The Firing Line Forums

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

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old December 29, 2017, 07:57 PM   #26
James K
Member In Memoriam
 
Join Date: March 17, 1999
Posts: 24,383
I have spent time as a LEO, and long-time firearms enthusiast and shooter. I have never fired a shot in anger, but have received LEO training. But I have studied some situations in which a gun was used in self defense, so perhaps I am as well qualified as some folks to comment on the issue.

The "2 and 1" and similar comments are, in almost all situations, simple fantasy. In a tight situation, with a handgun, few shooters (no matter what they claim on sites like this) would be able to even hit the bad guy, let alone place shots precisely. The idea that you (or I) would stand calmly, with bullets incoming, and place shots in a precise area with a tight group is dreaming. I have witnessed trained police officers, on a calm range, under ideal conditions, miss a man-size silhouette target at 50 feet. Armed with a handgun and Under stress, with bullets flying, I doubt they (or I) could have taken careful aim and fired a head shot. Of course, there are some shooters who could do so as far as mechanical ability goes. But they are people who often do almost nothing but practice shooting, competition or "trick" shooters who have no other job and no other duties. But they also are almost never found engaged in combat; they are the exhibition shooters we all envy, not the police or armed citizens who may actually be out on the street when the need arises.

Should everyone who carries a handgun be able to fire one-inch groups at 50 yards? Of course, in some other world. In this one, everyone, whether police officer, jury member, or simply commenter, needs to recognize that the real world is seldom ideal and that most shooters will, at best, be able to defend themselves and their loved ones effectively, not ideally in some fantasy land of tight groups and between-the-eyes shots.

Jim
James K is offline  
Old December 29, 2017, 08:32 PM   #27
jimbob86
Junior member
 
Join Date: October 4, 2007
Location: All the way to NEBRASKA
Posts: 8,722
Quote:
Originally Posted by James K View Post
I have spent time as a LEO, and long-time firearms enthusiast and shooter. I have never fired a shot in anger, but have received LEO training. But I have studied some situations in which a gun was used in self defense, so perhaps I am as well qualified as some folks to comment on the issue.

The "2 and 1" and similar comments are, in almost all situations, simple fantasy. In a tight situation, with a handgun, few shooters (no matter what they claim on sites like this) would be able to even hit the bad guy, let alone place shots precisely. The idea that you (or I) would stand calmly, with bullets incoming, and place shots in a precise area with a tight group is dreaming. I have witnessed trained police officers, on a calm range, under ideal conditions, miss a man-size silhouette target at 50 feet. Armed with a handgun and Under stress, with bullets flying, I doubt they (or I) could have taken careful aim and fired a head shot. Of course, there are some shooters who could do so as far as mechanical ability goes. But they are people who often do almost nothing but practice shooting, competition or "trick" shooters who have no other job and no other duties. But they also are almost never found engaged in combat; they are the exhibition shooters we all envy, not the police or armed citizens who may actually be out on the street when the need arises.

Should everyone who carries a handgun be able to fire one-inch groups at 50 yards? Of course, in some other world. In this one, everyone, whether police officer, jury member, or simply commenter, needs to recognize that the real world is seldom ideal and that most shooters will, at best, be able to defend themselves and their loved ones effectively, not ideally in some fantasy land of tight groups and between-the-eyes shots.

Jim
"At crunch time, it is unlikely that you will rise to the occasion, but rather more likely that you will sink to the level of your training." That's why drills are done, so that actions become reactions, and can be executed as soon as the decision is made to do so.

..... And I do get SO tired of the term, "trained Police Officer" in reference to firearms proficiency..... I have talked with LEOs, both gun enthusiasts and not.....shot with them......... cops that are not enthusiasts don't shoot any more than necessary, by and large...... And those that do not shoot, do not drill, whether they are cop, butcher,baker or candlestick maker ....... Stink at shooting. Of course, compared to John Q. Public, they have infinitely more experience with guns, because even if John has a gun, he probably hasn't moved the socks off it since he bought it and put it in the sock drawer.......
jimbob86 is offline  
Old December 29, 2017, 09:23 PM   #28
Nanuk
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 2, 2005
Location: Where the deer and the antelope roam.
Posts: 3,082
Quote:
we recently had a local 16 year old beat to death a 52 year old predator abusing him... jury still called it homicide....he got jail... as a victim (IMO) if I was on jury....it was justifiable

Full disclosure...and general assumption why he got jammed....after killing the predator he hid the body....

