Wound or Kill the robber?

[Sam1]

if he were armed with a knife and going after me or armed with a gun, I'd probably shoot to kill. I don't think I would shoot an unarmed person, or shoot someone cowardly in the back. if he was unarmed and going after me, I would secure my weapon and give him a good ol' beating!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[eltee]

If you are forced to defend your life or the lives of your family, you should shoot to end the threat.

That's what we teach recruits. We don't teach "to kill" as that will bite you in court. We teach to "stop the immediate threat." However, the technique is a double tap to the 10-ring which is in the area of the heart and if the first two don't work (body armor, high on PCP, Borg, etc.) then the third shot is between the horns. However, this isn't to "kill" but rather to stop.

[Sgt Raven]

Well said, Wes, Well said. You just saved me a lot of typing.

In before the lock!

Your sole intent in shooting someone else should always be to stop the threat. Period.


Anyone who asks a question like this might not understand that you are not going to have a nice liesurely time like on the range to ask yourself, "Do I want to hit him 2" below the belly button or 2" above the left nipple? Or do I just want to shoot him in the foot? Ah, lets go for #2 and relax, get a good breath, squeeze slowly."

You are going to have less than seconds to assess the situation, react, get on target, and fire before the subject completes their act of threatening your life or the life of others. In that case, you should be aiming for the largest part of their body and shooting until they stop their actions. Once their actions stop, do not render aid, seek cover, and call the police. The subject might not be out of the fight or their buddy might be around the corner.

In the civil suit you should hope this thread doesn't come up that you were seeking council on how best to kill someone and so when their client accidently walked into the wrong house, you could have asked them to leave, but you wanted to kill someone instead. Or maybe you just wanted to wound them because you are a sadistic duck and wanted to watch them squirm. That was some premediated murder as we can see from this thread.

Me, I don't want to kill anyone. I want to live in peace and harmony for the rest of my life and I want to help little children live better lives and aide my fellow citizens when they are down and out. I would only resort to harming someone when I had absolutely no other choice in order to preserve innocent life. And only then would I seek to stop their actions and I pray they don't have to die over their choice.

[USN CHIEF]

Kind of scary to read some of the responses in this thread. Some are so stupid that it is almost unreal. How can a gun owner not know that you never say that you shoot to kill?

[vormav]

Before I ever pull the trigger, i'm gonna let the gun cocking say my words for me, "whatever you stuffed into your pockets, just take it and get out of my house, i am armed"

Anything after that, i'm going to defend myself, thats all there really is to it.

No need to try to be any kind of home-owner hero, unless they come into my bedroom, or the bedroom of my family members, I really dont want to have to take a shot at anybody, I just want them gone.

[workinwifdakids]

Never shoot to wound. Never shoot to kill.

SHOOT TO STOP THE THREAT. Pull the trigger until the threat is over, and then stop pulling the trigger. Wounding or death is an inevitable and unfortunate byproduct of the assailant's actions, but you shoot to cease the attack against you. And then you stop and summon medical attention.

[larryb]

Kind of scary to read some of the responses in this thread. Some are so stupid that it is almost unreal. How can a gun owner not know that you never say that you shoot to kill?

Totally agree.

If you plan on using firearms for self defense you need to get some training/classes. You never shoot to kill or wound. You shoot to stop the threat.

If that means shooting center mass, then so be it. If shooting center mass does not have the desired effect then aim for the head. You never know, the intruder may be wearing body armor and shooting center mass may not be the answer.

Do not ever shoot someone in the back as they are retreating out of your home.

[Ironchef]

Kind of scary to read some of the responses in this thread. Some are so stupid that it is almost unreal. How can a gun owner not know that you never say that you shoot to kill?

And yet after all the sound wisdom has poured out, there still some guy just a few posts above still not getting it. lol

[AKman]

Funny, a local police agency teaches a double tap to the chest, pause, and if necessary, one to the head. They actually let lowly taxpayers practice this technique at the range. They also had one guy demonstrate how difficult it is to shoot a gun out of someone's hand (a stationary target after stressing the shooter a bit). I think there was only one hit out of dozens of shots.

If you are in a position where you legitimately fear for your life, lethal force is in order. Not shoot to scare away or wound. Not to waive your gun in the air to show the intruder how well armed you are. If you make the decision to shoot, do it right. An armed and/or dangerous intruder in your home is likely to be desperate, mentally ill and/or high on drugs. If he doesn't run away when confronted (fairly common with most burglars), then you are in an extremely dangerous situation.

Note that good home security significantly reduces the chances that you will ever face this type of situation. Confusion and deception are your friends, as is a loud, well advertised security system.

[HowardW56]

When you had to make a choice to use your gun to defend yourself, what would you do:

1. injure the robber (hit him on stomatch, his right chest...)?
In this case, would you have to his medical bill?

2. Hit the robber in the head or his left chest (aka. heart)?
what you've got is a guilty feeling you carry rest of your life.

How many rounds being shot before you stop to check on his "condition": 1, 2, or 3?

If you are justified in using potentially deadly force to end a threat, shoot to end the threat and continue shooting until the threat is eliminated. I was trained to for aim center mass, with a follow up shot to the head if necessary. After threat #1 is eliminated, check for any other threat.

[PorkLover]

If you are forced to defend your life or the lives of your family, you should shoot to end the threat.

I agree, shoot to end the threat......center mass, failure drill.....whatever you need to do to defend your family and home...........I am not a violent man by any means and I pray that I will never have to face this type of situation, but BGs beware, I will not hesitate to do what I need to do to protect my family.........

[SJgunguy24]

I agree, shoot to end the threat......center mass, failure drill.....whatever you need to do to defend your family and home...........I am not a violent man by any means and I pray that I will never have to face this type of situation, but BGs beware, I will not hesitate to do what I need to do to protect my family.........

Yep. I'd like to add, if i'm in a fight for my life I WILL NOT QUIT UNLESS I"M DEAD. Never quit fighting ever, your family needs you.

[Technical Ted]

Shoot the dog. Oh wait, those are ATF rules of engagement.

[SJgunguy24]

Shoot the dog. Oh wait, those are ATF rules of engagement.

Wait, I thought that was the unarmed woman at the door holding the baby.

[Beelzy]

Bingo!

The LEOs are taught the Mozambique Drill. I like it myself as one wants to
stop the threat by going for center of mass, but in the event of armor the
threat may not be stopped. Thus the final shot to the head.

So, if you ever get shot by a cop, go down. For they are just waiting to
get to round number 3.