PDA

View Full Version : Shoot once or twice in defense..


aspen1964
June 23, 2006, 08:58 PM
...Some people tell me that you should shoot in pairs, not one at a time...if attacked...

M14fan
June 23, 2006, 09:01 PM
I would think you shoot until the threat is neutralized. Shooting once vs twice would become rather academic if the threat is still attacking. But that's just me;)

Earnest T. Bass
June 23, 2006, 09:03 PM
As many hits (not just shots) as it takes to make your attacker stop attacking you - in other words, it's his choice.

aspen1964
June 23, 2006, 09:06 PM
I guess my curiosity is related to my other thread in that many people disdain any round that doesn't achieve their magical number of energy or velocity..but wouldn't it make better sense to shoot always in pairs rather than one at a time if stopping an attack? I.E. bang, bang..(quick evaluate)..repeat if necessary...

pumpkinheaver
June 23, 2006, 09:41 PM
2 in the chest, then one in the head if needed.

Lycanthrope
June 23, 2006, 10:10 PM
As many as it takes to fold the threat and one on the way down for good measure.

joab
June 23, 2006, 10:17 PM
I practice double taps .
Don't know why, just seems more plausible to me

That is what you were asking right?

Even if you shoot until the threat is neutralized, do you do it with six single shots or three double taps?
That's how you meant it correct?

Double Naught Spy
June 23, 2006, 10:18 PM
2 in the chest, then one in the head if needed.

Great saying, but very naive. If you have to transition from the chest because the chest shots are not creating a stop, then you don't want to just be shooting the head. You need a CNS impact causing incapacitation. In other words, the round needs to have traumatic impact on the brain, ideally devastating impact on the brain. Blowing out the jaw, pallate, teeth, sinuses, etc. is nice and will cause lots of pain, but certainly may not cause incapacitation.

I.E. bang, bang..(quick evaluate)..repeat if necessary...

I never understood this either, but have heard it taught. What is this evaluation crap. You stop, evaluate, make a decision, and then fire if necessary. Why **** away critical time you could be impacting your enemy with force by stopping to admire your work and look to see if you need any final touches? When driving a car down the highway, do you have to stop, get out, and check to see if you are properly in your lane or not? No. You do it on the fly and adjust as necessary. There is no reason you should not be able to do that while shooting. Do you really want to give a person you are shooting the chance to mount a counterattack while you stock to see your handiwork?

Rangefinder
June 23, 2006, 10:22 PM
Well, where I'm from it's like this-----"BLAM---BLAM-BLAM---BLAM-BLAM-BLAM, CLICK----CLICK-CLICK-----STOMP-KICK-STOMP..." :D

aspen1964
June 23, 2006, 10:29 PM
calm yourself DNS...evaluation is a word used to describe a quick impulse decision to fire again after shooting the first time..not standing there with your fist on your cheek thinking about it..

tony pasley
June 23, 2006, 10:37 PM
double tap is good pratice but when in doubt empty then reload quickly.unless the threat is gone then reload quickly

snolden
June 23, 2006, 11:57 PM
Never take your eyes off the target. You should be moving rapidly away and lateral to the threat as soon as you fire the first couple shots unless you are grappling with him.

so for me it is step/draw, yell "STOP" loudly, fire all in one motion. After that it is FIND COVER and assess the situation.

mete
June 24, 2006, 03:20 AM
The rule is to shoot and continue to shoot until the BG is no longer a threat! The 'double tap' was at one time the training method but that usually leaves you wondering what to do if nothing happens after the first two shots.

garryc
June 24, 2006, 06:10 AM
double taps, aids in weapon control give a brief evaluation time.

GoSlash27
June 24, 2006, 06:50 AM
Double-nought,
You owe me a new keyboard :D

hsim
June 24, 2006, 07:04 AM
I am assuming that this question was posted for academic purposes only. We are discuss 'how many times' we would shoot someone. Folks, come on, we are talk about as it we are shooting at paper targets.

IT'S A HUMAN LIFE we are discussing here. How many of those that have posted a respond have been in that situation? what else was going though your mind at the time? was it really how many times I should pull the trigger? there are other moral, legal and religious considerations here.

I think a better question would have been, "how many practice the double tap verses a single shot", for when the time comes, I KNOW you won't be counting.

MADISON
June 24, 2006, 08:42 AM
Most police departments teach their officers to DOUBLE TAP into the chest.
If that does not stop the person's agressive action then tape the head.