Most thought this seemed to suggest premeditation... I tend to think just a scared KID
__________________
Were you in the court room? Perhaps the jury heard evidence you did not.
__________________
Retired Law Enforcement
U. S. Army Veteran
Armorer
My rifle and pistol are tools, I am the weapon.
Nanuk is offline  
Old December 29, 2017, 09:29 PM   #29
Nanuk
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 2, 2005
Location: Where the deer and the antelope roam.
Posts: 3,082
Headshot? Depends on the circumstances. Today, could be a bomb, plate carrier, etc.
__________________
Retired Law Enforcement
U. S. Army Veteran
Armorer
My rifle and pistol are tools, I am the weapon.
Nanuk is offline  
Old December 30, 2017, 01:08 AM   #30
Bartholomew Roberts
member
 
Join Date: June 12, 2000
Location: Texas and Oklahoma area
Posts: 8,462
Having watched at least one rabbit do what seemed like an eight-foot back flip after being shot through the eye, I’d caution against assuming that even a well-delivered head shot will prevent a spasm or other dying reaction of the nervous system.
Bartholomew Roberts is offline  
Old December 30, 2017, 04:46 AM   #31
tony pasley
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 13, 2006
Location: western north carolina
Posts: 1,641
A head shot you will need a lawyer because you will end up in court, at least civil court!
__________________
Every day Congress is in session we lose a little bit more of our Liberty.
tony pasley is offline  
Old December 30, 2017, 07:11 AM   #32
Don P
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 17, 2005
Location: Swamp dweller
Posts: 6,187
Quote:
We first moved to safer location
False sense of security. Bad things happen in good places. So with regards to where you live the possibility is there for trouble and in closing we in general do not spend 27/7 in our homes.
__________________
NRA Life Member, NRA Chief Range Safety Officer, NRA Certified Pistol Instructor,, USPSA & Steel Challange NROI Range Officer,
ICORE Range Officer,
,MAG 40 Graduate
As you are, I once was, As I am, You will be.
Don P is offline  
Old December 30, 2017, 08:24 AM   #33
Nanuk
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 2, 2005
Location: Where the deer and the antelope roam.
Posts: 3,082
Quote:
Having watched at least one rabbit do what seemed like an eight-foot back flip after being shot through the eye, I’d caution against assuming that even a well-delivered head shot will prevent a spasm or other dying reaction of the nervous system.
I have seen the same thing, however, it is the most consistant way to shut something off.
__________________
Retired Law Enforcement
U. S. Army Veteran
Armorer
My rifle and pistol are tools, I am the weapon.
Nanuk is offline  
Old December 30, 2017, 08:25 AM   #34
Nanuk
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 2, 2005
Location: Where the deer and the antelope roam.
Posts: 3,082
Quote:
A head shot you will need a lawyer because you will end up in court, at least civil court!
Depends on the totality of the circumstances and your location. Where I live currently (north Dakota) in a SD use of force you are immune civil liability from the former attacker or his family.
__________________
Retired Law Enforcement
U. S. Army Veteran
Armorer
My rifle and pistol are tools, I am the weapon.
Nanuk is offline  
Old December 30, 2017, 09:11 AM   #35
OldMarksman
Staff
 
Join Date: June 8, 2008
Posts: 4,022
Quote:
The "2 and 1" and similar comments are, in almost all situations, simple fantasy. In a tight situation, with a handgun, few shooters (no matter what they claim on sites like this) would be able to even hit the bad guy, let alone place shots precisely. The idea that you (or I) would stand calmly, with bullets incoming, and place shots in a precise area with a tight group is dreaming.
True, even without "bullets incoming" if someone is charging with a contact weapon.

