Shoot to kill, or shoot to wound?

[DaveM55]

I have also heard this referred to as a 'Failure Drill" as in the first two "Fail" to stop the threat

Thanks for sharing that term.

[Pro2A]

I cant believe any one would put their name on a poll that is open like this for any one to see...

SHoot to stop the threat, Unfortunatly now, any one who has stated in the poll they would shoot to kill could have this poll used against them in a court of law.

Have you guys learnt noting from the recent court cases?

I would never want to kill somebody. I would definitely go for the center of mass like most people here have said to stop the threat, and if it ended their life so be it, but I didn't make the choice to attack me.

[AimeeM]

I chose "wound" as my interpretation of "shoot until threat stops". I do not ever hope, nor intend to kill someone--but you can bet your hind end that if threatened I intend to stop the threat. If this happens to kill the aforementioned threat, then that--as other have said many times--is an unfortunate side effect of shooting for the center of mass.

[Pocat6]

wouldnt anyone still with a weapon wounded considered a threat? for all i know they can still shoot

[RONNIE77]

I don't carry a firearm to kill people. My intention is not to kill.
My intention is to protect myself and whoever is around me at all costs.
If I draw my firearm in self defense, and it ends in the death of the threat.
Than it is what it is....

I was just protecting myself and loved ones.

[ErSwnn]

Stop the threat.....nothing more, nothing less. Largest available area is the target.

[Mtbkski]

im just saying frenchy more then likely if they get shot with my gun they wont walk away

Alas the problem arises here.

In all actuality. The person you shoot with your pistol WILL survive your shooting them. Unless you make a very nice shoot and hit a major organ, or you make a nice head shoot. But realisitically.... They will most likely survive being shot by any pistol out there.

Now, if you shoot them over and over and.... then they fall to the ground and they twitch.... so you shoot them again and again..... Chances are now improving that you will kill them.

If you go to court, and have to explain why you dumped all 13 rounds of your magazine into the guy, you probably better hope you have some witnesses that will testify that the guy you shoot kept coming, and coming, and wouldn't go down. Cause convincing a jury of this isn't likely.

If you really think that the pistol your carrying is a ONE SHOOT MAN STOPPER. I think your going to be very disappointed the day that you actually have to shoot someone. Even the Mighty 45 will not knock them back wards, off their feet, killing them instantly.

Hence, you shoot to make the bad guy stop what he is doing. Hopefully just pulling the gun will be enough and he will turn tail and run. Save you a lot of problems. If you do shoot. Then shoot until you feel he no longer presents a threat. If you shoot him once, and he keeps coming, shoot him again. If he keeps coming. Shoot him again. And keep shooting, till he finally stops whatever it is that he is doing that is a threat to your life.

Shoot center mass. Shoot straight. Shoot as often as you need to. But SHOT TO MAKE THEM STOP WHAT THEY ARE DOING. NOT TO KILL THEM.

Quick example: Your in high school and you got into a fight. This guy walks up punches you and a fight breaks out. You punch the guy trying to make him stop punching you. Once your threw that one punch that made him fall down or back away. It was time to stop. If you didn't. Then your became the aggressor cause the guy isn't attacking you any more. You only use the amount of force needed to make the guy stop hitting you.

If you stop. Your the winner. If not....The other school kids would not see you as the winner. You had become the attacker and should have stopped when you had the chance. Keep punching him, and you will have the bad reputation instead of the guy who actually started it.

[Konsukah_19]

if you dont shoot to kill they may come back later to kill you.

A lot of times depending on the situation, all that needs to be done is have the business end of the gun pointing at you, and your demeanor changes when you think that bullet will put a hole in you.

In terms of the shoot to kill thing, hehe, tell that to your lawyer.
Suppress the threat, if you do not need to kill, then don't. You have a lot of responsibility and legal recourse if you should squeeze that trigger. A lawyer will also try to tear your ass apart.

[Tun Tavern 1775]

I would shoot to stop the threat. It's not my fault that while the adrenaline was flowing that my shots ended up two in the chest and one in the head.

[Mtbkski]

Suppress the threat, if you do not need to kill, then don't. You have a lot of responsibility and legal recourse if you should squeeze that trigger. A lawyer will also try to tear your ass apart.

There never is a need to KILL THEM. Never ever ever.

You always!!!!! ALWAYS!!!!!! Shoot to stop the threat.


Killing someone may be a consequence of your trying to STOP THEM. But you never try to kill anyone. It just happens.

You guys are going to hang yourselves in court if you ever need to use a firearm for self defense.