Are Warning Shots a Good Idea?

[NavyLCDR]

Looks like some ( One in a million ) guy chose to try a warning shot instead of killing someone... Oh how sad.... The guy had a chance to kill someone and didn't .. I bet that pisses off lots of people on this forum

Oh my loving friends, did you think I would not post a comment?

And to think this guy probably slept very well knowing he did have to go to the lawyers office in the morning. Probably took the wife and kids out for breakfast, and had a great day....

Window Washer Survives 11-Story Fall In San Francisco?s Financial District, Passing Car Cushions Fall « CBS San Francisco

Guess it's OK to jump off 11 story roofs.....

and here's even some tips:
How to Survive a Long Fall: 12 Steps (with Pictures) - wikiHow

I hear driving off bridges is fun too....
Link Removed

 

[bofh]

Still a stupid idea:

Link Removed
Legally armed homeowner catches thief, is jailed for firing warning shot | The Daily Caller
Man Charged After Firing Warning Shot | KCCI Home - KCCI Home
Man charged after firing 'warning shot' - The Star Democrat - Easton, Maryland: Local
Link Removed
Hookah Bar Bouncer Charged After Firing 'Warning Shot' - Manchester Ink LinkManchester Ink Link
Link Removed
Store clerk who fired warning shot may face charges
Link Removed

Again, if you do not want to shoot, because you have moral objections, then don't shoot. Give a verbal warning. That's what your loud mouth is for. A gun is a lethal weapon and not a signaling device.

Also, if the first thing a burglar needs to hear is your warning shot, then you have already lost. Be prepared. Have an alarm system.

 

[Chris C]

I've just stumbled onto this thread........and certainly didn't take the time to read all 162 previous posts, so I apologize if this point has already been made.

In self defense, self preservation is the primary goal and the only "warning shot" should be to the center mass when at all possible.

 

[BluesStringer]

Still a stupid idea:

Link Removed
Legally armed homeowner catches thief, is jailed for firing warning shot | The Daily Caller
Man Charged After Firing Warning Shot | KCCI Home - KCCI Home
Man charged after firing 'warning shot' - The Star Democrat - Easton, Maryland: Local
Link Removed
Hookah Bar Bouncer Charged After Firing 'Warning Shot' - Manchester Ink LinkManchester Ink Link
Link Removed
Store clerk who fired warning shot may face charges
Link Removed

Again, if you do not want to shoot, because you have moral objections, then don't shoot. Give a verbal warning. That's what your loud mouth is for. A gun is a lethal weapon and not a signaling device.

Also, if the first thing a burglar needs to hear is your warning shot, then you have already lost. Be prepared. Have an alarm system.

I *tend* to agree with your first sentence. I have said before that I can envision no scenario during which I would fire a warning shot, and certainly don't train my "muscle" (brain) memory to have that option anywhere on the list, so the answer from me to the question posed in the title of the thread is, "No, I don't *think* warning shots are a good idea."

Then again, as creative and imaginative as I sincerely believe I am, I know that I cannot envision every conceivable scenario, and therefore, will not assert that warning shots are *never* a good idea, or are *always* a stupid idea, just that I don't *think* they're a good idea. I remain open to the possibility that my thinking could be proven wrong, however.

Just a point of clarification here: I am only answering the question in the title, notwithstanding anything that Massad Ayoob has to say about it. I consider his character so flawed as to not be worthy of my consideration of anything he says or writes. Anyone wondering about the basis of that conclusion can go here to get the skinny, that post being addressed to the same member who posted this thread, but in any case, I am only addressing the question in the thread title.

As far as the links you posted bofh, forgive me for not clicking on them before making comment, but I do want to say something about the ones that mention people being charged with a crime for firing warning shots. To me, the premise that warning shots should or shouldn't be a crime in and of itself is something that is not being discussed much here, if at all, and I think that should be the crux of the question. I don't have time to research those links, but I'm going to bet that at least some of them, if not all, are talking about a crime other than an out-an-out ban on warning shots, like maybe charges on a statutory ban on firing a weapon within city limits, or too close to a public road, or the warning shot(s) cause property damage or injury to a bystander or what have you. If I'm wrong, I'm wrong, but I am not one who believes that we need government placing prior criminal restraints on us concerning any decision that has even just slight potential to prevent an attack/injury/killing by a bad guy. That's not me supporting the notion of warning shots, it's just me recognizing my own human limitations that we, including law-makers, all share that prevent us from being able to foresee every possible scenario so clearly as to say that one tactic over another can *never* be a reasonable response to an advancing threat. To the extent that any of those links actually do reference charges that stem from a law making warning shots a crime in and of themselves, there's a helluva lot more wrong with the government in those jurisdictions than with the folks who tried, whether successful or not, to avoid having to kill someone by firing a warning shot.