Mastrogiacomo
June 24, 2006, 09:05 AM
I remember when I was in orientation for a security company, an ex cop was leading the class. He asked, "How many times do you shoot an attacker? As many times as it takes to stop the threat."

Sarge
June 24, 2006, 09:23 AM
I remember when I was in orientation for a security company, an ex cop was leading the class. He asked, "How many times do you shoot an attacker? As many times as it takes to stop the threat."

You win the teddy bear with that one.

autopsytech
June 24, 2006, 09:34 AM
It's very easy to teach 2 to the chest, 1 to the head. But in reality, the head shot is going to be the worse shot to take. Think about it, it's hard enough to hit the chest COM as large as it is. I've seen many "Chest shots" that wound up hitting the abdomen, arms or legs. I have also seen "Headshots" were the round entered the face or scalp and traveled under the skin and produced no lethal effects. Try hitting a target thats 1/5 the size of the chest while it's moving around or bouncing up and down snd it's not as easy as it sounds. If you try the head shot and more than likely your going to have a round that misses and may hit something else that was unintended. Maybe if there are any SWAT officers out there that may have input into this. Taking a head shot with a sniping rifle with a scope is probably somewhat difficult.

yomama
June 24, 2006, 11:00 AM
hsim, I respect your opinion, but I'll give you mine also :). I feel most people on this forum understand we are talking human life. We do not go to the range to play around, and take practice seriously. We also must have a clear mindset of how we will respond to a life threatening situation. Discussing a single vs. double tap in practice or in mindset should be no different.
In addition, I do not feel that someone who is trying to take out myself or my family is a human being, they are a target.
(Opinions are like *******s, everyone has one).

aspen1964
June 24, 2006, 11:20 AM
frankly, someone who is trying to kill me...or someone with me, isn't going to get a moment of moral debate in my mind...if a criminal doesn't want to get shot, then don't choose me as a potential victim to begin with...then my gun will always be cold and loaded instead of hot and empty in my pocket or drawer...self-preservation is a very practical action..

hsim
June 24, 2006, 11:29 AM
In addition, I do not feel that someone who is trying to take out myself or my family is a human being, they are a target.

yomama,

I agree, it just seems that sometimes we (the forum in general) discuss such matters a little too blasé.

I agree, if someone really needs shooting, you shot them, but do you really count how many times? or give reasons and explanation as to why you would shot them once, twice or three times? If placed in such a situation, would you not shot until the treat is neutralized? rather then, well I practice double taps, so that's what I'll do?

At 21 ft. BG coming at you with a knife, shot him once or twice or more? answer: run!

M14fan
June 24, 2006, 12:55 PM
At 21 ft. BG coming at you with a knife, shot him once or twice or more? answer: run!

Unfortunately, not all of us have the luxury of running. I have sustained an extremety injury that has permanently impacted my ability to run. For me, the BG at 21ft and a knife gets shot until he stops coming at me or those I am protecting.
As for the 2 in the chest 1 in the head doctrine (don't remember who said that one) I can consistently do that in IDPA style matches but those targets don't move or shoot back. I would probably still do that in the real world as that is the way I train.

aspen1964
June 24, 2006, 01:40 PM
exactly.

Ares45
June 24, 2006, 02:15 PM
This ain't sesame street. Forget counting.

I used to try counting rounds during IPSC matches. Even with a predetermined plan of action it's hard to keep up under mild stress. It'll never happen during a real life self defense shooting. You won't know whether you've fired 3 rounds or 13. Most LEO's involved in a shooting can't accurately recall how many shots were fired during the gun battle. Your brain has other priorities and will disregard anything not immediately necessary for survival. That includes everything from math skills to auditory exclusion and loss of fine motor skills.

The short answer is put rounds ON TARGET until the threat no longer exists. Then reload and be prepared to go again. The only thing you need to be thinking about is putting rounds on target.

Rusty Stud
June 24, 2006, 02:41 PM
WHERE? The Center of mass.
WHEN? When the person becomes a threat to the life of innocent people.
HOW? Multiple shots as accurate as speed allows.
WHY? Because If i were an attacker, this would really suck.

This is just my Opinion and how i train to react to situations.
Im also starting to get into the Move and shoot thing, its harder than it sounds, but definintly worth the work.
I thimk COM shots are the most efficient, because bigger targets are "easier" to hit, and hits are what stop attackers, not near hits to the brain.

