Carry less or non lethal first round

[GW]

Not pointing a gun at anything you are not willing to destroy is one of the universally excepted rules of firearm safety. I am guessing you know this so I am not sure if you are trolling or just did not express you thoughts clearly?

He's perfectly clear.
Being willing to destroy does not necessarily mean wanting to destroy. Just as being willing to kill the guy threatening you does not necessitate wanting to kill the guy.
Big moral/legal difference there.

[Steve_In_29]

You ONLY pull a gun when you feel your life is under threat and have passed the lethal force allowed threshold....so why then would you want to use something less then lethal?

BAD idea! If you don't want to shoot someone then practice running away faster.

[faris1984]

You ONLY pull a gun when you feel your life is under threat and have passed the lethal force allowed threshold....so why then would you want to use something less then lethal?

BAD idea! If you don't want to shoot someone then practice running away faster.

I can't even run due to wound from sniper shot.I don't have good physical power so the fire power will be the only thing I have to use to protect myself against deadly threat.

[IVC]

I know you are kidding, but don't think that that blanks can't kill people. They Can and have. Back in the 80's an actor was screwing around on set and shot himself in the side of the head with a blank and it ended up killing him.

Not to mention Brandon Lee, son of Bruce Lee.

[Steve_In_29]

I can't even run due to wound from sniper shot.I don't have good physical power so the fire power will be the only thing I have to use to protect myself against deadly threat.

Then you BETTER make the first shot count!

So stop considering a less then lethal round and stock up on something like the Critical Defense or PDX rounds.

[The Gleam]

Since I'm nowhere near as a good a shot as Rob Leathem, I guess I'm already carrying "less than Leathem" rounds.

HAARRRR HARRR HARDEEE HARRR HAH Hah Ha humm heh ha - yeah.

[mif_slim]

Wow, ifilef came out the gates swinging in this one. Like Brian said, its a universal rule. If a shooter doesnt know that then they dont know the fundamentals.

Pointing a gun at something Im not willing to destroy means if i dont feel threaten, i dont need to draw my gun in the first place. By the time i draw my gun, it means my life is threaten. If i point it at something, i am willing to destroy it. Plain and simple. No need to go into morals, shoot to stop, etc.

Of course the aim is to stop the threat, but if that requires 10 rounds, so be it. I am not going to fire 1 round, wait, fire another, wait, fire another, wait or i am not going to aim for an leg or arm or their weapon. Ive done too many force on force training that trying to shoot limbs is near impossible. Oh wait, we are armchair commandos... no one trains but the selected few.

[paratroop]

I actually know someone that shot a guy with a rubber .45.

Technically it stopped the guy, from killing the other two guys, but he ran away after being told the next one was a hollow point. The rubber bullet just got his attention, but didnt really "stop" him.

I would never use that garbage in self defense, you may only get one shot.

[nedro]

Hi fellow Calgunners ,
Have you ever thought or did put non less or non lethal round in your gun?.
is there any good less lethal 9mm in the market.
Thanks

You watch a lot of movies, eh?
Tell you what, at the next bad guy convention, let them know your idea. If they all agree to do the same for us, I'm in.

[alfred1222]

I dont believe in less lethal ammo. Why risk it? I believe, like most here, that if i need to draw my weapon, then it demonstrates a need to use it, as a result of me fearing for my life. If i am in fear for my own wellbeing, why would i risk my life betting on a less than lethal round? A .45 hollowpoint does the job, a mag full of HP does it even better. and no, i dont plan on shooting to kill. I will aim center mass and shoot until the attacker is no longer a threat to me or mine. If he survives, then i guess his guardian angel was working overtime. If he doesnt, well, better him than me. But i disagree with the mentality of shooting to kill. If someone is charging me with a knife, and I draw and aim, causing him to turn tail and run away, he is no longer a threat, and i believe the proper course of action is to let him run.

[SoCalEnthusiast]

I think it would be a great idea to put in a few rubber bullets and then put in the stuff that packs a punch.

[Cali-Shooter]

You're not doing anyone any favors using less-than-lethal in a legally classified lethal weapon, except to the perpetrator. You are also potentially endangering your own life (less or no stopping power). Don't even bother with it.

[TeddyBallgame]

IF, i have a chance to give a verbal command, THAT would serve as my less than lethal force

if not, my primary objective is protecting MY life, or, the life of someone else

anything that happens to the aggressor at that point is secondary

[Citadelgrad87]

You're missing the point.
Of course lethal force can be used in self-defense

When you draw the gun you presumably are in fear for your life. The use of lethal force would be legal and legitimate. However, when you do a mag dump on that poor kid who was just trying to slice an apple to share with your family before he left for Bible college. that DA with an anti-gun hard-on is going to have a field day with your comments.
I'm talking about the mindset and aftermath of the shooting. If you go John Wayne you can expect to be treated as the criminal.
"Why did you shoot him 8 times?" See what response you get when you say "Because I didn't have 9 rounds."
"Did you want to kill him?"

Just keep it to "I was in fear for my life." and "I want to talk to my lawyer before I say anything further."

Now I think you are missing the point. None of my comments approach "because I didn't have 9". The word game "I didn't shoot to kill, I shot to stop" isn't some magic spell. Everyone reading this knows what is supposed, intended, to happen when shots are placed center of mass. The attack stops because the injuries to the attacker prevent him from being able to continue. An anti gun da will have a field day playing with someone's doe eyed "no, I didn't intend to kill anyone, I intended to stop the attack" as well. It comes down to intentionally causing likely life threatening injuries to the attacker, and the law allows that.

I'm not advocating booking your thumbs in your belt and saying "damn right I killed that scumbag", that's why I put quotes around a perfectly reasonable statement, demonstrating that intent to kill, in a vacuum, isn't going to convict someone. Some statements might, and it's always advisable to shut up and speak to an attorney, but the blanket statements being tossed around are inaccurate.

[Steve_In_29]

I think it would be a great idea to put in a few rubber bullets and then put in the stuff that packs a punch.

Well we all know what your experience level is so only a fool would take that suggestion.