As to the text I put in bold in your post, great idea. I have alarmed and security-lighted my home, and hardened all the entrances with steel door encasements and anchored struts top and bottom, making it so someone trying to get into any of the doors would literally have to apply enough force to move the door, steel encasement, concrete floor and ceiling joists as one whole assembly, which, obviously, ain't likely to ever happen. Windows are the most vulnerable part of my home, so I paid the extra bit to have sensors put on all of them too, but we found out on 4/27/11 and the 10 days subsequent to that day, that even the battery back-up rendered the alarm system useless after that date's tornado swarm storm. Power was out at our home for 10 solid days due to all five of Brown's Ferry Nuclear Plant's transmission lines being destroyed. Not sure when the back-up battery went dead, probably about Day Seven or Eight. Certainly a very tangential point to the one you were making, but it goes to show that all conceivable scenarios cannot be foreseen in either case, whether considering the human mind or technological/mechanical devices.

Blues

 

[NavyLCDR]

Still a stupid idea:

Link Removed
Legally armed homeowner catches thief, is jailed for firing warning shot | The Daily Caller
Man Charged After Firing Warning Shot | KCCI Home - KCCI Home
Man charged after firing 'warning shot' - The Star Democrat - Easton, Maryland: Local
Link Removed
Hookah Bar Bouncer Charged After Firing 'Warning Shot' - Manchester Ink LinkManchester Ink Link
Link Removed
Store clerk who fired warning shot may face charges
Link Removed

Again, if you do not want to shoot, because you have moral objections, then don't shoot. Give a verbal warning. That's what your loud mouth is for. A gun is a lethal weapon and not a signaling device.

Also, if the first thing a burglar needs to hear is your warning shot, then you have already lost. Be prepared. Have an alarm system.

America - where people go to jail for intentionally not shooting criminals - and other people claim that it's a good idea to try it anyway....

 

[torontogunguy]

Each situation is different. I am not about to think it through, having been at the business end of an armed confrontation more than once. If i need to defend it is my firm and we'll trained reflexive reaction to STOP THE THAT. That simply means, being succinct, should I reasonably feel I am in fear of death or grievously bodily harm there will be no discussion. I will fire on target and continue firing until the threat is terminated. No more and no less. I carry generally a Glock 30 with JHP rounds like Gold Dots. I train to draw and fire as necessary. I am comfy with that. No warning shots. THAT is the way I train and that is what is ingrained. I pray I never experience the situation again. But if I do I feel confident in my training.

 

[Rhino]

I think Blues just said it best. The original question was if warning shots are a good idea. No, they aren't. But that doesn't mean that they can't be useful in some rare circumstances because they have saved lives on some occasions. The problem is that those occasions and the circumstances involved have been so tangential and individually unique that there's no way to categorize the use of warning shots, and certainly no way to plan or train for them.
.
Long ago, a friend of mine with a black belt used to carry around two wallets. One was his regular wallet and one was empty. His reasoning was that if someone ever attempted to rob him, he'd simply toss the empty wallet at them and then run away as they attempted to catch it, thus avoiding a confrontation. He advised me to do the same. He wasn't afraid of a confrontation. He just knew it was wiser to avoid one. Empty wallets aren't a self defense tactic, they aren't something you can train for, and they certainly aren't something you should rely on, but they may actually work in some unforeseen circumstances, so you can't simply rule out the possibility of using them. Warning shots aren't all that different. They aren't a good idea as self defense tactics go. You can't train for them and you'd be an idiot to rely on them. But you can't simply rule out the possibility that someday there may arise some unique circumstance where the use of one might be of benefit. Extremely unlikely, yes. Even incredibly so. But not completely impossible.

