View Poll Results: In a self-defense shooting, do you shoot to...

Voters
171. You may not vote on this poll
  • Kill?

    42 24.56%
  • Stop?

    127 74.27%
  • Wound?

    2 1.17%
Page 1 of 7 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 170

Thread: Kill, Stop, or Wound?

  1. #1
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Fairborn, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    13,063

    Kill, Stop, or Wound?

    Forgive me if this has been polled before, but it is a current discussion and I wonder what the current sense is.

    In a self-defense situation in which you shoot the perp, is the goal of your shooting him to kill him, to stop the attack, or to wound him?

    Note: In any case, you may end up accomplishing one of the other possibilities, e.g. shooting to stop will likely result in killing. The question is, "What is your goal?"
    Last edited by eye95; 11-21-2010 at 10:32 PM.

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Fallon, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    5,580
    The Goal should always be to stop the attack.


    You don't shoot to wound, or shoot to kill, you shoot to 'stop the attack.' That is exactly what I would do, and that is exactly how it will get related upon questions.
    "Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." Benjamin Franklin

  3. #3
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Brentwood, Tennessee
    Posts
    1,956
    None of the above, I only carry blanks and shoot warnings into the ground. I'm a non-violent person unlike everyone else who has voted.

  4. #4
    Regular Member Nevada carrier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    The Epicenter of Freedom
    Posts
    1,297
    I know that every class you take will tell you to shoot to stop the attack, but I shoot to kill, and this is why.

    1. it's the surest method to stop an attacker, and
    2. there is only one story to be told in court

  5. #5
    Regular Member HvyMtl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Tennessee
    Posts
    271
    The official answer would be to "stop the threat."

    Saying you "shot to kill" probably would not be beneficial to you in Court.
    Μολὼν λάβε

  6. #6
    Regular Member sultan62's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Clayton, NC
    Posts
    1,319
    To clarify to everyone, I'm guessing this thread was born of the discussion here, and actually warrants a poll. I'm curious of the outcome myself.
    "They don't give a damn about any trumpet playing band
    It ain't what they call rock and roll
    And the Sultans...
    Yeah the Sultans, they play Creole"

    OCDO Member
    NCGO Member

  7. #7
    Regular Member sultan62's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Clayton, NC
    Posts
    1,319
    Quote Originally Posted by Nevada carrier View Post
    I know that every class you take will tell you to shoot to stop the attack, but I shoot to kill, and this is why.

    1. it's the surest method to stop an attacker, and
    2. there is only one story to be told in court
    What do you do when the attacker is clearly down, out of commission-but not dead?
    "They don't give a damn about any trumpet playing band
    It ain't what they call rock and roll
    And the Sultans...
    Yeah the Sultans, they play Creole"

    OCDO Member
    NCGO Member

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    South end of the state, Illinois, USA
    Posts
    314
    I would shoot to stop. If down but still alive I would stay away from him but keep him , or her as the case might be , covered while waiting for the police to arrive. If the person were to become a threat to me and try to attack I would again shoot till they stopped.

  9. #9
    Campaign Veteran GLOCK21GB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Green Bay, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    4,348
    I would shoot to stop the attacker or attackers..with the end result possibly being those suns o bitches not breathing ever again.
    http://youtu.be/xWgVGu3OR4U AACFI, Wisconsin / Minnesota Carry Certified. Action Pistol & Advanced Action pistol concepts + Urban Carbine course. When the entitlement Zombies begin looting, pillaging, raping, burning & killing..remember HEAD SHOTS it's the only way to kill a Zombie. Stockpile food & water now.

    Please support your local,county, state & Federal Law enforcement agencies, right ???

  10. #10
    Regular Member Beretta92FSLady's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    In My Coffee
    Posts
    5,278
    Shoot until they stop...if they die along the way, well, they had the opportunity to make the decision whether they wanted to end up on the business end of your sidearm or not.
    I don't mind watching the OC-Community (tea party 2.0's, who have hijacked the OC-Community) cannibalize itself. I do mind watching OC dragged through the gutter. OC is an exercise of A Right. I choose to not OC; I choose to not own firearms. I choose to leave the OC-Community to it's own self-inflicted injuries, and eventual implosion. Carry on...

