Would I have been justified?

[Bmaninmifco]

With all of the would I have been justified threads I've seen
If the situation arose where you had no choice but to pull your weapon, would you shoot to injure or shoot to put him down?

Personally even if I was in the right I think I would have a hard time taking a persons life, it would be preferable to me to injure and end the situation.

Thoughts?

[Pa. Patriot]

The universal teaching is that you shoot to stop the threat. IE: center of mass and or head.

Doing otherwise can mean your demise. You won't have time to think about and aim at limbs, etc. Most defensive engagements happen at contact distance or very close to contact distance.

I highly recommend taking a good defensive handgun I class, at the minimum.

[Thekatar]

With all of the would I have been justified threads I've seen
If the situation arose where you had no choice but to pull your weapon, would you shoot to injure or shoot to put him down?

Personally even if I was in the right I think I would have a hard time taking a persons life, it would be preferable to me to injure and end the situation.

Thoughts?

If you make the decision to shoot someone it is because they have presented themselves as a potentially lethal threat to you and you could not safely retreat from them. You shoot them center mass, or alternately between the eyes because the vulnerability of those two target areas will most rapidly and conclusively stop the threat. If they die as a result that is a secondary consideration.

Here's a quote from another thread:

I've seen many questions like this on the forum, and I don't recall ever reading the words "Would I have been justified?", where the answer was "yes".

[Bmaninmifco]

Must be the whole though shall not kill thing
I'm just saying 99.9999% of the situations life presents you wouldn't be justified
But for for that .0001% I would prefer being able to injure than kill

[JoeWilliams]

Shoot center mass. You aren't shooting to kill or injure, you are shooting to stop a threat, so you shoot center mass, and keep shooting till they are on the ground or running away. They might die, they might not. Either way isn't your primary concern.

If you shoot to injure (shoot for arms, legs, etc), you will probably miss, have your gun taken and used against you, and the bullet you sent downrange is liable to end up in an innocent bystander. A really for real shooting isn't anything like a trip to the range, or IDPA, or anything else you do for practice. You will be pants wetting scared (maybe not manly to say for some folks here, but it's a fact of life), you are going to be higher on adrenaline than you ever dreamed possible, and you will have about 1 second to save your life and/or that of your loved ones. You will not hit anything other than center mass except by sheer luck... heck center mass might even be luck.

Cold hard facts are that if you aren't willing to kill someone, you should not carry a firearm for self-defense. Surely keep on shooting for sport and fun, but you should not carry a gun. You are liable to get someone else hurt, in addition to you. There ARE other methods of defending yourself.

OTOH, just wondering "Could I really kill a fellow human?" doesn't mean you don't have the mental attitude necessary to carry a gun for self defense. It means you are not psychotic. A normal, well adjusted person does not want to have to use their gun, all the chest beating you see here to the contrary. Talk is one thing, but most of the folks here are no more anxious to use their guns than you are.

You are VERY smart to be considering this. You will have to do some soul searching. If you carry a gun, kill a fellow human, and find that it's not something you can live with... well, that would be a bad thing, to put it mildly.

BTW, the Commandment is not "You shall not kill." It is "You shall not murder." Throughout the Bible it is made clear that self defense is not murder. Even Jesus sent his disciples forth with their swords.

[Pa. Patriot]

Must be the whole though shall not kill thing
I'm just saying 99.9999% of the situations life presents you wouldn't be justified
But for for that .0001% I would prefer being able to injure than kill

You only present a firearm where you are justified in doing so such as preventing imminent death or grave bodily injury to you or yours.
You are obligated to de-escalate or avoid/break off from any encounter that does not meet the confines of justifiable lethal force.

As for the circumstances that do warrant lethal force. It's not about "killing" but rather "surviving". If you absolutely can not accept the intellectual liability of taking a life you should consider alternative methods of defense such as a tazer. They are not a substitute for a firearm, and much more limited in effectiveness (multiple attackers, heavy clothing, etc) But if you have a moral obstacle to deploying a firearm you may not use it when needed and an alternative defense is better than none.

I highly recommend investing the $ in a handgun -I class at a reputable facility. Particularly in your situation (the way I'm reading it). It will help you make the decision you are obviously seeking.

[BenningBoy]

I am not a lawyer. If you are in enough trouble to pull the gun, then you have already made a decision. No one should ever hope that showing a weapon will deter an attack. Even drawing a weapon should be thought through, because once it's done, a chain of events will ensue. Violence is seldom the answer, but when it is, it's the only answer.

[Swarner793]

I believe the actual translation of the commandment is not committing unwarranted murder, not so much "thou shall not kill". Someone here has a signature about the Dali Lama willing to kill to save oneself.

Like the Patriot said, you are not killing him as much as saving yourself.

Be safe.

Scott

[normanvin]

With all of the would I have been justified threads I've seen
If the situation arose where you had no choice but to pull your weapon, would you shoot to injure or shoot to put him down?

Personally even if I was in the right I think I would have a hard time taking a persons life, it would be preferable to me to injure and end the situation.

Thoughts?

The point of this question is are you willing to do what is needed to survive a bad situation. It is nice to say that yes I will do this or that when there is no one bearing down on you. The situation can and will take on a more profound spin when the bad guy or guys are in your face. When you have no choice, be a victim or a survivor. Just remember that the bad guy will have no reservations over hurting or killing you and yours.

So if push comes to shove shoot for the largest target you can find. Stop the threat and move on.

[PocketProtector]

Shooting to injure only happens in the movies. If you find yourself in a "situation" you'll be damned lucky to hit anything. Police shootings tend to prove that. Very low percentage of hits.