Are Warning Shots a Good Idea?

[BC1]

Firefighter, do ALL shots that go into the "bad guy" stop? ....... Shall I go on?.... Do ALL SHOT AIMED AND FIRED AT THE BAD GUY HIT THE BAD GUY? Shall I go on? Are you now going to say it is a bad thing to shoot bad guys because the shot might go through them and hit an innocent? Not worth the risk? Shall I go on?

If the shot goes through them and hits an innocent it's gonna be a problem. If that innocent dies there will likely be a manslaughter charge. And a civil suit is a guarantee. Lawyers will be lining-up to get to your assets. Most PP classes will tell you that you can only take the shot when the background is completely clear. Look at NYC? Every time a cop shoots he also tags a bystander.
.
Penal Law S125.15 Manslaughter in the second degree.
A person is guilty of manslaughter in the second degree when:
1. He recklessly causes the death of another person.
Manslaughter in the second degree is a class C felony.
.
Plenty of case law out there ruling that when you take the shot without a clear background your actions are reckless.

 

[Firefighterchen]

Firefighter, do ALL shots that go into the "bad guy" stop? ....... Shall I go on?.... Do ALL SHOT AIMED AND FIRED AT THE BAD GUY HIT THE BAD GUY? Shall I go on? Are you now going to say it is a bad thing to shoot bad guys because the shot might go through them and hit an innocent? Not worth the risk? Shall I go on?

That is the difference, it is worth the risk of the bullet passing through the bad guy, in an attempt to stop the threat. A warning shot is not worth the risk, just like urinating on oneself is also not worth the risk, both could stop the threat, not worth it though.

Sent from my D6616 using USA Carry mobile app

 

[BC1]

That is the difference, it is worth the risk of the bullet passing through the bad guy, in an attempt to stop the threat. A warning shot is not worth the risk, just like urinating on oneself is also not worth the risk, both could stop the threat, not worth it though.

Sent from my D6616 using USA Carry mobile app

Chen, it's never worth the risk of penetrating the bad guy and hitting an innocent. If the shot is not clear you may not take it. That's in the syllabus for the NRA courses PPOTH & PPITH. Every course I ever took, even instructor training made this statement very clear. The shot is not available to you if it endangers an innocent.

 

[Firefighterchen]

Chen, it's never worth the risk of penetrating the bad guy and hitting an innocent. If the shot is not clear you may not take it. That's in the syllabus for the NRA course PPITH. Every course I ever took, even instructor training made this statement very clear. The shot is not available to you if it endangers an innocent.

There is always a risk associated with shooting, nothing is guaranteed. I know we don't see eye to eye on who's life is more important, mine and my families vs another bystander nearby, but what I mean by its worth the risk, is in both instances (warning shot or real shot), taken with the utmost confidence the background is safe, there is still the risk we missed someone hiding, a ricochet, a false wall, etc.

Sent from my D6616 using USA Carry mobile app

 

[BC1]

There is always a risk associated with shooting, nothing is guaranteed. I know we don't see eye to eye on who's life is more important, mine and my families vs another bystander nearby, but what I mean by its worth the risk, is in both instances (warning shot or real shot), taken with the utmost confidence the background is safe, there is still the risk we missed someone hiding, a ricochet, a false wall, etc.

Sent from my D6616 using USA Carry mobile app

You do know that when you place an innocent in danger of death to save your own life you've become no better than the criminal right? Let's say for example, someone threatens you, you draw and begin firing and there are innocents behind him. You do understand that anyone in the vicinity can shoot YOU dead to protect that innocent person right? So if someone opens-up and your family is in harms-way will you drop the shooter? I will save my family. They aren't a partner in your misery if someone is attacking you. As soon as you involve them they, or I, or any person, have the right to stop the threat. For me personally? If you catch my family in a cross-fire I'm dropping the person who poses the threat to them; with zero hesitation. Really need to think that wild west approach. And that is also the reason a lot of places don't want people carrying guns. They don't want you opening-up with innocent people in harm's way.

