User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 9/11/2005 5:35:12 PM EDT
[#1]
With a .308 he will bleed to death sooner or later regardless.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/11/2005 5:35:19 PM EDT
[#2]
If it's worth pulling the trigger, it's worth killing.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/11/2005 5:35:19 PM EDT
[#3]
Dead men don't sue.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/11/2005 5:36:10 PM EDT
[#4]
Use the level of force needed to stop the threat.
Kharn |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/11/2005 5:36:16 PM EDT
[#5]
Kill body's can't use guns , wounded people can.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/11/2005 5:37:24 PM EDT
[#6]
Exactly. If lethal force is justified then one does not shoot for the pinky toe. 
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/11/2005 5:38:19 PM EDT
[#7]
but the familys do! |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/11/2005 5:38:29 PM EDT
[#8]
Is this a serious question?
If I EVER shoot another human being in self defence, shooting to kill is my only option. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/11/2005 5:38:29 PM EDT
[#9]
Exactly...........remember kiddies, CYA!
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/11/2005 5:38:54 PM EDT
[#10]
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/11/2005 5:41:18 PM EDT
[#11]
Someone stealing a cold cheese steak samish - I'm not going to sentence someone to death for that.
Someone shooting at me - two to the center of mass, re-evaluate, head shots if needed. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/11/2005 5:45:09 PM EDT
[#12]
Let him go; the threat in no longer present. But if there's a chance he may come back as a  then yeah, I'll keep plugging him.
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/11/2005 5:48:30 PM EDT
[#13]
Shoot to stop the threat. 2 shots center mass, if he dies than it was a fatal shooting, if not then he was wounded.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/11/2005 5:49:49 PM EDT
[#14]
Absolutely. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/11/2005 5:50:59 PM EDT
[#15]
AMEN I recall an old wive's tale of a police officer emptying a Beretta 96 into an assailant who was on top of him with a knife. The officer had been blinded by Pepper Spray after he tried using that while the guy was on top of him, then all the pepper spray came back after gravity took hold. In the "internal" investigation, he was asked why he shot the guy 12 times (a full mag+1). His answer was: Because I had problems getting another magazine in the gun while he was on top. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 9/11/2005 5:51:11 PM EDT
[#16]
Shoot to stop the threat, Usualy two to the chest and if necessary another to the head will do it
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/11/2005 5:51:56 PM EDT
[#17]
I made this comment (or at least a similar one) on the CA forum in response to the listing of handcuffs or readi-ties in bug out bag supplies. (BTWm the consensus of opinion is that in most of SoCal, you better be prepared to hole up where you are because you ain't gonna get out of town. Many think I am a closet liberal for my less sanguinary outlook on some issues.
Just because you can either legally or morally kill somebody doesn't mean you need to or should, and there are some kyboard commandoes here that are of the shoot firt and keep shooting school for any infractions more serious than riding a bike on the wrong side of the street. But if it really is a bonafide SHTF, I ain't gonna shoot looters, if they are being kept interested and happy by somebody else more power to him and them, and some would arrest bg's. Not me, ain't my job and it ties up resourdes better used elsewhere. I being an officer and a gentleman prefer to take a more cavalier attitude. If the people are ol men, women and children and I can help, it would be both un-Christian and unmanly to not protect and aid others worse off. If it is a young ish predator (say from 60 -14) and he evinces a predatory attitude, is old enough to know better, and he should know better, I would likely kill him and stack the body as a warning sign. Younger and appearing that they might learn from an object lesson, disable him with an extremity shot and point him to the nearest aid station. If it really really really is a bonafide SHTF, and you are in that period between the event and the return of lawful authority, then you need to do the right thing and protect you and yours. But wounding means that precious assets are going to be used on a dirtbag, others need those resources more. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/11/2005 5:53:01 PM EDT
[#18]
Like my Granpappy always said................. "Shoot to Kill" |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/11/2005 5:54:35 PM EDT
[#19]
I wanted to think about this for a minute. Considering the scenario that AyeGuy presented, IE civil authority is gone and armed assailants are shooting at me, looting, and some mofo tries to steal my cold cheese steak samish - which just happens to be the only samish I have for me and mine...then yeah, I'll plant him. That being said, in a non-SHTF scenario, I'm not gonna shoot some guy because he's stealing the wheels from my vehicle at night. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 9/11/2005 5:55:37 PM EDT
[#20]
Shoot 10 yards off taget an apologize.
It's the only way to be sure to rid yourself of legal fees in the aftermath. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/11/2005 5:55:38 PM EDT
[#21]
+1 When civilization returns, I don't want to face the bastard in front of some dumb ass liberal judge. Two to the chest and one to the head would be the rule. Disconnector |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/11/2005 5:55:43 PM EDT
[#22]
How about we just try to reason with the maurauding hoardes?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/11/2005 5:57:31 PM EDT
[#23]
Dead men don't sue: or tell any tales! |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/11/2005 6:01:38 PM EDT
[#24]
I've been practicing shooting the guns out of people's hands, but I'm not that good at it and it's tough to find volunteers to hold the guns for me to shoot at.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/11/2005 6:04:39 PM EDT
[#25]
Especially since your firearms will have been confiscated for your own safety |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/11/2005 6:08:41 PM EDT
[#26]
If you have to shoot someone, and it's righteous, then shoot-to-kill. There's no in-between.
