"I shot to Stop" vs "I shot to Kill" - Ask a Vet!

  • Thread starter Thread starter ezkl2230
  • Start date Start date
E

ezkl2230

Guest
If this is a duplicate, I apologize. I didn't see it anywhere else.

I receive emails from USCCA. The following is an email they received and reprinted in today's mailing. It is an appropriate topic on this forum, as there are those who continue to debate whether we shoot to stop or shoot to kill in a defensive situation. Further, it doesn't hurt for us to be reminded about the ramifications of the decision to pull the trigger in a defensive situation.

I truly hope this message is sent to Tim Schmidt!

You are doing a wonderful job of informing the general public of the liabilities, consequences and responsibilities of carrying a concealed firearm and the laws regarding our criminal and/or civil engagement!

But one important thing that is not covered by your fine organization very often is the true meaning of "I shot to Stop" vs. "I shot to Kill."

As a VET, I can say that there is a clear distinction. Let it not be said of anyone, "When you or your loved ones were in harms way, you shot to stop and/or kill your attacker without regard!" It is immediate and irrevocable. It's also something you will have to live with the rest of your life!

I pose this question: Are you really preparing your subscribers for the harsh reality of taking someone's life and all the consequences that come with it?

Ask a VET! We will end the myths of stopping power by the weapon we carried. We will tell you that a well-placed shot is as important as the caliber of the gun you carry and how many rounds are in the magazine.

But more importantly, we will tell you of the inevitable question of the impact of stopping someone from potentially inflicting harm or killing them as it is in the mind of a single trooper. The military trains us that the only way an assailant is truly STOPPED is through immediate death.

My request is simple: All I ask is that you thoroughly, compassionately and emotionally listen to our men and women who have served this great nation so graciously and without hesitation.

Best regards, Tim. And a SPECIAL THANK YOU to all of the past and active service men and women whom have given with such sacrifice and loyalty!

Love you all,
Dave
Click to expand...
 
Ive been thinking about this...in relation to what I am taught as a paramedic in dealing with death.

As a medic, we are taught to be truthful about death. We shouldnt say, "your son passed away," or, "your mother is in a better place.". No, we say exactly what it is, "your father has died, do you need us to call anyone, or want a crisis worker to come out?". We don't beat around the bush.

If someone is coming at you with lethal force, they want to kill you, do you respond with:

1. Less force
2. Equal force
3. More force

I understand the mindset and semantics of the argument, but I also understand if someone is trying to kill me, the force I use in self defense is going to be more than what is coming at me.

Sent from my HTCONE using USA Carry mobile app
 
Firefighterchen said:
Ive been thinking about this...in relation to what I am taught as a paramedic in dealing with death.

As a medic, we are taught to be truthful about death. We shouldnt say, "your son passed away," or, "your mother is in a better place.". No, we say exactly what it is, "your father has died, do you need us to call anyone, or want a crisis worker to come out?". We don't beat around the bush.

If someone is coming at you with lethal force, they want to kill you, do you respond with:

1. Less force
2. Equal force
3. More force

I understand the mindset and semantics of the argument, but I also understand if someone is trying to kill me, the force I use in self defense is going to be more than what is coming at me.

Sent from my HTCONE using USA Carry mobile app
Click to expand...

Agree. But I think what he's getting at is the whole idea of shooting to stop (wound). There are a number of people on this forum who have bought into that way of thinking, and some in politics who are trying to make that the standard. Why go for center mass when you could just as easily go for an arm or a leg, they ask. Obviously, they have never actually tried hitting something that comparatively small when it is in motion. INCREDIBLY difficult. But the more obvious problem is that such an action, even if carried out successfully, still allows that person to find a way to complete a lethal attack - especially if they are armed with a firearm. Even if they are unsuccessful at that, they still have the opportunity in our screwed up "justice" system to launch a debilitating civil attack against the one who injured them.

No, taking a life is never the first choice. But having said that, as the author points out from our own military's training - there is only one way to truly STOP a lethal attack.
 
I am reminded of a saying, "Dead men tell no lies."

Now, that said, I want it known, I am not a crazy person here.

I am just making the point, if someone is in my home and/or is trying to kill me, I really don't care what the result is, I want that person to be stopped and I will use my weapon to defend myself! I made that decision when I signed up for my NRA class to qualify for my concealed carry permit. I will shout a warning to drop your weapon and put your hands up! If not, well, my Glock is always carried hot.
 