Ausserordeutlich
June 24, 2006, 06:13 PM
When/if somebody forces me to use a weapon to defend myself or others, I can't fathom that religious, moral, or legal matters would pop in my mind. Shoot a lot until they stop. Usually, they'll be dead, and that would be the absolute best outcome for you and for society in general.

ISP2605
June 24, 2006, 08:43 PM
"Most police departments teach their officers to DOUBLE TAP into the chest."

Actually, very few agencies teach double tap any more. Sure, you'll no doubt find the occasional agency that does but not if their ROs have been keeping up with updated training. The training today, and has been for a few years, is to continue shooting until the threat stops. If the threat stops after 1 shot then stop shooting. If you've fired 6 shots and the threat continues then keep firing.
One often reads posts about why the number of rds fired by police on average for each shooting has increased over the years. Those who haven't been involved in the training, and arm chair commandos, put their supposition in that it's because the police are bad shots. That's not it at all. The reason being is training has changed from double taps or 2 to the body and 1 to the head, then assess to what's been SOP for training of continue firing until the threat stops. Anyone who has been involved in a shooting situation will know that seldom does a person stop after being hit once. Even if that first hit is a fatal wound does not mean the threat will cease. They may continue as if not hit at all. Therefore, training today is keep putting rds in the threat until the threat quits being a threat.

5whiskey
June 24, 2006, 11:10 PM
But I fire a hammer pair right off the bat (double tap as fast as you can pull the trigger). I don't have time to figure out whether or not the first round did the job before the second round hits. Automatic, and yes, you asses but it's not an all day/smoke a cigerrate affair. Fire a hammered pair and if the target keeps coming fire more rounds. If he's down and out then search and assess for other threats before going back to a lowered alert state (and the alert carry for your firearm). I do this for everything, primary (rifle) or secondary (pistol). If I'm engaging at ranges of 100m or more (obviously with a rifle), then I'll slow the rate of fire and see the effects of my fire. Obviously a civie won't be firing at someone 100m away, but I'm infantry. That's just how I train and it works well for me.

Just_Parker
June 25, 2006, 12:45 AM
someone at 21 feet with a knife, wait till they get closer. Then shoot them better they tried to harm you and died for it than try and hurt someone else. Il never understand this whole idea that if someone is trying to rob you better to let them have your money and everyone live personaly i think if you choose to rob someone getting shot should be one of those risks you should deal with.

wolfdog45
June 25, 2006, 10:56 AM
If you are being attacked keep firing till the attacker stops attacking.
Simple.

Baba Louie
June 25, 2006, 01:05 PM
someone at 21 feet with a knife, wait till they get closerHUH?
You and I can cover 21 ft in about 1.5 seconds. So can a bad guy.
Do you have your gun in your hand or in a holster? reaction time is almost always slower than action that precipitates it.

21 ft and closer you're gonna get cut... badly.

mnrivrat
June 25, 2006, 03:45 PM
I didn't see the reason for triple tap posted so I guess I will reply with the "wearing a vest" theory .

If two to center mass is somewhat ineffective, the thought is that the perp may have a vest . Moving to a secondary position is then advisable. The head was thought then to be the best "other" location , but some teach the pelvic area as a better choice .

Deanimator
June 25, 2006, 09:33 PM
You shoot until the threat is neutralized, be that two times or twenty.

NickolasPopoff
June 25, 2006, 09:48 PM
21 feet with a badguy who has a knife,.... yeah right depends on the situation

in my ccw class in AZ we watched a video that basically said, if you have your hand on your gun ready to draw your chances of getting your gun on target and delivering an accurate shot on a person running at you from 30 is virtually 0.... maybe this is crap but sounds pretty true to me...

as far a shooting goes, i practice shooting as rapidly as i can aquire a target until my gun is empty reload and repeat.... and for practical purposes i would take COM shots unless it was a very unusal situation since i am just your average joe... not in the military/police

RoscoeC
June 25, 2006, 10:03 PM
The class I took taught that a pistol is not a powerful weapon. Shots to the head are rarely effective. The skull is thick. Rounds to the head usually glance off. The only effective shots to the head must hit in the eyes or nasal cavity area. Very difficult to hit. Any place else is a crapshoot. Rounds should be placed between the nipples and the chin. As many as it takes for the threat to stop. Shots to the center of mass will do little to stop the threat. My instructor spent much of his LEO career investigating shootings. He relates that often after a shooting incident an officer will look down and see the blood, and exclaim "Oh, crap, I have been shot". If you have been forced to make the decision to use your weapon, use it. Don't screw around or you may be the ultimate casualty.