  11. #11
    Regular Member Beretta92FSLady's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    In My Coffee
    Posts
    5,278
    Quote Originally Posted by Nevada carrier View Post
    I know that every class you take will tell you to shoot to stop the attack, but I shoot to kill, and this is why.

    1. it's the surest method to stop an attacker, and
    2. there is only one story to be told in court

    Here is the problem with your theory, there are more than one story to be told, even if the perp dies. Their body tells a story also. Bullet trajectory...entery/exit wounds...distance, etc. They are going to know if you shot the perp from five feet away while they were standing and when you shot the perp as they lay on the ground begging you not to kill them.
    I don't mind watching the OC-Community (tea party 2.0's, who have hijacked the OC-Community) cannibalize itself. I do mind watching OC dragged through the gutter. OC is an exercise of A Right. I choose to not OC; I choose to not own firearms. I choose to leave the OC-Community to it's own self-inflicted injuries, and eventual implosion. Carry on...

  12. #12
    Centurion
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Pleasant Grove, Utah, USA
    Posts
    3,828
    It is ALWAYS shoot to stop the threat! It is not for revenge. There is some anger involved but it is because someone forced me to use potentially deadly force to STOP THEIR USE OF POTENTIALLY DEADLY FORCE AGAINST ME OR SOMEONE IN MY PRESENCE!

  13. #13
    Campaign Veteran Bookman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Winston Salem, North Carolina, United States
    Posts
    1,424
    My vote was to stop the attack. If that results in the death of the attacker, so be it.
    "All that is required for evil to prevail is for good men to do nothing." - Edmund Burke


    "I like people who stand on the Constitution... unless they're using it to wipe their feet." - Jon E Hutcherson

  14. #14
    Activist Member JamesCanby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Alexandria, VA at www.NoVA-MDSelfDefense.com
    Posts
    1,543
    Quote Originally Posted by sultan62 View Post
    What do you do when the attacker is clearly down, out of commission-but not dead?
    "Out of commission" = no longer a threat = Call 911 (and then your attorney), render first aid if possible and if safe to do so, wait for the police and EMS response.

    If, by your question you are implying a "Bernard Goetz" approach by making certain the assailant* could never testify in court, then no, he/she does not get get shot again.

    *he/she WAS an assailant, yes? That's why you "stopped the threat," yes?
    Last edited by JamesCanby; 11-22-2010 at 07:16 AM.

  15. #15
    Regular Member SouthernBoy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Western Prince William County, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    5,849
    To stop the threat. There is no such thing as shooting to kill in the context of using deadly force to stop a threat (civilian world, of course... not combat). And shooting to wound IF you are lucky enough to deliver a wounding shot, will most likely get you in legal hot water. You shoot to stop the threat.

    INAL and this only applies to the state in which I reside.
    Last edited by SouthernBoy; 11-22-2010 at 08:01 AM.
    In the final seconds of your life, just before your killer is about to dispatch you to that great eternal darkness, what would you rather have in your hand? A cell phone or a gun?

    Si vis pacem, para bellum.

    America First!

  16. #16
    Regular Member Nevada carrier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    The Epicenter of Freedom
    Posts
    1,297
    Quote Originally Posted by sultan62 View Post
    What do you do when the attacker is clearly down, out of commission-but not dead?
    I would not continue to shoot once the threat no longer existed. then after all was said and done, hopefully I'm cleared of any wrongdoing and I'm not facing a civil suit, I would head to the range and get more practice because if someone survives a double tap from my 1911, my skills need improvement.

    When I do double tap drills, I like to put a 4" peel and stick just a little to the right of the sternum approximating where the heart would be. They may be alive for a few seconds after they hit the ground, but a pair of ranger talons through the heart is beyond what a heart surgeon can repair.

    What I really want to do is find a training course that will simulate an attacker rushing you to train myself to be able to draw and shoot a moving target, because as we know, shooting stationary targets is one thing, real life and death scenarios are often very different.
    Last edited by Nevada carrier; 11-22-2010 at 08:12 AM.