 

[BC1]

I think Blues just said it best. The original question was if warning shots are a good idea. No, they aren't. But that doesn't mean that they can't be useful in some rare circumstances because they have saved lives on some occasions. The problem is that those occasions and the circumstances involved have been so tangential and individually unique that there's no way to categorize the use of warning shots, and certainly no way to plan or train for them.
.
Long ago, a friend of mine with a black belt used to carry around two wallets. One was his regular wallet and one was empty. His reasoning was that if someone ever attempted to rob him, he'd simply toss the empty wallet at them and then run away as they attempted to catch it, thus avoiding a confrontation. He advised me to do the same. He wasn't afraid of a confrontation. He just knew it was wiser to avoid one. Empty wallets aren't a self defense tactic, they aren't something you can train for, and they certainly aren't something you should rely on, but they may actually work in some unforeseen circumstances, so you can't simply rule out the possibility of using them. Warning shots aren't all that different. They aren't a good idea as self defense tactics go. You can't train for them and you'd be an idiot to rely on them. But you can't simply rule out the possibility that someday there may arise some unique circumstance where the use of one might be of benefit. Extremely unlikely, yes. Even incredibly so. But not completely impossible.

I'm sort of ambivalent about the wallet robbery scenario. I carry almost no cash. Maybe $20 in my wallet, if that. And I'm certainly not shooting anyone over $20. I would think drawing the gun should be enough to run him off. I flip the wallet past him to the ground. When he turns and picks it up I draw. But I would rather avoid a situation that costs me tens of thousands of dollars in headaches over twenty bucks. But my watch? My wife's watch, ring, earrings ... tennis bracelet... car? It's worth the fight. No one walks-away with valuables.

 

[Rhino]

I'm sort of ambivalent about the wallet robbery scenario. I carry almost no cash. Maybe $20 in my wallet, if that. And I'm certainly not shooting anyone over $20. I would think drawing the gun should be enough to run him off. I flip the wallet past him to the ground. When he turns and picks it up I draw. But I would rather avoid a situation that costs me tens of thousands of dollars in headaches over twenty bucks. But my watch? My wife's watch, ring, earrings ... tennis bracelet... car? It's worth the fight. No one walks-away with valuables.

Well, back then there was no such thing as ATMs and almost nobody accepted checks, so cash was a common thing to carry. We couldn't afford 'valuables'. There were no concealed carry licenses either, so you only carried if you were willing to break the law and be willing to pay the price for it if necessary. So today, yeah, you've got a point. But it was more relevant back then.

 

[Deanimator]

I'm sort of ambivalent about the wallet robbery scenario. I carry almost no cash. Maybe $20 in my wallet, if that. And I'm certainly not shooting anyone over $20. I would think drawing the gun should be enough to run him off. I flip the wallet past him to the ground. When he turns and picks it up I draw. But I would rather avoid a situation that costs me tens of thousands of dollars in headaches over twenty bucks. But my watch? My wife's watch, ring, earrings ... tennis bracelet... car? It's worth the fight. No one walks-away with valuables.

Forcible robbery is NOT a "property crime". It's a crime against a PERSON.

What IS robbery? It's the unlawful threat or use of force, deadly or otherwise, to forcibly take something from an innocent victim to which you're not legally entitled.

I'm not going to shoot you because you picked my pocket.

I'm going to shoot you because you put me in immediate and credible fear of life and limb while TAKING my wallet. If I didn't think you were a threat, I'd tell you to get bent.

Don't want to get shot? Don't put people in immediate and credible fear of life and limb, for ANY reason, be it robbery, rape or a "hate crime".

 

[kelcarry]

Still a stupid idea:


Again, if you do not want to shoot, because you have moral objections, then don't shoot. Give a verbal warning. That's what your loud mouth is for. A gun is a lethal weapon and not a signaling device.

Also, if the first thing a burglar needs to hear is your warning shot, then you have already lost. Be prepared. Have an alarm system.

How does this thread keep going with this assinine idea? Thank you bofh.

 

[Gregmm6]

In some states pulling a gun to intimidate or possibly firing warning shots can be illegal. Hard to tell sometimes where a warning shot will end up, In most states you are responsible for where those bullets land(they can ricochet). Could be in a house, a building or an innocent person or animal. I feel warning shots are a bad idea. If you feel you are in imminent danger for your life, you have to make the decision to shoot to kill. A decision you will have to live with.

Not always. I don't know where you were trained, but I was always taught that you shoot to stop the threat, whether your target lives or dies isn't the issue.