My observation is that this is not the thread about warning shots.
Here, read this part of my post again.
Replying to point #2 (the subject of the thread) with an argument pertinent to point #1, which isn't relevent to the main point, is a little silly, isn't it?
75% of the posters on this thread have ignored the original subject and expressed opinions on legal or tactical considerations re: civilian SD warning shots in our country.
The subject of the thread is about foreign country security or guard duty with re: to lethal force policy and warning shot requirements---- WHICH IS NOT RELEVENT TO WARNING SHOTS AS A SD STRATEGY HERE IN THE US.