Shooting to wound.

[runningrabbit747]

Just read a good article in USCCA, something really to think about, when you are face with a threat to you and your family. Kill or wound ????? Page #40.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G900A using USA Carry mobile app

 

[bofh]

Just read a good article in USCCA, something really to think about, when you are face with a threat to you and your family. Kill or wound ????? Page #40.

I have the magazine, but haven't fully read the article yet. The article is titled "Shooting to Wound?". After briefly skimming over the article, it looks like it correctly asserts that shooting to wound is stupid and in many cases illegal.

The general wisdom is that you do not shoot to wound or to kill. You shoot to stop the threat. If the threat stops, you stop shooting.

 

[DavidWhite]

Shooting another human being is generally considered to be the absolute last resort.

If you ever need to draw your weapon in defense of self and or others, you shoot to stop the threat.

If the end result is only wounds with incapacitation, so be it.

Never shoot to wound.

Shoot to stop the threat.

 

[Ringo]

Sign on neighbors garage...TRESPASSERS WILL BE VIOLATED!

 

[SR9]

You should never fire unless it is absolutely necessary. But if you do, shoot to kill. A wounded person can still kill you and or members of your family. Also, a dead man tells no tales, and can't testify or sue you in court. CYA

 

[DavidWhite]

You should never fire unless it is absolutely necessary. But if you do, shoot to kill. A wounded person can still kill you and or members of your family. Also, a dead man tells no tales, and can't testify or sue you in court. CYA

Link Removed

 

[XD40scinNC]

Shoot center mass until the threat stops. If the drop, or turn and run after the first shot, mission accomplished. If they continue to threaten or advance, continue shooting center mass.

I do not consider it a wound vs. kill debate, my goal is to stop the threat.

 

[XD40scinNC]

You should never fire unless it is absolutely necessary. But if you do, shoot to kill. A wounded person can still kill you and or members of your family. Also, a dead man tells no tales, and can't testify or sue you in court. CYA

If you do find yourself in a self defense situation and your web postings are discovered, this post alone would put you in a world of ****.

 

[tcox4freedom]

Stop the threat---

 

[Ringo]

Stop the threat---

With two in the chest and one in the head.

 

[bofh]

With two in the chest and one in the head.

+1

 

[sandetl]

With two in the chest and one in the head.

Exactly!

 

[maybejim]

Just read a good article in USCCA, something really to think about, when you are face with a threat to you and your family. Kill or wound ????? Page #40.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G900A using USA Carry mobile app

Neither. You shoot to stop the threat.

 

[maybejim]

With two in the chest and one in the head.

Actually, you shoot to the center of visible mass until the threat ends.

 

[bofh]

Stop the threat---

With two in the chest and one in the head.

Actually, you shoot to the center of visible mass until the threat ends.

Two different schools of thought. See Shooting Illustrated | Failure Drill and Link Removed.

 

[Ringo]

Actually, you shoot to the center of visible mass until the threat ends.

You shoot to the center of visible mass until the threat ends. I'll put two in the chest and one in the head and end the threat.

 

[Bikenut]

I have no desire to kill, or even do harm to, a human being. My only desire is to cause an attacker to stop attacking. Period. Preferably without causing any harm to anyone. But that may not work so....

Any and all shots that impact an attacker cause wounds. It is my goal to cause enough wounds to make the attacker to stop attacking. And it is unfortunate and tragic if the attacker expires due to those wounds but that was not my goal.

By the way... the idea of shooting to center of mass is generally accepted as torso shots but that isn't the full concept since center of mass really applies to the center of whatever mass is available. That mass could be a knee, foot, hand, elbow, shoulder, head, or leg. Hopefully folks will recognize those peripheral areas are valid center of mass if the torso is not available.

 

[tcox4freedom]

I have no desire to kill, or even do harm to, a human being. My only desire is to cause an attacker to stop attacking. Period. Preferably without causing any harm to anyone. But that may not work so....

Any and all shots that impact an attacker cause wounds. It is my goal to cause enough wounds to make the attacker to stop attacking. And it is unfortunate and tragic if the attacker expires due to those wounds but that was not my goal.

By the way... the idea of shooting to center of mass is generally accepted as torso shots but that isn't the full concept since center of mass really applies to the center of whatever mass is available. That mass could be a knee, foot, hand, elbow, shoulder, head, or leg. Hopefully folks will recognize those peripheral areas are valid center of mass if the torso is not available.

Plus 1+

 

[XD40scinNC]

You shoot to the center of visible mass until the threat ends. I'll put two in the chest and one in the head and end the threat.

Well Mr. cool under pressure, good luck with that, when fighting for your life you do not and will not have the composure to follow you own fantasy of how a self-defense shooting will go down, and with your exaggerated view of your ability, you will be lucky to even hit your attacker. Holes in paper targets are easy, and only a fool believes that the adrenaline surge in a life/death situation won't effect them.

 

[maybejim]

Two different schools of thought. See Shooting Illustrated | Failure Drill and Link Removed.

The two to the chest one to the head assumes every gun fight will be like the OK corral. The bad guy isn't necessarily going to just stand there and shoot it out. He might be behind a door frame or a car or a tree. So your target can only be center of visible mass.