Quote:
A head shot you will need a lawyer because you will end up in court, at least civil court!
Just whaat is if that you believe should lead to a different aftermath with a head shot vs a shot on the abdomen plus one in the chest plus one in the arm?
OldMarksman is offline  
Old December 30, 2017, 12:01 PM   #36
Glenn E. Meyer
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 17, 2000
Posts: 20,064
Quote:
A head shot you will need a lawyer because you will end up in court, at least civil court!
After any shooting, you need a lawyer. You are not going to get the "It's a Good Shoot" parade down your street by the arriving police and neighbors.
__________________
NRA, TSRA, IDPA, NTI, Polite Soc. - Aux Armes, Citoyens
Glenn E. Meyer is offline  
Old December 30, 2017, 01:42 PM   #37
briandg
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 4, 2010
Posts: 5,468
Hi, at no point did anyone say anything about body armor. It said right inside the first brief, unambiguous post "in the belly" not "bounced off of his armor." Two hits in the belly or chest is going to be very damaging, and two hits in the belly or chest do not automatically call for a more difficult follow up shot to the head to put an end to aggression, not at all. That shot will either be at a moving target the size of a swollen soft ball, or at a stationary target that's just laying there immobile.

We keep coming back to the absolute foolishness of taking head shots when unnecessary. Turning away from something that works and risking a weak attempt at a final, finishing move to end all possible aggression. Unless the terminator is still coming and uninjured after taking the two initial hits, why would it be desirable, especially if the probability is that probably only one percent of americans could actually make a brain pan follow up shot during a genuine, actual gunfight?

Call it editorializing if you want, I really don't care, everything that is said in the aftermath of that shooting will be skewed. shooting a guy three times with a kill shot finishing him off if going to be the most controversial and polarizing shooting possible. Everybody is going to find something to say about it, and not a lot of it will be unbiased. If someone does this very thing, there is one absolute certainty. There will be screaming, loud, endless screaming about what happened. Even if your own family and friends, and maybe even everyone in the whole county is clapping their hands, there will be plenty of others who will be calling the professional rabble rousers like the aclu, or god forbid, paid protestors. You will have hostile lawyers who have an absolute obligation to rip your reputation apart and do everything possible to make you hurt, even put you in prison for life if possible.


Quote:
The three shots are one dose of response,without hestitation,to one threat,as one motion.
A really key factor to keep in mind for the idealistic,politically correct dissection:

We reluctantly decided to use deadly force because our bad guy had the means,the will,and had made the choice to kill us
You sound as if you have a press release already prepared. Good luck with that, saying that to an emotional, gun hating, hysterical public after you shot some poor kid in the head because he pointed a gun at you and said "gimme your money".

No matter how you think it should be or want it to be, you have an entire world of people out there who are just looking for an excuse to vent their hate. Lynch mobs don't bother with ropes now, they just set buildings on fire.
__________________
None.
briandg is offline  
Old December 30, 2017, 01:59 PM   #38
briandg
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 4, 2010
Posts: 5,468
Quote:
"It's a Good Shoot" parade down your street by the arriving police and neighbors.
I'm guessing that there hasn't been such a parade for over half a century. The only incident I can think of offhand during which a man was hailed as a hero for stopping a shooter was down in austin at the tower.


Quote:
The day was declared by the City of Austin as "Ramiro Martinez Day".[40]

In 2008 the following names of persons who helped stop Whitman were added to a plaque on an Austin police precinct building.

Martinez and McCoy were awarded Medals of Valor by the city of Austin.[
All from wikipedia
__________________
None.
briandg is offline  
Old December 30, 2017, 03:32 PM   #39
TXAZ
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 5, 2010
Location: McMurdo Sound Texas
Posts: 4,322
Quote:
Originally Posted by briandg View Post
I'm guessing that there hasn't been such a parade for over half a century. The only incident I can think of offhand during which a man was hailed as a hero for stopping a shooter was down in austin at the tower.