If I ever have to fire (God forbid that should ever happen), It will be rapid fire to the area between the nipples and chin until the BG turns and runs or goes to the ground. This is my mindset, and this is how I practice.

ShelbyV8
June 25, 2006, 10:10 PM
If you have to think and count you are not going to make it. The only decision you make in a gunfight is to shoot. Once the that decision is made, training takes over. If you haven't trained enough that your reflexes take over you are going to be standing there jumping around like a monkey in a red ant bed and you probably won't pull the trigger much less hit anything.

NwG
June 26, 2006, 12:29 AM
Fire a NSR (Non standard responce.. 3-5 rounds)COM.. These shot don't need to be touching.. If they are speed up.. Spread the love around the COM.. Hit as many pipes and pumps as you can.. If target is still standing / still in your sight picture place one or more in the head..

Target no longer in sight picture? Is he down? Better question is he DONE? Or did he just hit the deck when rounds started flying?

Ok he is done.. Does he have any friends? yes/ no?

Do I need to reload? YES

Am I ok? Just a quick glance from wrist to feet back to wrist.. Your looking for blood.. You may not know you were hit..

And all this should be done while on the move and with the use of cove if possable!

A lot to think about.. Even more to think about when you add sight picture, trigger reset, recoil control, malf's ect...

Train, train TRAIN!

Gunmeister
June 26, 2006, 07:41 AM
I'm an older duffer, age 70, I'm in pretty good physical condition and still mentally sharp---but---reaction time and visual aquity really has gone down hill as I age.
I spent 30 years in the military and trained rather extensively with all types of firearms and I can vouch for the fact that a handgun is the least desireable weapon for self defense. Having said that, we can't conceal and carry shotguns or rifles so we have to make do with pistols.
Perhaps no longer subscribed to but years ago I was educated on the "Rule Of Threes". That being that most civilian gunfights are fought at a distance of three feet, with three shots fired and is over in three seconds. So at my age, with diminished sight and reaction time, I have to click off as many rounds as possible to neutralize a B/G. Again at my age, the odds are heavily in favor of the B/G and I'll probably lose but I'm comfortable knowing he's gonna get bit once or twice. I train for a double tap in the upper chest then work down from there (a moving head's too small of a target), a .40S&W round will break a pelvis and drop him in his tracks, also a 40S&W in the gonads may not incapacitate him but it will make him wonder why he initiated the fight in the first place.:cool:

Ausserordeutlich
June 26, 2006, 08:21 AM
RE: Permitting a guy with a knife @ 21 ft. to get closer, isn't the purpose of this thread something to do with self-defense; not how to commit suicide? :cool:

Jeepmark2005
June 26, 2006, 09:10 AM
Shoot as fast as you can hit center of mass of the target provided until the threat has stopped. Reload and scan / cover. Kick away any weapon still in the possession of your threat as you continue to cover. Call for EMS and police as you continue to cover. Then call your lawyer.

stephen426
June 26, 2006, 10:05 AM
The class I took taught that a pistol is not a powerful weapon. Shots to the head are rarely effective. The skull is thick. Rounds to the head usually glance off. The only effective shots to the head must hit in the eyes or nasal cavity area. Very difficult to hit. Any place else is a crapshoot. Rounds should be placed between the nipples and the chin. As many as it takes for the threat to stop.

Roscoe,

I hope you realize that many firearms instructors fluff up their credentials to give themselves more credibility. They tout their opinions as stone cold facts. If you are not using a tiny pocket gun shooting underpowered rounds (anything less than 9mm), head shots are VERY EFFECTIVE. It is possible that the round may hit at a glancing angle and not penetrate, but practically any shot (again with 9mm and up) that hits at a perpendicular angle will penetrate. There are always exceptions to the rule but don't think a head shot won't kill you. Personally, I'd prefer to get hit with a COM shot versus a head shot any day... Actually, I'd prefer to not get shot at all! :eek: :D

While the shot you described will likely hit the heart or lungs, it will not instantly incapacitate someone unless you hit the spinal chord. Someone who is drugged up or running on pure adrenaline may continue to fight even if they are mortally injured. Continuing to take COM shots even after the first few are ineffective is useless at best and deadly (for you) at worst. The only instantly incapacitating shot (according to FBI SWAT/HRT) is one that destroys the medulla oblongata which lies behind the eyes. According to them, that shot is INSTANTLY incapacitating and someone will drop IMMEDIATELY. (Do not pass GO, Do not collect $200). This is used when the suspect has a gun to someone's head or some kind of detonation device.