You use enough force to stop the threat. If the threat is imminent serious bodily injury or death, then you use deadly force. However, once the threat is stopped, you must terminate the deadly force. If the thug is no longer a threat but still alive, continuing the use of deadly force will land you in severe trouble.
 
I agree with you completely, Pir8fan, I would never claim to be able to overpower someone whose goal is to kill me. I am 5'3" and 51 years old and have arthritis. My Glock would only serve to even the playing field. I certainly wouldn't be shooting at someone who dropped their weapon and put their hands up. But they better not move until police arrive to put them in handcuffs. My home security system has a video camera setup and it would all be on tape. I am not the crazy killer here.
 
To be honest the email just rings false to me, it reads more like the author is trying to puff himself up than to give an legitimate advice. I’m certain his advice doesn’t match any US Army training doctrine I’m familiar with.
 
"I fired to stop the threat."

Or:

"I fired to kill the threat."

Firing center mass is perfectly consistent with both statements.

Only one of those statements is consistent with the legal use of deadly force that results in a death.

First off, you should never say a single word to cops about the details of a self defense shooting without your attorney present, but failing the discipline to adhere to that self-defense rule, no matter where your shots struck the now-dead target, if you say you shot to kill them rather than to stop them, you have just voluntarily given the cops all they need to prosecute you successfully.

This is such a stupid debate. The meme is taught as a way for people who are prepared to defend themselves with a firearm to train themselves to survive both the violent encounter and the subsequent legal fight for their lives that they will almost assuredly have to deal with to one degree or another. If the Zimmerman case didn't prove that Stand Your Ground laws and immunity laws are decidedly not a foolproof protection against prosecution, then I can't imagine what case might be better to demonstrate that. And in all the brainless talking to cops without a lawyer that Zimmerman did, not once did he say that he purposely killed Martin. If he had, I can just about guaran-damn-tee ya that the verdict would have been different, and the charge itself may have been Murder 1 instead of M2.

If you know that a double-tap to CM and one to the head is likely to result in your attacker's death, why on Earth would it matter how you relate it in your mind as a way to protect yourself legally after the shooting?

I don't want to kill anybody, but I do want to employ the best tactics I can that will ensure I go home relatively unscathed should I ever have to open fire on someone trying to do harm to me or mine. Those "best tactics" include good shot-placement to the parts of my attacker's body that are most likely to make them stop the attack. It's just coincidence that those are the same parts of the body that will many times cause death too.

If you "shoot to kill," you shoot to get yourself in trouble with the law. Why anyone would make an issue of this is beyond me. Gotta have your head in both the physical and legal fight people, and shooting to stop the threat is the only right way to win both.

Blues
 
I've always trained 2 rounds, evaluate threat, repeat if necessary. Always CM. I train to STOP the threat. I advise all to have the same mind set. JMHO
 
I read this quote a long time ago. It was from a "gun guy", but unfortunately I can't remember the name.
.
"I don't shoot to kill. I shoot to live."
.
Works for me.
 
Seems a stupid debate indeed. As an armed civilian, you shoot to stop - death is one variation on that theme, one potential outcome - but you are shooting to stop the threat. I was in danger and had to stop threat to my life.

And to be honest - meaning no disrespect to my fellow veteran - that email seemed to be babbling to me.
 
If I fire my weapon at a person, it doesn't matter to them whether I intended to stop them or kill them. I am using lethal force, and will most likely not hit the exact spot I aim for - assuming I have enough time to aim at all - so a shot that was intended to wound could very well be fatal.

By pointing my weapon at a person and pulling the trigger, I am accepting the possibility that they will die. If I am not able to accept that then I have no business carrying a weapon in the first place.
 
Because I'm Politically Incorrect, and because a person who has doubts is thinking about two different things at the same time and can't make up his mind about anything, I would never point my gun at anyone threatening my life or the life of a loved one that I didn't intend to kill.
 
I have never aimed a weapon at another human being with the specific intent of killing them but I have aimed a weapon at another human being with the specific intent of shooting them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

New Threads

Members online

No members online now.
Total: 4,112 (members: 0, guests: 4,112)

Forum statistics

Threads
49,530
Messages
610,684
Members
75,032
Latest member
BLACKROCK6

Share this page

Back
Top