All from wikipedia
That wouldn’t happen today in Austin. The DA and former police chief decided *EVERY* defensive shooter is arrested and goes to the grand jury.
__________________

Cave illos in guns et backhoes
TXAZ is offline  
Old December 30, 2017, 03:32 PM   #40
hdwhit
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 22, 2017
Posts: 1,011
Quote:
SIGSHR wrote:
Ethics and legality of headshots
I will leave the legal aspects of this question to the attorneys since I have no idea whether the courts see one as more or less indicative of criminal intent.

AS the the moral and ethical aspect, your question. as presented, seems premised on the idea that if you intentionally shoot for the head as opposed for shooting at the "center of mass", you are more intent on achieving a deadly outcome. Is this the way you intended for it to be taken?

A civilian self-defense shooting is intended to neutralize an immediate threat to your life or the life of another that is in immediate peril. If the idea is to neutralize the aggressor with the minimum damage to that agressor and the maximum potential to save the aggressor's life and allow him/her to return to a normal life, then the fact the vital organs make up a smaller portion of the assailant's body make up a smaller portion of the body than the brain does of the assailant's head, In that respect, you would shoot for the center-of-mass and thus - hopefully - realized the lower legality likely with shots into this area.

If, however, the objective to take the assailant "out of the fight" for as long as the fight lasts so a to allow you to save innocent by-standers, the fact a head wound is more likely to divert the assailant's attention would argue for a head shot every time.
hdwhit is offline  
Old December 30, 2017, 04:11 PM   #41
briandg
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 4, 2010
Posts: 5,468
TXAZ, iirc, martinez deputized a bystander. People popped up out of nowhere and went all alamo on the tower. Even without police presence, whitman would have eventually been taken down by civilians alone. IIRC, when the first armed cop arrived at the scene there were civilians at the tower itself, one civilian actually went onto the deck. Then he bungled it with an accidental discharge.

Everyone who reads that story will get something different out of it. Some people are going to see snuffy smith and the shootin' iron, others will see a bunch of camo wearing rednecks, only a few people are going to see a courageous group of citizens who stood in the path of sniper fire and tried to save lives.
__________________
None.
briandg is offline  
Old December 30, 2017, 04:11 PM   #42
Skadoosh
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 13, 2010
Location: Virginia Beach
Posts: 2,016
How threads like this make it beyond one page is astonishing.
__________________
NRA Life Member
USN Retired
Skadoosh is offline  
Old December 30, 2017, 04:25 PM   #43
TXAZ
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 5, 2010
Location: McMurdo Sound Texas
Posts: 4,322
I don’t doubt it for then Brian, but that wouldn’t happen there today.
__________________

Cave illos in guns et backhoes
TXAZ is offline  
Old December 30, 2017, 05:37 PM   #44
OldMarksman
Staff
 
Join Date: June 8, 2008
Posts: 4,022
Quote:
Where I live currently (north Dakota) in a SD use of force you are immune civil liability from the former attacker or his family.
True, "if the court finds that the defendant is immune from civil liability". That refers to a civil court. One will most likely want legal representation in the attendant process. And keep in mind that a plaintiff need only to dispute a claim of justification with a preponderance of the evidence--not beyond a reasonable doubt.

So, a defender may be acquitted, or perhaps not be charged, in the criminal justice system, and still end up fighting it out and possibly losing in the civil courts.

That's a fundamental principle of tort law.

I can think of no reason why the location of a wound would, by itself, enter into the question.
OldMarksman is offline  
Old December 30, 2017, 06:07 PM   #45
TXAZ
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 5, 2010
Location: McMurdo Sound Texas
Posts: 4,322
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skadoosh View Post
How threads like this make it beyond one page is astonishing.
Because it’s a holiday and too cold to go out in -16, so we’re all waiting for the next interesting opportunity to offer our expert opinions on gun related discussions.
In April or May, you’re probably right.
__________________

Cave illos in guns et backhoes
TXAZ is offline  
Old December 30, 2017, 06:18 PM   #46
jimbob86
Junior member
 
Join Date: October 4, 2007
Location: All the way to NEBRASKA
Posts: 8,722
Quote:
So, a defender may be acquitted, or perhaps not be charged, in the criminal justice system, and still end up fighting it out and possibly losing in the civil courts.

