[Frank Ettin]

Originally Posted by totaldla

Are you saying that you are holding out hope that your use of lethal force will not result in death? If so, then why are you using lethal force in the first place? Better think that through....

If the use of lethal force is going to be legally justified, the defender is at reasonable risk of death or grave bodily injury if the attacker is not stopped promptly. That will require significant force.

There are four ways in which shooting an assailant stops a fight:

1. psychological -- "I'm shot, it hurts, I don't want to get shot any more."
   
   
2. massive blood loss depriving the muscles and brain of oxygen and thus significantly impairing their ability to function
   
   
3. breaking major skeletal support structures
   
   
4. damaging the central nervous system.

Depending on someone just giving up because he's been shot is iffy. Probably most fights are stopped that way, but some aren't.

Breaking major skeletal structures can quickly impair mobility, but someone with a gun can still shoot.

Hits to the central nervous system are sure and quick, but the CNS presents a small and uncertain target.

The most common and sure physiological way in which shooting someone stops him is blood loss -- depriving the brain and muscles of oxygen and nutrients, thus impairing the ability of the brain and muscles to function. Blood loss is facilitated by (1) large holes causing tissue damage; (2) getting the holes in the right places to damage major blood vessels or blood bearing organs; and (3) adequate penetration to get those holes into the blood vessels and organs which are fairly deep in the body. The problem is that blood loss takes time. People have continued to fight effectively when gravely, even mortally, wounded. So things that can speed up blood loss, more holes, bigger holes, better placed holes, etc., help.

Stopping the assailant might result in his death. But the goal is not to kill him. The goal is to stop him.

Originally Posted by totaldla

...Seriously? You shoot at a BG and want to tell me with a straight face that you meant for him to live long and prosper?..

What I mean for him to do, and want him to do, is stop.

Originally Posted by totaldla

...Lets think for a moment, suppose I pointed a banana at you and said "Give me all your hope and change!" - pretty difficult to determine my intentions right? Lets replace the banana with a gun. Now what do you think about my intentions? Suddenly it becomes more clear - why? Because pointing a firearm at you, (a device designed and employed to kill), has signaled what a reasonable person would interpret as my intention to kill.

Point a banana at a Cop and you'll get checked out. Point a firearm at a Cop and you'll get your own body bag. That's my "citation to proper legal authority" for today....

In other words you just made up that business about intent under the law and you have no idea what you are talking about.

Originally Posted by totaldla

Yep and everybody gravitates towards the biggest caliber, the nastiest hollowpoints and trains for a magazine full of center of mass hits because they want the bad guy to just "stop". Yep. Uh-huh. Sure. You-betcha

[1] So obviously you have no training since you're unfamiliar with what is taught.

[2] As for biggest caliber and hollow points, see my discussion of wound physiology, above.

Originally Posted by =totaldla

...Using a lethal weapon is serious business and if folks don't want to belly up to the bar and be clear about what they are doing, ...

Yes, it is serious business. And for you to suggest that those of us who understand the legal and ethical issues, and shoot to stop rather than to kill, don't take it serious, is an insult that is inappropriate for this forum.

And your chest thumping flippancy suggests to me that you really don't fully appreciate how serious this all is.