The best shot is still the center of mass (since it is easier to hit), but if those shots are ineffective, go for the head.

ATW525
June 26, 2006, 11:33 AM
I've never had to shoot anybody, but if I had to the number of shots I would fire before stopping and evaluating the situation would depend on the gun I was carrying. With my Springer Mil-Spec it would be 9 shots, my Beretta 96 would be 13 and my Sig P228 would be 16 shots.

When I practice at the range I empty my weapon as fast as I can can while still keeping my shots on COM. Unless the bad guy drops out of my sight picture, I'm not likely to stop firing until slide lock. Bullets are cheap, so I don't see any reason to be stingy with them.

Remember, it's always better to give than receive. ;)

stephen426
June 26, 2006, 01:13 PM
When I practice at the range I empty my weapon as fast as I can can while still keeping my shots on COM. Unless the bad guy drops out of my sight picture, I'm not likely to stop firing until slide lock. Bullets are cheap, so I don't see any reason to be stingy with them.

Good defense attorneys are not...

ATW525,

It is good to practice getting your shots on target quickly, but going for slide lock may not be looked upon favorably by the police, a district attorney, and if it gets to it, a jury. For me, I would say shoot until the bad guy's weapon is no longer pointing at me. This may be because he has dropped his weapon, he is on the ground, or he "surrenders" (hands up). I would keep my gun trained on him and have him kick the gun away. I would then order him to lie face down with his hands interlocked over his head. I would then call the police and an ambulance. This is assuming that he can comply because he isn't dead already.

I don't believe in "finishing" shots as this crosses the line between self defense and murder. You can say that dead people don't sue, but you need to remember that their families still can. Besides, that finishing shot may be the difference between a good self defense shooting and getting arrested and prosecuted.

Jeepmark2005
June 26, 2006, 01:45 PM
^ +1 Shoot until the threat is stopped.

ATW525
June 26, 2006, 02:19 PM
It is good to practice getting your shots on target quickly, but going for slide lock may not be looked upon favorably by the police, a district attorney, and if it gets to it, a jury.

I can't say I'll be taking the time to ponder the politically correct number of bullets when it's my life on the line. As they say, it's better to be judged by twelve than carried by six. I want to put the maximum amount of lead into the other guy in the minimum amount of time, because I will be the one left standing when it's over.

Going into it with the mindset of shooting to slidelock just makes the most sense to me. If he happens to hit the ground or flee before I run out of bullets, then good for him. If he's still on his feet and in my line of sight when I hit slidelock, then I'll evaluate whether he's still threat when I'm reloading and moving to cover.

I most definitely am not advocating finishing people off while they lay bleeding on the ground, however. Nor am I saying you should keep shooting until the gun is empty regardless of the situation. If it's readily apparant the threat has been stopped then it's time to cease fire.

Jeepmark2005
June 26, 2006, 02:30 PM
I understand what your saying. You just have to be careful what you say infront of your friends and peers because a prosecuter will ask them what you have said in the past. Anytime ANYONE asks me that question my answer is and will be - Shoot at the center of mass at the largest target provided and shoot to stop. Shoot until the threat is down. And Good lord, If you shoot a finishing shot after the threat has ceased you WILL be prosecuted. Shooting to stop is self defense. A finishing shot is MURDER. If the threat takes one hit....... If the threat sees my gun and gives up, drops the weapon and complies or runs away I do not fire. My weapon is to stop the threat, Not kill.

stephen426
June 26, 2006, 02:45 PM
ATW525,

The problem arises when you revert to what you practice. I fully agree that it is better you than him, but I don't want a good shoot to turn into a criminal case against me. While you may tout the phrase "better judged by 12 than carried by 6", I believe there is a third option which is neither being judged by the 12 or being carried by the 6.