 

[Firefighterchen]

You do know that when you place an innocent in danger of death to save your own life you've become no better than the criminal right? Let's say for example, someone threatens you, you draw and begin firing and there are innocents behind him. You do understand that anyone in the vicinity can shoot YOU dead to protect that innocent person right? So if someone opens-up and your family is in harms-way will you drop the shooter? I will save my family. They aren't a partner in your misery if someone is attacking you. As soon as you involve them they, or I, or any person, have the right to stop the threat. For me personally? If you catch my family in a cross-fire I'm dropping the person who poses the threat to them; with zero hesitation. Really need to think that wild west approach. And that is also the reason a lot of places don't want people carrying guns. They don't want you opening-up with innocent people in harm's way.

If i put your family in harms way when I'm attempting to save my family, and there are people behind me, are you taking the shot? I'll do whatever it takes to save my family, even if that means I'm in jail and their alive. I wouldn't expect anything less from you when your protecting your family.

Sent from my D6616 using USA Carry mobile app

 

[NavyLCDR]

Chen, it's never worth the risk of penetrating the bad guy and hitting an innocent. If the shot is not clear you may not take it. That's in the syllabus for the NRA courses PPOTH & PPITH. Every course I ever took, even instructor training made this statement very clear. The shot is not available to you if it endangers an innocent.

Too bad police officers are not held to the same standard.

 

[ET]

There is no guarantee what you're shooting at is safe. Not worth the risk.

There are a lot of things that could work, but I would lump into the warning shot category, such as:

1. Peeing on your attacker.
2. Cutting yourself and trying to get your blood on them while screaming you have aids.
3. Exposing yourself.
4. Pooping your pants.

Shall I go on?

Sent from my D6616 using USA Carry mobile app

I happened to open this one... I laughed and realized why I put him on ignore the first week I was here. unfortunately there is no idiot test when it comes to owning a gun. Just another thought for those others of the same species.. an attempt to shoot someone in a crowded place has as much chance to hurt or kill an innocent bystander.. fortunately most muggings and robberies occur in isolated areas. a place where an assailant may not know you are armed, but a warning shot makes it a well known fact.. I may be a old guy looking like a victim, but someone coming at me in a robbery or mugging could be stopped in his tracts with a warning shot. Some 70 year old guys can be lethal. Many 70 year old guy get to be 70 years old by being smart, and consider every option.

 

[Firefighterchen]

I happened to open this one... I laughed and realized why I put him on ignore the first week I was here. unfortunately there is no idiot test when it comes to owning a gun. Just another thought for those others of the same species.. an attempt to shoot someone in a crowded place has as much chance to hurt or kill an innocent bystander.. fortunately most muggings and robberies occur in isolated areas. a place where an assailant may not know you are armed, but a warning shot makes it a well known fact.. I may be a old guy looking like a victim, but someone coming at me in a robbery or mugging could be stopped in his tracts with a warning shot. Some 70 year old guys can be lethal. Many 70 year old guy get to be 70 years old by being smart, and consider every option.

Some 70 year olds scrap through life to where they are and make up extravagant stories that would make Rambo blush.

Sent from my D6616 using USA Carry mobile app

 

[BC1]

If i put your family in harms way when I'm attempting to save my family, and there are people behind me, are you taking the shot? I'll do whatever it takes to save my family, even if that means I'm in jail and their alive. I wouldn't expect anything less from you when your protecting your family.

Sent from my D6616 using USA Carry mobile app

If there are people behind the shooter who's placing my family in danger? No. I won't take the shot. I'm sticking my body in front of my loved ones so some moron doesn't shoot them. And when the smoke clears they'll wish they never fired. Now they deal with that father.
.
Regardless, that shooter is in deep trouble if someone is hit. He's going to jail. He's getting sued. He'll be broke for life. His life is over. Thus the best instruction is always not to "turn perp" and start shooting the place up. This is why PP courses in all the best schools (LFI, GFH, Gunsite. Thunder Ranch) ALL teach no shot without a clear background. This is also why lot of places don't want armed customers. The average non-gunner is scared to death of what you posted.
.
Bottom line? I would rather die in the attack than cause the death of your innocent family member with an errant shot.

 

[BC1]

Too bad police officers are not held to the same standard.