  17. #17
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Phoenix, Arizona, USA
    Posts
    460
    Quote Originally Posted by wrightme View Post
    The Goal should always be to stop the attack.


    You don't shoot to wound, or shoot to kill, you shoot to 'stop the attack.' That is exactly what I would do, and that is exactly how it will get related upon questions.
    But not without my attorney present...

  18. #18
    Campaign Veteran GLOCK21GB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Green Bay, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    4,348
    Quote Originally Posted by Nevada carrier View Post
    I would not continue to shoot once the threat no longer existed. then after all was said and done, hopefully I'm cleared of any wrongdoing and I'm not facing a civil suit, I would head to the range and get more practice because if someone survives a double tap from my 1911, my skills need improvement.

    When I do double tap drills, I like to put a 4" peel and stick just a little to the right of the sternum approximating where the heart would be. They may be alive for a few seconds after they hit the ground, but a pair of ranger talons through the heart is beyond what a heart surgeon can repair.

    What I really want to do is find a training course that will simulate an attacker rushing you to train myself to be able to draw and shoot a moving target, because as we know, shooting stationary targets is one thing, real life and death scenarios are often very different.

    They won't survive a single tap from my Mossberg 590 using 3" mag 00 buckshot @ 6 feet away when aimed at their head. Go ahead break into my home.


    first call 911 leave an open line ( whisper to 911 dispatcher, that someone has broken into your home & that you are afraid for your life ) , then grab gun & investigate noise , upon confronting scum bag, yell really loud PLEASE DON'T HURT ME, PLEASE DON'T HURT ME ....IF you see weapon , then you Shoot to stop threat....then you grab phone & tell 911 dispatcher that heard everything, that you had to defend yourself, that you think think the thief is dead,please send an ambulance, tell 911 person that the gun you used to defend yourself is now unloaded and on the floor. You will be waiting outside with your hands up let them know what color shirt, jacket you are wearing. Hang up. QUICKLY GET DRESSED IF YOUR ARE NOT ALREADY - GO OUTSIDE CALL LAWYER. When police arrive SAY NOTHING!!!!!!!!
    Last edited by GLOCK21GB; 11-22-2010 at 12:34 PM.
    http://youtu.be/xWgVGu3OR4U AACFI, Wisconsin / Minnesota Carry Certified. Action Pistol & Advanced Action pistol concepts + Urban Carbine course. When the entitlement Zombies begin looting, pillaging, raping, burning & killing..remember HEAD SHOTS it's the only way to kill a Zombie. Stockpile food & water now.

    Please support your local,county, state & Federal Law enforcement agencies, right ???

  19. #19
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Mo.
    Posts
    279
    Eye95, please don't delete this thread!!!

    I would be interested in seeing how the law differs from State to State on this very subject. The question has come up in regards to reciprocity with other States and having to abide by THEIR specific carry and use of force laws.

    Use of force statute in Missouri is RSMO 563.
    http://www.moga.mo.gov/statutes/c563.htm

    Unlawful use of a weapon in Missouri is RSMO 571.
    http://www.moga.mo.gov/statutes/c571.htm

    The clincher in Missouri seems to be the phrase any part of RSMO 571 or 563 that constitutes intent to cause serious physical injury. If you're intending to wound rather than stop the threat then it appears as though your intent is not self defense as it could be argued that you may be the aggressor. The deciding factor in 563 is (snip)...situation created through no fault of the actor. I do not know of any cases that have gone to court in Missouri under this very issue, so I'm VERY interested to see what's out there in other States.

    We all know it's just a matter of time before someone winds up in this boat, so let's get the information out there.

    Personally, you "stop the attack". The words "kill", "wound", "shot", and others like them are dangerous in court. Remember, all 911 calls are recorded and it's vital that YOU identify yourself as the VICTIM!

    If said BG happens to die as a result of injuries resulting from a GSW, then I hate it for the BG...but at least the shooter may get to go home to his or her family.
    Last edited by heresyourdipstickjimmy; 11-22-2010 at 04:44 PM.