That's a fundamental principle of tort law.
Needs serious reform, then ....

In my profession, I deal with practical applications of physics, chemistry and material properties and environmental conditions .... Lawyers deal with selected case law, a couple of colleges and 12 people that had squat better to do .... I think they are overpaid, and overused.
jimbob86 is offline  
Old December 30, 2017, 06:31 PM   #47
Nanuk
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 2, 2005
Location: Where the deer and the antelope roam.
Posts: 3,082
Quote:
True, "if the court finds that the defendant is immune from civil liability". That refers to a civil court. One will most likely want legal representation in the attendant process. And keep in mind that a plaintiff need only to dispute a claim of justification with a preponderance of the evidence--not beyond a reasonable doubt.

So, a defender may be acquitted, or perhaps not be charged, in the criminal justice system, and still end up fighting it out and possibly losing in the civil courts.

That's a fundamental principle of tort law.

Quote:
12.1-05-07.2. Immunity from civil liability for justifiable use of force.

1. An individual who uses force as permitted under this chapter is immune from civil liability for the use of the force to the individual against whom force was used or to that individual's estate unless that individual is a law enforcement officer who was acting in the performance of official duties and the officer provided identification, if required, in accordance with any applicable law or warrant from a court, or if the individual using force knew or reasonably should have known that the individual was a law enforcement officer.
2. The court shall award reasonable attorney's fees and court costs and disbursements incurred by the defendant in defense of any civil action brought by a plaintiff if the court finds that the defendant is immune from civil liability as provided in subsection 1.
There is no "if the court finds". The intent of the law is so that the victim of a violent attack is not "victimized" again by the system or the attackers family. This part of the country is very friendly to non criminals who defend themselves from criminals. You know as well as I do that it is quite easy to differentiate in most cases. I never arrested a violent offender that did not have a rap sheet 3 miles long.
__________________
Retired Law Enforcement
U. S. Army Veteran
Armorer
My rifle and pistol are tools, I am the weapon.
Nanuk is offline  
Old December 30, 2017, 06:32 PM   #48
Nanuk
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 2, 2005
Location: Where the deer and the antelope roam.
Posts: 3,082
Quote:
Because it’s a holiday and too cold to go out in -16, so we’re all waiting for the next interesting opportunity to offer our expert opinions on gun related discussions.
It was -35 this morning when I went out to take care of our horses, thankfully just a light breeze.
__________________
Retired Law Enforcement
U. S. Army Veteran
Armorer
My rifle and pistol are tools, I am the weapon.
Nanuk is offline  
Old December 30, 2017, 06:34 PM   #49
Nanuk
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 2, 2005
Location: Where the deer and the antelope roam.
Posts: 3,082
Quote:
Needs serious reform, then ....
There are 39 states (last time I looked about a year ago) that had some sort of immunity to civil action for self defense, the laws vary from state to state. I am fortunate to live in a state that is very gun friendly. Many people think that because it is a nightmare on the east coast it is the same everywhere.
__________________
Retired Law Enforcement
U. S. Army Veteran
Armorer
My rifle and pistol are tools, I am the weapon.
Nanuk is offline  
Old December 30, 2017, 06:49 PM   #50
Safaripolice
Member
 
Join Date: December 25, 2017
Posts: 39
In a justified self defense situation you shoot until the threat is eliminated. So if you fire 5 rounds and 1 hits and the assailant in down crying and his weapon is a safe distance away "threat gone", job well done and if you fire 5 shots and they all hit including a headshot and the assailant is clearly dead "threat gone" job well done again. Basically if you are ever in a situation that justifies "deadly use of force" you continue to defend yourself until the threat is gone whether they are injured or dead I guess is up to shot placement and the good man upstairs. Lord forgive me for saying that a dead criminal is a good criminal but I guess if an assailant survives maybe just maybe there's a chance they can turn their lives around which I doubt but we're not here to judge. Stay safe and shoot often!
Godspeed
Safaripolice is offline  
Closed Thread

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

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 03:37 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2021 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Page generated in 0.10600 seconds with 8 queries