Yeah, Manhattan is a dilemma in itself. There's no safe direction. I always tell people look at the backdrop when watching Fox News. They're perched above Radio City on Sixth Ave. During any given news broadcast one can see thousands of people just on that street alone. In Midtown you actually have millions of people walking during weekdays. There's pretty much nowhere you can take a safe shot. Even cops are putting bystanders at risk. People always think NYC cops are bad shots. That's just ignorant. There are over 35,000 cops in NYC, they all aren't bad shots. There's just very few places one can take a shot without endangering others.

 

[Firefighterchen]

If there are people behind the shooter who's placing my family in danger? No. I won't take the shot. I'm sticking my body in front of my loved ones so some moron doesn't shoot them. And when the smoke clears they'll wish they never fired. Now they deal with that father.

It would be nice if we were always that close. What do you do if can't shield them? Bottom line, would you rather watch your family die than take the shot?

We can play hypotheticals all day, you can assume you will have all the other options available to save your loved ones, but what happens when you don't have those options? You can't shield them? All you have left is the shot to try and save them, your confidence the background looks clear, but the possibility that someone maybe hiding out of your view, or maybe the round hits a large bone and ricochet 30 degrees to the side. There is always that possibility. what then? What shot doesn't involve risk?
.

Regardless, that shooter is in deep trouble if someone is hit. He's going to jail. He's getting sued. He'll be broke for life. His life is over. Thus the best instruction is always not to "turn perp" and start shooting the place up. This is why PP courses in all the best schools (LFI, GFH, Gunsite. Thunder Ranch) ALL teach no shot without a clear background. This is also why lot of places don't want armed customers. The average non-gunner is scared to death of what you posted.

.

Take the shot to save your family, is it worth the risk knowing that each round may hit a bystander, since there are no guarantees, there is always a possibility for each round to go off course. For me, I'll take the risk of financial ruin and jail if it means my son, wife, brothers, parents etc stays alive.

If you have to go to the extremes of thinking one goes wild wild west, or shooting the place up, then I don't see you having a point.

The average non gun owner isn't scared of anything, they don't think anything bad will happen to them to begin with. Their logic is of no concern to me.

Bottom line? I would rather die in the attack than cause the death of your innocent family member with an errant shot.

Bottom line is not about you, it's about watching your family die and choosing to do nothing about it because a shot has the possibility of hitting a bystander nearby.

Would you say it is better that the lady at Libbys dinner watch her parents die, than for her to take a shot to save them even though that restaurant was crowded? Do you side with her, or do you think it is better she was unarmed so she didn't harm more people, with her parents as collateral damage...

Sent from my D6616 using USA Carry mobile app

 

[1-LM]

Ammo is to expensive for a warning shot!

 

[ET]

Ammo is to expensive for a warning shot!

I don't know, I shoot 50 rounds a week at my range just to keep my edge, at my age.. and I'm not starving. But a human life must be worth less. then? Seems like that's what you are saying. And the cost of taking that life will be much much more costly than the 60 cents for a single warning shot. Even if a kill shot was within the law. Way too many John Wayne's and Audie Murphy's carrying guns in our towns and cities. Ill take a warning shot if I can avoid killing someone and still be able to walk away. This forum can get very scary with some of the stuff I read here, and the logic that accompanies it.. the scariest is that some of these people might be walking around my town, or where my children or grandchildren live. Im all for guns and the right to bear arms, but not the right for 40 year old mindless adolescents to have them.

 

[Firefighterchen]

Age does not equate to wisdom. We got ourselves an older Joe Biden here folks...from warning shots to infringing rights.

These posters are very educating though, to see why this country went the way it did.

Sent from my D6616 using USA Carry mobile app

 

[Bikenut]

I don't know, I shoot 50 rounds a week at my range just to keep my edge, at my age.. and I'm not starving. But a human life must be worth less. then? Seems like that's what you are saying. And the cost of taking that life will be much much more costly than the 60 cents for a single warning shot. Even if a kill shot was within the law. Way too many John Wayne's and Audie Murphy's carrying guns in our towns and cities. Ill take a warning shot if I can avoid killing someone and still be able to walk away. This forum can get very scary with some of the stuff I read here, and the logic that accompanies it.. the scariest is that some of these people might be walking around my town, or where my children or grandchildren live. Im all for guns and the right to bear arms, but not the right for 40 year old mindless adolescents to have them.