HH |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/11/2005 6:19:08 PM EDT
[#27]
"Though defensive violence will always be a 'sad necessity' in the eyes of men of principle, it would be still more unfortunate if wrongdoers should dominate just men.”... St. Augustine
“I do believe that where there is a choice only between cowardice and violence I would advise violence.” – Mohandas Gandhi That being said: Three shot burst. Two to the chest one to the head. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/11/2005 6:20:08 PM EDT
[#28]
ALWAYS shoot to STOP.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/11/2005 6:22:44 PM EDT
[#29]
+1 |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/11/2005 6:25:48 PM EDT
[#30]
Shooting is using deadly force. Shooting to wound is the use of deadly force in a careless manner. In Texas, shooting to wound will get you put in jail, shooting to kill an intruder, attacker, etc will not. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/11/2005 6:27:36 PM EDT
[#31]
+1 and the only way to do that is center mass until they're laying on the ground not moving. As to the person who said they wouldn't shoot someone over a sammich, there has been at least one person in my county shot this week siphoning gas. Someone who will take your sammich will be back later to take more. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/11/2005 6:31:50 PM EDT
[#32]
That's the most beautiful thing I've heard today. In a situation where food is limited and people are raiding others for supplies then shoot to kill is the true only option if someone's trying to take your supplies. So in a true SHTF senerio I say shoot to kill, that's one less looter you have to worry about. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/11/2005 6:32:16 PM EDT
[#33]
I do not/will not shoot to kill. I shoot to stop the threat to my safety, and once the threat is stopped, any further outcome is of no consequence.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/11/2005 6:34:54 PM EDT
[#34]
take a lesson learned from the Isreali boys, and shoot them in the "jimmy".....that way if they don't die and manage to get away they can't procreate.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/11/2005 6:39:57 PM EDT
[#35]
Seems like the exact legal def to me. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/11/2005 6:41:35 PM EDT
[#36]
Ohh, keep some lime handy too. Bodies start to bloat and stink after a few days.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/11/2005 6:46:26 PM EDT
[#37]
Shooting to wound is a ridiculous premise. If you are going to pull the trigger on someone...given that you have just cause, then you have...or should have a single intent: To remove the imminent threat to yourself, your loved ones or another human incapable of self protection. The ONLY sure way to do that is to take the life of the enemy. That logic is pure and inescapable.
To do otherwise is illogical and foolish. Never shoot unless you absolutely have to...but then make sure you shoot to kill. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/11/2005 6:53:20 PM EDT
[#38]
Which is why I think you should just finish them. Since it may be a while until civil order is restored and bodies examined for forensic evidence, Nature will erase or obscure ant damning evidence that you did a "socially unacceptable" act. So don't cover them with lime; leave 'em sitting out in the sun... |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/11/2005 6:54:20 PM EDT
[#39]
You have never been around dead bodies obviously. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 9/11/2005 6:56:20 PM EDT
[#40]
Always shoot to kill. I'll agree...dead men don't sue.
Just ask Bernie Goetz. He's being garnished for the rest of his life because he didn't kill the sharpened-screwdriver wielding trash that were harassing him. Scott |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/11/2005 7:10:10 PM EDT
[#41]
And thats all there is to say about that. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/11/2005 7:10:41 PM EDT
[#42]
But thier families do! 
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/11/2005 7:13:45 PM EDT
[#43]
+1 |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/11/2005 7:19:48 PM EDT
[#44]
If you only wound him, he will come back with his buddies to finish you off. Stop the threat now, or stop the threat later.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/11/2005 7:22:08 PM EDT
[#45]
Wound, let him show the other punks your wrath.
You might not have enough ammo to hold back the tide, but a human leaking blood can stop a mob in its tracks. With luck, he'll eventually bleed to death w/o hospital care in front of the other looters!
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/11/2005 7:29:23 PM EDT
[#46]
Not dead humans obviously, but dead animals, yeah. And a blated, rotting, stinking corpse might serve as a caution to prospective looters...
I was also thinking that. Also: say you wound this fellow. A while after the shooting is over, people come out and see him lying there wounded...what do you do then? As the guy who shot him, they might look to you as being responsible for him...So, do you expend valuable and scarce resources on taking care of him? |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 9/11/2005 7:30:35 PM EDT
[#47]
I am going to use whatever force is neccessary to stop the threat. Be it kill or wound doesn't matter to me as long as the threat is stopped.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/11/2005 7:35:59 PM EDT
[#48]
If I shoot, its not to hurt, its to get the job done.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/11/2005 7:36:02 PM EDT
[#49]
Shoot to kill, scalp for bounty, stainless steel bore brush for denialibility.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/11/2005 7:40:39 PM EDT
[#50]
The real question is, are they combatants or non-combatants? If they shoot at you they are combatants. Once you are designated as a combatant you only become a non-combatant when you are dead or surrender. Surrender can be by an overt act or by incapacitation that prevents you from participating in further action.
|
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