I guess this is when we start having debates about why anything less than a .45 acp is useless and why anything less is asking for a failure to stop. Then i expect someone to say that handguns are useless and that only shotguns and rifles are of any defensive value. I certainly hope it doesn't go down that path... :rolleyes:

Bob O
June 26, 2006, 03:18 PM
One or two BGs = three's.
Two or more BGs = two's.

I always practice in three's, so I intend to shoot in three's.
With more than two BGs enough ammo may be a problem so I'd go for two's.

D.S. Brown
June 26, 2006, 04:39 PM
As many of my instructors have said, "anyone worth shooting once is worth shooting twice."

Best,
Dave

Ausserordeutlich
June 26, 2006, 05:44 PM
Stephen 426: Do you consider yourself to be a good defense attorney? How much is your legal advice worth? What was your standing in your law school class? How many years have you practiced criminal defense law? In what states are you licensed? Do you give a discount for TFL members?

stephen426
June 26, 2006, 06:09 PM
Do you consider yourself to be a good defense attorney? How much is your legal advice worth? What was your standing in your law school class? How many years have you practiced criminal defense law? In what states are you licensed? Do you give a discount for TFL members?

What is the point of your post? To play big shot lawyer? I am not a lawyer and I do not play one on TV. Johnnie Cochran is dead so you had better find someone else. He cost OJ Simpson over $3.5 million (http://www.usatoday.com/news/index/nns176.htm). But hey, if you want to place your freedom in the hands of some rookie public defender, then go right ahead. If I read correctly, the NRA will also help you out if you are a member, but I doubt they would really go out on a limb in a questionable shooting.

Anyway, my post was made in response to ATW525 comment that "bullets are cheap". What jury would not at least consider the possibility that the defendant was actually guilty of murder with a statement like that? Pretty much everything I have read indicates that you should not say anything to the police without an attorney present and if forced to speak, say you shot to stop the threat. If you have some better advice, please share.

By the way, I thought the term criminal attorney was redundant.

Socrates
June 27, 2006, 02:53 AM
Well, I sort of resemble that remark. Yes, I have a JD. Yes, I have worked in the DA's office, as an intern, for 6 months.

What is the law's, and the DA's concern: Was the person in threat of their life, and, where they justified in shooting? After that, it's pretty much moot. We REALLY want to get the bad guys, and, if we have a guy with a 20 page rap sheet, and someone shoots him, we aren't going after the shooter, if it was justified. The entire Ayoob, handloads, multiple shots, etc. stuff never made it into consideration.

Believe it or not, most of the guys we dealt with where clearly criminals, carrierwise, and, if someone actually had a gun, in San Francisco, ownership is now illegal, pending Supreme Court ruling, and shot one, the DA has far better things to do then prosecute innocent people, when so many are clearly criminals. Why waste time on a borderline case, when you have tons of really bad people to put away?

S

stephen426
June 27, 2006, 01:46 PM
Socrates,

I fully understand that DA's have better things to do than prosecute innocent people. What happens if the person you shot happens to not have a major rap sheet either because he he is new to the world of crime or he just hasn't been caught yet? Then would a DA consider the possibility that emptying a full magazine into the guy might have been a little excessive and question the whole self defense arguement? I'm not saying it will happen, but I'm pretty sure that it will increase the likelihood of happening. You guys can do what you like, but I'm stopping as soon as the threat is over. I just hope I can do it with a few well placed shots rather than pumping the guy full of lead.

kymasabe
June 27, 2006, 04:42 PM
With my SIG on me...self defense starts with one long hard trigger pull followed immediately by 14 more shorter, easier trigger pulls...or as many as needed until threat is no longer a threat.

Sarge
June 27, 2006, 05:41 PM
FWIW I have spent almost 10 years as the investigator (read "office cop") for a PA office. The prime considerations in evaluating cases like this go something like this-


Would a reasonable person have felt in danger of death or serious bodily injury, either for themselves or for a third party whom they were acting in defense of?

Is the use of force in this instance otherwise justified under the law?

Did the shooter do anything to contribute to the breach of peace that precipitated the act of defense?

Were there other options available besides the use of deadly force? (Retreat, etc.-may not apply in your state.)

Was the use of defensive force immediate to the threat, or did the actor leave and return with a weapon and 'restart' the dispute?

Was the force applied beyond the point where it was justified under the law?


