 

Task Force 16

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

gotm4 wrote:
I agree.

Lots of times cops shoot people in the hands because that's where the cops are looking.

A few years ago I shot in a low light 3gun match. We had IDPA targets with different t-shirts on them and each had a face (copies of police sketches). Many looked similar to others. My enemy was a guy with glasses. I was only supposed to shoot the guy with dark hair and glasses. The shots were to be in the COM and not the head. I shot everyone in the face that had glasses......because that's where I was looking.

We had something similar last month at the Magpul Dynamics Advanced carbine class . We were shown the bad guy, and then had to run from 100yds to them and stop behind a line which put us within 15-20yds and engage the bad guys. Out of 15 targets I had two bad guys. I didn't screw up too much this time but I did shoot one of the bad guys in the body and head.
If anyone has to draw and shoot at a criminal that is aiming a gun at tehm, what is usually behind the hand that holds the gun? Most of the time it is Center Mast. So it is quite possible to hit the assailants gun hand when shooting for COM, incidentaly.
 

gotm4

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Mar 1, 2007
Messages
89
Location
Woodbridge, Virginia, USA
imported post

Task Force 16 wrote:
gotm4 wrote:
I agree.

Lots of times cops shoot people in the hands because that's where the cops are looking.

A few years ago I shot in a low light 3gun match. We had IDPA targets with different t-shirts on them and each had a face (copies of police sketches). Many looked similar to others. My enemy was a guy with glasses. I was only supposed to shoot the guy with dark hair and glasses. The shots were to be in the COM and not the head. I shot everyone in the face that had glasses......because that's where I was looking.

We had something similar last month at the Magpul Dynamics Advanced carbine class . We were shown the bad guy, and then had to run from 100yds to them and stop behind a line which put us within 15-20yds and engage the bad guys. Out of 15 targets I had two bad guys. I didn't screw up too much this time but I did shoot one of the bad guys in the body and head.
If anyone has to draw and shoot at a criminal that is aiming a gun at tehm, what is usually behind the hand that holds the gun? Most of the time it is Center Mast. So it is quite possible to hit the assailants gun hand when shooting for COM, incidentaly.
True. But from the guys I know who've shot people in the hands & arms the assailant wasn't always holding a gun.
 

lax

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 15, 2007
Messages
111
Location
Sierra Vista, AZ
imported post

Stuff can get distorted. On a stormy night, my mom fell from a ladder in the garage. The call went out to the ambulance as "struck by lightning."

Good to hear the guy has the skills to make the shot under pressure.
 

Hawkflyer

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Feb 21, 2007
Messages
3,309
Location
Prince William County, Virginia, USA
imported post

gotm4 wrote:

True. But from the guys I know who've shot people in the hands & arms the assailant wasn't always holding a gun.

It does not have to be a gun. The point is that the shooter is focused on the weapon of the other person. Usually that weapon is held in the hand, unless you have a different technique.

Regards
 

Grapeshot

Legendary Warrior
Joined
May 21, 2006
Messages
35,317
Location
Valhalla
imported post

nitrovic wrote:
I've never taken a class (in civilian, military, or LE) where it is taught to "shoot to wound". Using a firearm on another human is presumed to intend "deadly force" (which this scenario would certainly be). What course and what instructor told you the above?
The old DOC training mandate was "shoot to wound" though long since replaced with "shoot to stop." In the old curriculum, the officers were at least trained to shoot center of mass or head shots = higher scores. Now days, anything in the black scores the same.

Progress - not really. Only the special teams get really good equipment and training - IMHO.

Yata hey
 

ChinChin

Regular Member
Joined
May 17, 2007
Messages
683
Location
Loudoun County, Virginia, USA
imported post

nitrovic wrote
This is simply not true. If the person was in fear for their life (such as being robbed at knife point) I think deadly force is authorized, I see no reason why they would be charged with manslaugher. If you are justified in using deadly force, it doesn't matter where you shoot.

Furthermore, I can't even find the story anywhere. A double "homicide" (legal or not) would be a front page story in this area.
Dear lord. . .I agree 100% with everything Vic said. I feel so dirty now. :lol: j/k.
 

ccunning

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2007
Messages
115
Location
Manassas, Virginia, USA
imported post

nitrovic wrote:
I've never taken a class (in civilian, military, or LE) where it is taught to "shoot to wound". Using a firearm on another human is presumed to intend "deadly force" (which this scenario would certainly be). What course and what instructor told you the above?

My CHP class was taught by a LEO who strongly emphasized that we should shoot center mass; never ever say you were shooting to kill or you would be brought up on manslaughter or murder charges. "Shoot center mass, you were 'just trying to stop him' "
 

Grapeshot

Legendary Warrior
Joined
May 21, 2006
Messages
35,317
Location
Valhalla
imported post

Another multi-page thread on something that doesn't seem to have happened.

Oh well, tomorrow's another day.

Yata hey
 

Sleepless

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 30, 2008
Messages
218
Location
Canada
imported post

Tomahawk wrote:
You'd ahoot a guy in the center mast? That's just cruel...
The poor bastardwho gets shoot like that will never be able to fly his flag again. :uhoh:
 

bohdi

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 21, 2007
Messages
1,753
Location
Centreville, Virginia, USA
imported post

nitrovic wrote:
suntzu wrote:
VAopencarry wrote:
A guy I work with is a volunteer EMT. He told me last night they ran a call, off Sudley Rd(I think). A guy was walking his dog about 10:30pm. Two guys tried to rob him at knife point. He pulled out a S&W 340PD. Two shots fired, 2 head shots, 2 dead bad guys.

I can't find any news item on this. Anyone else hear about it?

PS: I have no reason to believe my co-worker was making it up.
Two shots fired and two hits to the head, two b/g deceased....

If this story is true and the insdividual who killed them does not end being indicted on a manslaughter charge--I'll be surprised....he was intentionally trying to kill them when he opened fire--the rounds to the head is the giveaway, at least to me--maybe it was reflex-it certainly sounded like he was aiming to kill them as opposed to just stopping the attack.

I don't see this boding well for the person who defended himself if this story is true.

This is simply not true. If the person was in fear for their life (such as being robbed at knife point) I think deadly force is authorized, I see no reason why they would be charged with manslaugher. If you are justified in using deadly force, it doesn't matter where you shoot.

Furthermore, I can't even find the story anywhere. A double "homicide" (legal or not) would be a front page story in this area.


Does this come with a disclaimer - I am not a lawyer use at your own risk? Thinking and knowing are two different things yes? :lol:
 

Thndr

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2008
Messages
86
Location
, ,
imported post

While it has yet to be proven if this happened or not, I have my doubts.

Am I the only one that thinks engaging multiple target in close proximity with what I would call extremely controlled shot placement(headshots) under stress(fear for life) seems unlikely?

I guess if he is an "operator" or seasoned in similar situations, but that would introduce a whole other set of issues.

What are the odds of pulling that off otherwise?



Just somethings I have been pondering that make this seem a little hard to swallow.
 

bohdi

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 21, 2007
Messages
1,753
Location
Centreville, Virginia, USA
imported post

With that kind of luck I'd like to start playing the lottery.....I agree with you Thdr. sort of like all those claims about a constitutional convention - with no proof in mainstream media - there is no proof. Sure things get covered up but something like this would be all over the place. No one in Manassas knows about this? Unlikely.
 
Top