Firefighterchen didn't say a word about shooting to kill. I'll guarantee you that he knows the difference between willfully trying to kill a threatening subject and stopping the threat. All he said is that you never shoot to wound, and he's right. Both premises are too specific to be either prudent or legal. You shoot to stop the threat, just like your instructor said. If the threatening subject gets wounded, that's fine. If he gets killed, that's fine too according to the law, as long as the perceived threat and use of deadly force was justified. Shoot center-mass and/or central nervous system with your intent being to stop the threat. Don't shoot the leg or arm thinking that you'll wound him and that will be sufficient to stop the threat. Without trying to speak for Firefighterchen, I'm pretty sure that's all he was saying.
The news said that the invader was shot in the head. I'm
guessing that that's what the home-owner was aiming at rather than that his aim was off.
That's exactly right - you're guessing what the homeowner was aiming for. At night from a good distance away, there's no telling what he was aiming at.
Isn't shooting someone in the head much more likely to kill than a COM shot?
Shooting someone in the heart is much more likely to kill them than shooting through the meat just below the clavicle too, but either would be considered a COM hit. Where would an errant round that stayed on the center-line, but missed high, actually hit? If you said the head, you're a winner.
Either way, it's intent that matters. You can stop the threat with a COM shot or a CNS (which includes the head) head shot. Niether one makes you a wanton killer. You just defended yourself efficiently and accurately, which is more than many shooters can say in a high stress, high adrenaline situation.
You're reading much more into what FFC said than is fair.
I beg to differ with you on reading too much into what
the instructor said.
"FFC" = Firefighterchen. You were (and still are) reading much more into what Firefighterchen said than is fair.
He was quite unequivocal in saying that once the perp is on the ground and not threatening us with further bodily harm, we were to stop shooting.
Something that FFC (Firefighterchen) neither said he wouldn't do, nor, I'm reasonably sure, would he disagree with your instructor on that score.
Perhaps keep the BG covered until LE arrives....
Ya think?
....but not to continue shooting until all movement stops.
And who exactly said anything contradicting this premise again? Nobody that I saw. All FFC said was that you never shoot to wound, you
only shoot to stop the threat, and he was 100% correct. You don't shoot to kill, and you don't shoot to wound, you
only shoot to stop the threat.
It is possible to writhe in pain or try to reposition your body to get off a particularly painful open wound without threatening anyone.
If you can tell the difference, and the subject is indeed writhing in pain rather than trying to lure you into a false sense of security that you have succeeded in stopping the threat, then maybe you will take the opportunity to administer first aid? You do know first aid, don't you? I know for a fact that FFC has forgotten more about first aid than most of us will ever know. That said, I would not hold it against him if he kept a safe distance from the person he just had to shoot because they were trying to victimize him with potentially deadly force, and if any of the subject's movements appeared threatening, I wouldn't hold it against him if he opened fire again.
I do appreciate everyone's thoughtful comments. Frequently when I get into discussions (about politics or history mostly) folks get all bent out of shape when they can't discourse dispassionately about a topic.
George
*/:-{)=
Well, I don't know why anyone should be "dispassionate" about the prospect of saving their own life at the possible expense of another's, but you do have the right to expect a fair degree of manners and decorum. That's a two-way street though, and reading things into what others say when they didn't even come close to implying what you read into it is lacking in form too. But it takes awhile to fit in anywhere that you don't yet know the general tone of the group. Keep trying - you'll get there.
Blues