This is not a comprehensive list, but in my experience these questions almost always get asked- whether the person using deadly force is Joe Citizen, or Joe Cop (except the 5th one). Nobody in my experience has ever considered whether the ammunition used in a clearly defensive shooting was ball, reloads, JHP or whatever. This includes 12 years of law enforcement experience beyond the PA office. Premidated murder is another matter entirely, and the ammo selected by the shooter is fair game.

I will suggest that pumping rounds into someone after the 'fight is out of them' is a good way to wind up in prison. I have seen it happen.

I will also suggest that the political environment in your area may be such that the DA or PA is 'gunning' for people who use firearms on other people, whether they needed shot or not. What 'goes' in west Texas may not 'go' in New Yawk Sitty. State laws are different throughout the US, as are the views of the 'powers that be' regarding the defensive use of firearms.

It shouldn't be this way, but it is what it is. You'd do well to consider this before living or hanging around in environs where your right to self defense is questioned on its face.

If you have questions about your specific area, write or call your state Attorney General's office. Ask for a response in writing, or a reference to the statute that applies in self defense/use of dealy force cases.

ETRANGER
June 28, 2006, 02:24 AM
New to this site.

Theres alot of talk about pistols, mainly because that's what people keep on their nightstand. I keep a shotgun under the matress. 870 Express Magnum loaded with #4 buckshot. Its much easier to put an intruder down with a COM hit with such a shell. However, i dont have kids. I might be a little more concerned about using a shotgun if i had little ones around.

Ace On The Line
July 3, 2006, 09:49 AM
Everybody gets one before anyone gets seconds.

stephen426
July 3, 2006, 10:49 AM
Ace On The Line,

I think it really depends how many people you are up against. I had my first IPSC shooting experience last week and the typical drill is two shots for each cardboard target before moving to the next target. Considering that the primary defense weapon for most of us (outside the house) is a handgun, 2 to the chest is not a bad idea, especially since it takes just a fraction of a second more. It is much faster to put 2 in the same target than to reacquire your sights for a second round of shots. Besides, unless your shots are instantly incapacitating, the badguys you shot may still be able to shoot you. Practice double taps if you are allowed and you will be suprised how quickly you can get 2 shots off. Now if your concern is ammo capacity because you carry a 5 shot revolver or a small pocket gun, you might want to go one shot each or double tap each and then reolad from cover. I doubt you will get caught in a fire fight way out in the open, and I seriously doubt that everyone will just be standing there shooting at each other. Thats just my $.02 worth anyways.

Ace On The Line
July 3, 2006, 12:31 PM
Unless Clint Smith haschanged his instruction course "The Boarding House Rule" was being taught there, admittedly its been a number of years but old habits are hard to break. Without going into the Mr.Smith's logic behind this or getting into any other gun guru's theories on the subject, let me just say that I favor Mr. Smith's wisdom on the subject. Not to say anyone is wrong or right, its a choice we all must make and believe in. None of us want to be caught undecisive.

Jkwas
July 3, 2006, 07:52 PM
I carry revolvers, and you can empty a gun pretty fast. And if you're not hitting anything, that can present a problem( remember pulp fiction?). I know that's the movies and this is real life, but I practice double taps. If two don't do it, then they get two more and so on. I think a disciplined approach is best, and practice makes perfect.

Kermit
July 4, 2006, 11:38 PM
I was taught to shoot until the aggression has stopped.

cuate
July 5, 2006, 12:11 AM
As many as it takes to down the agressor but beware the Prosecutor in court because if he is gun unfriendly or out to make a name for himself, and or there are a tribe of witnesses who hate you because you are a whatever and they are willing to lie to see you found guilty........have good lawyers and lots of money.

Raptor5191
July 5, 2006, 01:43 PM
IF you or another are in imminent danger of great bodily injury or death or a REASONABLE assumption can be made thereof, the best policy is "shoot to stop".

In other words: shoot till they are no longer a threat...vary your shot placement from center mass to instant no-go areas (heart, spine, brain stem...)

johnsonrlp
July 5, 2006, 02:07 PM
I wouldn't even pause until he hit the ground, or ran away. Unless he's running with my property.