  20. #20
    Regular Member tletourneau's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Greater Minnesota, USA
    Posts
    72
    Shoot to stop the threat, CoM until there is no more threat.
    Thanks,

    Tom

    ----------------------------------
    Springfield XD-40 Service
    Taurus PT-111 Pro (3rd Gen)
    Desert Eagle .50AE Mark VII

  21. #21
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Western, Kentucky, USA
    Posts
    308
    Prosecutor: Mr. Catass, why did you shoot this man 13 times?
    Catass: Based on my formal training, I felt 12 wasn't enough and 13 would have been too many, sir
    Quote Originally Posted by Open Carry.org Member View Post
    I really disgree with this one! That means that we can have any yahoo running around with a gun with out the proper training. This really scares the hell out of me. Just my two-cents!
    Quote Originally Posted by KansasMustang View Post
    Joe Schmedlap out there with a loaded weapon thinking he's going to deter crime and he's not even trained to fire his weapon safely just kinda makes my hair on the back of my neck stand up.

  22. #22
    Campaign Veteran since9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Colorado Springs, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    6,787
    Quote Originally Posted by sultan62 View Post
    What do you do when the attacker is clearly down, out of commission-but not dead?
    1. Remain on target until law enforcement arrives and takes over.

    2. Have someone remove weapon(s), if able.

    3. Have someone provide first aid, if able.

    There's no way I'd do either 2 or 3 unless there was a confirmed good guy willing and able to take over my duty to maintain 1.

    The technically, and legally correct answer is "shoot to stop." "Shoot to kill" presumes you have authority to kill. We citizens do not! We are authorized to use "deadly force" in some situations, but the phrase "to use deadly force" does not legally equate with the phrase "to kill."

    Finally, saying "shoot to kill" can be spun into murder or attempted murder charges in many areas, depending on local laws. However, if we use deadly force and the perp dies, that's an "unintended and unfortunate consequence," nothing more, as our goal was "to stop."
    Last edited by since9; 11-22-2010 at 08:12 PM.
    The First protects the Second, and the Second protects the First. Together, they protect the rest of our Bill of Rights and our United States Constitution, and help We the People protect ourselves in the spirit of our Declaration of Independence.

  23. #23
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Seattle, Washington, USA
    Posts
    514
    All of the firearms training I have ever taken taught "shoot to stop"

    The person I took classes from was one of the instructors for the police and SWAT shooting and tactical courses. She said she teaches the cops the same attitude.

    It was beaten into us that if a situation arises where we choose to draw a weapon our only concern should be that the threat is STOPPED.

    I do not think you have to consciously "shoot to kill" in order to stop a threat.

    Put enough holes at center mass and whether they live or die, they will stop what they were doing. Whether or not they survive is a secondary concern to the safety of those threatened.

  24. #24
    Regular Member Contrarian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Seattle,WA, , USA
    Posts
    266

    Red face kill,stop, or wound

    Quote Originally Posted by sultan62 View Post
    What do you do when the attacker is clearly down, out of commission-but not dead?

    What any sensitive,caring individual does: kneel on their chest and start CPR...

  25. #25
    Regular Member rushcreek2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Colorado Springs. CO
    Posts
    924
    I know that the correct legal answer is shoot to stop the threat. In reality the outcome of even a single bullet wound is a factor of luck or the lack there of on the part of the recipient. What I mean is that you don't really get to call the shot as to whether a bullet wound is going to be life threatening or not. Your intentions have little or nothing to do with the outcome. The path of the bullet will determine the outcome.

    Despite all of the super-dooper, double looper magnum, +P, and shock & awe ammo on the market a single FMJ 9mm target round that succeeds in lacerating an aorta will kill. So if I shoot a person the real issue is going to be WAS I JUSTIFIED IN SHOOTING. My only thought process will be to shoot or not to shoot. To stop the threat to be sure, but more to the point perhaps - to preserve MY LIFE.

Page 1 of 7 123 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •