The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > Hogan's Alley > Tactics and Training

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old November 21, 2008, 11:12 PM   #101
ragingbullpa
Junior Member
 
Join Date: November 21, 2008
Location: wilkes-barre, pa
Posts: 5
I'm a firm Believer

In the Castle Doctrine , warning shots not in my house or property
__________________
RagingBullPa
Bob M SR
Never Mind About The Dog Beware Of Owner
Throwers Prayer- May My throws Never Land
ragingbullpa is offline  
Old November 22, 2008, 01:13 AM   #102
alienbogey
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 14, 2008
Location: Puget Sound Area
Posts: 267
Investigator: "Were you aware that ROE required you to fire a warning shot?"

Shooter: "Yes, sir."

Investigator: "But your first shot hit him square in the chest."

Shooter: "I missed."

alienbogey is offline  
Old November 22, 2008, 11:38 AM   #103
Recon7
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 10, 2005
Posts: 707
Shooter: "go ahead and write me up sir, but just think of how much more paperwork you would have to do if HE had shot ME in the chest."
Recon7 is offline  
Old November 23, 2008, 03:42 AM   #104
Alaska Wild
Member
 
Join Date: November 15, 2008
Location: Alaska
Posts: 18
Warning shots never, but verbal commands if feasible might not be out of the question.
Alaska Wild is offline  
Old November 23, 2008, 09:26 AM   #105
Creature
Junior member
 
Join Date: April 8, 2007
Location: Virginia
Posts: 3,769
Quote:
our roe in iraq stayed we had to initiate a warning shot at vehicles coming within 150m of our peremiter, after 100m it was shoot to kill.

i fired 6 warning shots, 4 with a .50bmg and 2 with 5.56 into the vehicles grille.

nukecop, are you using a M9? its a horribly inacurate pistol(especialy with fixed sites) you could use that in your defence.
This isnt a military operation and we are not talking about exclusion zones.

And regarding your statement about the M9, they are definitely not "horribly inaccurate".
Creature is offline  
Old November 25, 2008, 04:44 PM   #106
Sulaco2
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 5, 2005
Location: Seattle
Posts: 1,239
The M9 will do its job if you do yours. Recent shooting on an Air Force base in ND. Armed rampage by goblin ended when USAF SF cop fired ONE 9mm round at the suspect at over 60 (i think it was, may have been longer) yards away and killed the goblin. He got a airmans medal as I recall.
Sulaco2 is offline  
Old November 27, 2008, 09:00 AM   #107
B.N.Real
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 22, 2008
Posts: 4,083
Any semi auto can jam.

ANY semi auto.

I prefer my first necessary to fire shot be in the threat.

Then at least I can have time to swipe the jam away or rack the slide if necessary.

As others have said,for example in a convienance store or a restaurant,with a crazy person threatening you with a knife or a gun or simply through their out of control actions,warning shots can easily bounce off floors or walls and kill innocent people.

You will have to justify every shot you take.

I prefer every shot I take to be exactly into the chest/head area of the deadly threat.

Along with the verbal warnings -if I have time- to say to them of "STOP NOW,DON'T MAKE ME SHOOT YOU."

Last edited by B.N.Real; November 27, 2008 at 03:07 PM.
B.N.Real is offline  
Old November 29, 2008, 01:36 AM   #108
Regular Joe
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 6, 2008
Posts: 170
This has to be entirely case by case. I was out hunting once, about 400 yds. from my car when a carload of people pulled up next to it (in the middle of nowhere). They soon started trying to force entry into my car. A short distance from the cars was a toppled water tank. I fired a warning shot at that, and it rang like a big bell. In that unique situation, I was carrying a .223 varmint rig, and I probably would NOT have shot to hurt anyone, even if they didn't stop. No, my next shot would have been at their car. The one shot was all it took though. No-one hurt, or even endangered, as I prefer to keep it.
Regular Joe is offline  
Old November 30, 2008, 07:36 AM   #109
Kline605
Member
 
Join Date: November 25, 2008
Location: Midwest
Posts: 49
There should be no shooting to wound. If the situation is bad enough for you to pull the trigger then you should be shooting center mass until the threat has stopped. (Failure Drill exceptions noted)

As for ROE, having been in the military for numerous years and deploying several times, I understand the requirement, I just don't agree with it. Overseas in an armpit of the world, maybe a warning shot (situationally dependant) is appropriate. In the U.S., no damn way.
Kline605 is offline  
Old November 30, 2008, 08:32 AM   #110
Johnc
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 21, 2006
Location: Long Island NY
Posts: 566
In defense of others or SD, no warning shot. In a case like REGULAR JOE's, yes.

I did not read every line on this thread, so if anyone else covered it sorry. I would fear the potential effects of blindness from muzzle flash at night or temporary loss of hearing from a warning shot. In a gunfight you need to have all your senses at 100%. If you fire a warning shot, compromise your senses and need to then engage your primary target, or worse yet, a secondary (previously unknown) target, you are now at a loss.

Thinking responsibly, where did that warning shot go? Was it in a safe direction?
Johnc is offline  
Old November 30, 2008, 05:37 PM   #111
eaglesnester
Member
 
Join Date: September 19, 2007
Posts: 99
warning shot?

Warning Shot? I think not, shoot to kill, center body mass empty your weapon or shoot until your target is dead or down and not moving
eaglesnester is offline  
Old December 6, 2008, 07:36 PM   #112
bustavista32
Junior Member
 
Join Date: November 22, 2008
Posts: 9
Warning shots are just made up fallacies by the movie industry.
bustavista32 is offline  
Old December 6, 2008, 07:42 PM   #113
FireForged
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 4, 1999
Location: Rebel South USA
Posts: 1,185
as just a plane ole Citizen.. I dont believe in warning shots. I could spend that time trying to get away from the problem. I would only pull a weapon if I was going to use it as a weapon.
__________________
Life is a web woven by necessity and chance...
FireForged is offline  
Old December 10, 2008, 10:46 PM   #114
mrghostwalker
Member
 
Join Date: August 4, 2008
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 34
Bad choice of words

WHA!!!! Eaglesnester wash your mouth out with soap!!!!!!! NEVER NEVER NEVER NEVER say that you shoot to kill! It's things like that- that will cause all your belongings to be awarded to the low-life's next of kin!
ALWAY say that you shoot to "stop the threat", and then "I stopped once the threat was gone". All Cops are drilled on this point.
Sure, we might kill the low-life in the process of "stopping the threat" but-and this is the important part- you didn't intend to kill him!
__________________
-mrghostwalker
And this be our motto: "In God is our trust"
And the star-spangled banner in triumph shall wave
O'er the land of the free and the home of the brave!
mrghostwalker is offline  
Old December 11, 2008, 12:40 AM   #115
Apone
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 28, 2008
Location: Kingwood, TX
Posts: 269
Personal opinion. I think warning shots are a wonderful idea. If I ever have to fire my pistol in defense of my life, I plan to give three: two to the chest and one to the head! Mozambique! I meant, er...halt or I'll shoot. If I draw it will be for good reason, and I would give one verbal "Hey, stop (three consecutive expletives followed by the activity of the BG) or I will end your worthless life!"

My two cents.
Apone is offline  
Old December 13, 2008, 05:17 PM   #116
Viking Josh
Member
 
Join Date: December 13, 2008
Posts: 29
The only warning shot my assailant gets is the one that doesn't drop him in the first hit.
Viking Josh is offline  
Old December 13, 2008, 05:51 PM   #117
OldMarksman
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 8, 2008
Posts: 1,844
Quote:
I would give one verbal "Hey, stop (three consecutive expletives followed by the activity of the BG) or I will end your worthless life!"
That's something you may not want to provide to the prosecutor for possible use against you... "Stop or I'll shoot" might be better.

Lay opinion.
OldMarksman is offline  
Old December 13, 2008, 09:35 PM   #118
Apone
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 28, 2008
Location: Kingwood, TX
Posts: 269
Quote:
That's something you may not want to provide to the prosecutor for possible use against you... "Stop or I'll shoot" might be better.

Lay opinion.
Duly noted.
Apone is offline  
Old December 15, 2008, 11:39 PM   #119
MaxHeadSpace
Junior member
 
Join Date: December 8, 2008
Posts: 129
They get to know that you have a firearm when the bullets are coming out of the muzzle and in their direction. If you don't have justification to shoot -- to use lethal force in self defense -- then you have no legal justification to draw your gun, threaten to draw your gun, "index" your gun, pull back your jacket, etc.

In this state all that sort of behavior is statutorily "brandishing."

Last edited by MaxHeadSpace; December 15, 2008 at 11:46 PM.
MaxHeadSpace is offline  
Old December 15, 2008, 11:48 PM   #120
JohnKSa
Staff
 
Join Date: February 12, 2001
Location: DFW Area
Posts: 17,945
Quote:
If you don't have justification to shoot -- to use lethal force in self defense -- then you have no legal justification to draw your gun, threaten to draw your gun, "index" your gun, pull back your jacket, etc.
That depends.

http://tlo2.tlc.state.tx.us/statutes...00.htm#9.04.00

THREATS AS JUSTIFIABLE FORCE. The threat of force is justified when the use of force is justified by this chapter. For purposes of this section, a threat to cause death or serious bodily injury by the production of a weapon or otherwise, as long as the actor's purpose is limited to creating an apprehension that he will use deadly force if necessary, does not constitute the use of deadly force.

Basically in TX you can threaten deadly force when force is justified even if the actual use of deadly force is not justified.

For reference, 'deadly force' (which is NOT the same thing as 'force') is carefully defined earlier in this section of the penal code.

Personally I think warning shots are a very bad idea.
__________________
Did you know that there is a TEXAS State Rifle Association?
JohnKSa is offline  
Old December 16, 2008, 01:58 AM   #121
Wuchak
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 1, 2007
Location: Shawnee, KS
Posts: 1,093
I think warning shots are a very bad idea in a SD situation. That might be the only shot you get a chance to fire before the BG kills you.

The one story of a warning shot that did like was: A farmer was getting tired of having the local teenagers break into his tractor shed and steal his gas. One night he heard a noise and looked out the window to see the light, a single hanging bare bulb, on in the shed. He could see people moving about inside. He quietly opened his bedroom window, grabbed his .22 rifled, and shot out the light bulb. He got a couple of free gas cans that were left behind and his gas stopped disappearing.
Wuchak is offline  
Old December 16, 2008, 08:02 AM   #122
TacticalDefense1911
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 4, 2006
Location: Ohio
Posts: 1,276
I'm a little late to the show here but I'll weigh in anyways. Considering that you are morally responsible for every bullet that is discharged from your firearm it is a very bad idea to fire a warning shot. Many times you will not know what is behind your threat, like innocent people, and by firing you then become the aggressor. If the threat does not have a weapon pulled yet, you firing could give him legal cause to "defend himself" with lethal force. If you pull the trigger of your CCW it should be to eliminate a threat that has given you no other option.
TacticalDefense1911 is offline  
Old December 30, 2008, 12:33 AM   #123
chrisbarcelo
Member
 
Join Date: December 28, 2008
Posts: 48
Funny issue this warning shot. And where are we suppose to fire our guns during warning shot? This is just the same as saying HI BAD GUY, HERE I AM A CAPT OF THE PHIL MARINES AND I AM ARMED AND I AM WARNING YOU! Remember, that the guy you are supposed to warn is armed as well, I bet before you have time to level your weapon at him he is pumping you full of tiny itsy bitty holes from his 7.62 rifle yes? Well, if its an issue of my men's welfare, myself or my friend's we can forget all about this warning shot issue. I dont mean to be rude or a fatalist but, well, that is the real scenario here in Mindanao.
chrisbarcelo is offline  
Old December 30, 2008, 02:57 AM   #124
lvhutch77
Junior Member
 
Join Date: December 30, 2008
Posts: 3
I was told by a cop buddy of mine that I should always fire a warning shot. . . but that hole in the ceiling should be the last one I shoot.
lvhutch77 is offline  
Old December 30, 2008, 04:21 AM   #125
Powderman
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 7, 2001
Location: Washington State
Posts: 2,151
There are some well meaning, but VERY misguided comments in this thread.

In case some of you might have missed, NukeCop is a serving member of the Armed Forces. In this case, I believe he (or she) is asking the question in a rhetorical sense, and without the intent to seek guidance in the commission of an act which is unlawful under the present circumstances.

You see, in addition to the laws of the host nation, NukeCop is also under the provisions and jurisdiction of the Uniform Code of Military Justice--as long as he (or she) carries the identification card of a servicemember.

First, the three General Orders under which servicemembers perform duties as Sentinels of the Guard are specific:

1. I will guard everything within the limits of my post, and quit my post only when properly relieved.

2. I will obey my special orders, and perform all my duties in a military manner.

3. I will report violations of my special orders, emergencies, and anything not covered in my instructions to the Commander of the Relief.

Different branches have different wording and length, but the intent is still the same. Thus, if the special orders for NukeCop's post call for warning shots, and then shots directed at the pelvic area, he (or she) had damned well better do EXACTLY that--and NOTHING ELSE.

Should he (or she) make the decision to step outside the boundaries of the special orders, this is what they might face:

...(1) In that you did, while assigned as a Sentinel of the Guard at Post XXX, failed to follow your Special Orders, of which you had prior knowledge, to wit: fire warning shots to discourage a breach of your post. This is in violation of Article 92(2), UCMJ.
...(2) In that you did, while assigned as a Sentinel of the Guard at Post XXX, failed to follow your Special Orders, of which you had prior knowledge, to wit: to fire aimed shots at the lower body/pelvic area to stop or disable an intruder. This is in violation of Article 92(2), UCMJ.

...(3) In that you did, while assigned as a Sentinel of the Guard at Post XXX, did commit the act of Murder, by intentionally discharging your assigned weapon at the chest area of XXXXX, thus causing death as a direct result of your actions. This is in violation of Article 118, UCMJ.

____________

If they find in Courts-Martial that NukeCop intended to kill the intruder, guess what the penalty is? It involves being the target at a high-power match.
Powderman is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:47 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2013 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.14987 seconds with 7 queries