McBrideGuns
July 5, 2006, 02:22 PM
well personally i dont have any set training pattern nor do i go to a shooting range regularly and all of my shooting experience came form either my dad or my uncle my uncle taught me the the way he learned to shoot in the military and my dad says if they are comming in your house and they arent supposed to be there you unload on them and reload and if they are still twiching you unload on them again until all movement stops or you run out of ammunition and seeing as how im shooting .357 sjhp and just stocked back up with a box of 100 i would say the movement would stop before i run out:D

Para Bellum
July 15, 2006, 06:22 AM
Folks, here's some real life stuff:

a 30yr old fit and strong 5'10" male with 170# on speed storms your 15x15ft office with a knife while you are sitting at your desk focussing to our PC and are as peaceful as you can be.
He comes straigt at you and keeps stabbing onto your head until - luckily - his cheap folding knife breaks.

That happend in the room right next to mine at my workplace recently. Unfortunately I was out of office that day and couldn't help.

So what could you really do? MOVE MOVE MOVE and draw as you MOVE and keep shooting as you MOVE until the threat no longer is a threat.

How often you shoot depends on where and how you hit whom. COM hits at a young strong male on speed may be lethal but can take a long time to incapacitate. You only gain time by MOVING.

Get real.
and stay safe.
PB.
concentrated to your

Winston007
July 17, 2006, 08:29 AM
Something to think about
About fifteen years ago during a Coronial Inquest in a departmental shooting The Coroner, asked: “So officer if the threat to life stops after the first shot, why are you firing the second shot, to make sure his dead?”
The officer on the stand (not me) did not have an answer.
Double Taps have been removed from our training program ever since.
Now it’s…shoot, evaluate, shoot, evaluate, shoot, evaluate….

M1911
July 17, 2006, 11:30 AM
.Some people tell me that you should shoot in pairs, not one at a time...if attacked...The training that I received at LFI, Sigarms Academy, and Cumberland Tactics is to keep shooting until the attack stops. Never expect a single shot to stop the attack immediately -- this isn't Hollyweird. Even if you shoot someone directly in the heart, they may still have enough oxygen in their brain to be functional for 10-15 seconds.

Ayoob suggested two shots to the chest and if the threat is still there, to shift to the head or possibly pelvis.

Capt Charlie
July 17, 2006, 12:21 PM
The officer on the stand (not me) did not have an answer.
Double Taps have been removed from our training program ever since.
As our range officer explained it, there is a sound, physiological reason for the double tap. A single, penetrating wound causes the body's defenses to rally. Adrenalin flows and nerve endings in the affected area are shut down, allowing the person to continue fighting.

A double tap confuses the body's response; defenses are split between the two wounds and become inadequate, and the body goes into shock.

Does it work? Analysis of actual shootings suggests.... sometimes ;) .

My department began teaching the double tap approx. 15 years ago, and it remains an important part of our training.

One other thing: When you're being grilled on the stand about your actions, the best response is often, "I acted the way I was trained". This shifts the focus to your department and instructors.

EMB135Driver
July 17, 2006, 05:36 PM
I'd recommend using as little force as possible, especially if the would-be assailant is unarmed----neutralize the threat, but you dont have to personally ensure a meeting with Jesus by emptying your magazine into him......2 or 3 rounds and reassess the threat---more only if necessary. Save some ammo for his buddies around the corner.

As crazy as this sounds, after you have neutralized the threat, make sure in addition to requesting police you request EMTs......this way, if you are ever on the defense side of a courtroom, you can say you shot to neutralize the threat and then immediately sought medical help for your attacker....no jury in the world would convict you of excessive force.

Of course if you put 14 rounds, reload and put a few more in him, then douse him in gasoline and light him up to toast marshmellows til the police arrive you might have some legal problems.

symr00
July 18, 2006, 12:59 AM
As someone who works for and was trained by a large federal law enforcement agency that is VERY politically correct in its firearms policies, we are trained to shoot till the threat has stopped. When that adrenaline is rushing, no one is counting bullets and when you revert to gross motor skills, you do what has been ingrained in you at training. Shooting 2 rounds and then stopping to assess the situation could get you killed. I think that was something taught years ago but most agencies have realized that it is not practical anymore.

Doubletaptap
July 20, 2006, 12:25 AM
Doubletap is a great way to learn gun control and keeping em' in the target. It's easy to do with semis but rather difficult with a revolver (for me) I can do it with my Ak or Ar 15.
As far as for defense, empty it in em', reload, and try to find cover at the same time.
Double tapping is a training device for some orginazations.
All that 2 in the chest and one in the head stuff(as far as civilians go) is for Rambo magnum brained idiots who try to be cool. Do what works for you.
George