You're
completely misunderstanding the 'willing to destroy' component of the firearms rules; it equates, in this usage, to 'trying to shoot.'
Quote:
|
So a cop pointing their gun at a DG is breaking one of the rules of safety? I don't think so, if the good guy is okay with destroying the BG it seems appropriate to me. So it seems DT that you have more training than I do according to your post, yet I've been in a stressful situation and I didn't seems to have a problem not shooting the kid who broke into my house. Just like I was trained to do, yet I was willing to destroy my target if needed.
|
See that part I bolded? It means that, during that encounter, you were NOT willing to destroy your target; the necessity had not yet arisen (and you were most likely correct and within the law doing what you did.)
Were you 'willing to destroy' someone not posing a deadly threat to you? Was this police officer 'willing to destroy' this suspect? It doesn't seem so in the officer's case, and I suspect you weren't in yours. 'Willingness to destroy' in not a condition of mindset, but a consideration of the totality of the circumstances you're presented with.
And in general, anytime someone actually GETS SHOT one of the rules of firearms safety was broken. Cops just seem to (sometimes) get a pass on the initial judgment to point a gun at someone not currently posing a threat to their life.
Larry