Ahhh yes, yet another ........I'm all for guns and the right to bear arms except for those I personally don't think deserve them. .... anti gunner lite.

What is really the scariest is knowing some people that would take a warning shot are walking around my town, or where my loved ones, live.

Yeah... a warning shot might make the bad guy run but sending a bullet off somewhere is very risky.... but then... that "somewhere" doesn't apply to those experts who, during the stressful time of being confronted by a bad guy, took the time to look for an impact zone where that bullet had no chance of ricochet, couldn't possibly hit an innocent (whether that innocent were nearby or a half mile away) and would go into a safe backstop...

 

[ET]

Ahhh yes, yet another ........I'm all for guns and the right to bear arms except for those I personally don't think deserve them. .... anti gunner lite.

What is really the scariest is knowing some people that would take a warning shot are walking around my town, or where my loved ones, live.

Yeah... a warning shot might make the bad guy run but sending a bullet off somewhere is very risky.... but then... that "somewhere" doesn't apply to those experts who, during the stressful time of being confronted by a bad guy, took the time to look for an impact zone where that bullet had no chance of ricochet, couldn't possibly hit an innocent (whether that innocent were nearby or a half mile away) and would go into a safe backstop...

so your point is that you can without question take down a bad guy in the heat of battle with a single shot and never miss.. which would be against all statistical documentation of professional law enforcement.. as I said recently, two Ohio cops shot 56 rounds in a city street at a bad guy 20 feet away, armed with an AK-47 while he was not under any cover or concealment in the open, wanting to commit suicide by cop. Of those 56 rounds the two cops fired only 6 hit the bad guy , of the six 5 were non lethal and one was a kill shot. in civilian life a kill shot is not called shot placement, it is called luck... Wonder where those 50 other shots went, ??? these two were professional law enforcement who have to qualify quarterly. One was a tenured Sargent.. chances are slim to none that you are going to take down a bad guy with a single controlled well places shot.. OH and BTW learn some reading and comprehension skills , and read what I had to say about the when and if of a warning shot.. IM tired of all the bull$hit stories and addendums you add to my posts. There are all types of people on this forum, and thank God IM not one of those blindness immature cowboys who think killing someone is a macho thing. everyone I have on my ignore list would never pass the psych evaluation on a State law enforcement test.

 

[XD40scinNC]

Ah, the childish ignore list.

Link Removed

 

[1-LM]

I don't know, I shoot 50 rounds a week at my range just to keep my edge, at my age.. and I'm not starving. But a human life must be worth less. then? Seems like that's what you are saying. And the cost of taking that life will be much much more costly than the 60 cents for a single warning shot. Even if a kill shot was within the law. Way too many John Wayne's and Audie Murphy's carrying guns in our towns and cities. Ill take a warning shot if I can avoid killing someone and still be able to walk away. This forum can get very scary with some of the stuff I read here, and the logic that accompanies it.. the scariest is that some of these people might be walking around my town, or where my children or grandchildren live. Im all for guns and the right to bear arms, but not the right for 40 year old mindless adolescents to have them.

Not what I was saying at all. It was tongue and cheek statement! I would not take or recommend a warning shot period! The logic behind it is, it is a dangerous practice. If I am required to pull my firearm things have escalated beyond a warning shot. When I need to pull my gun a kill shot will be required, It will be a matter of my life, my family's or his. When you pull a gun life as you know it becomes complicated. I am well beyond my 40 year old adolescent stage of life. To lesson your fear I dry fire practice everyday and go to the range three times a week for live fire training. ( Range Safety Officer at gun club, also a Council on Law Enforcement Education and Training / SDA instructor) I pray everyday I will never need to pull my firearm.

 

[Firefighterchen]

IM tired of all the bull$hit stories and addendums you add to my posts. There are all types of people on this forum, and thank God IM not one of those blindness immature cowboys who think killing someone is a macho thing.

Lol I don't think I've read so much Hollywood from a poster since tricolordad... And even he was more grounded than ET. Talk about bull$h!t stories....

Thank God I'm not one of those guys that likes to pick fights from my car in some kind of testosterone driven intimidation.

Sent from my D6616 using USA Carry mobile app