The Use of Deadly Force

[Tommycat]

Things to remember when firing a deadly weapon.

1) NEVER SHOOT TO WOUND!!!! Ever. At all. If your intention is to wound, it is better not to fire the weapon at all. First off, if you wound them, THEY CAN SUE YOU!!! Second, if you wound them they might be tough enough to be just really ticked off, and now you have a guy that's tough enough to handle a bullet wound THAT'S ANGRY!(anyone that's been bear hunting knows how this works) Third, shooting to wound requires greater accuracy, a keen knowledge of vital organs and arterial distribution and bullets are not surgically precise instruments. Soooo you may as well shoot with the intention to kill.

 

2) NEVER draw your weapon if you don't intend to use it to kill. This may seem redundant to the first, but its a seperate thing. If you aren't able to pull the trigger and kill someone, you shouldn't pull a deadly weapon in the first place. If you can't kill them you have pretty much given the criminal the weapon they are going to use to kill you.

 

3) Know the law in your area. This seems like a no brainer, but this is where a lot of idiots get it wrong(yes I include this guy in that category as well). Be aware of what the local authorities need you to do in order to operate your firearm safely.

 

4) Never go against the police. They have more guns and more people than you. If they tell you to sit tight, do so.

[Web Rider]

With proper training no problem. In fact, I'd rather have to shoot twice or more to stop a man, instead of killing him when not necessary.

because all gun owners regularly train to do this. No, the average gun owner buys a gun, shoots it once or twice, and keeps it around for "what if" after that.

 

But he will get slower and thus is easier to hit with another bullet.

maybe.

 

Well, simple, ask the people around you to get a slight feeling for what they would do.

isn't that what we're doing?

 

© pull a gun and shoot first (D) run away and not get shot (E) play he would surrender and then ignite a mini atom bomb.

we're assuming we're shooting at the criminals now dead in this situation. And that they're NOT Lex Luthor.

 

In fact it is more like the normal citizen is not obligated to do more than calling the cops.

I never said they were. I only said that they're likly to get crap for doing nothing, as I've seen people get, as they are to get flak for doing something.

 

But I see no reason to shoot a guy that is running away...obviously my life would not be indanger if he's running away and to me human life > TV, dvd, etc...

cops shoot guys running away all the time. Why does their badge make it OK for them to kill somebody over some guy they never met's TV vs me killing a guy over my neighbor, and likly my friend's TV?

 

We say cops are justified because they're "protecting others", well, aren't I doing the same when killing that burgular? Now he'll never break into another house, never threaten another person if they're home.

 

We say cops are justified because they're trained for it. If I have enough training with guns does that make it OK for me to do it?

 

We say cops are justified because "they're cops". Well, cops are just people in special clothes with special permissions. That hardly makes them good people, and if reports are to be trusted, half the cops who use their guns have less self control when shooting than the average guy. I mean, we've all heard the stories of cops emptying whole clips(10-14+ bullets) into a guy who it only took 1 or 2 to take down. That hardly makes me believe cops are a safer bet than some fat guy with a shotgun.

[Corinthian]

To be fair, sometimes emptying loads of ammo into a guy is necessary - if you're gonna kill 'em, make sure they're dead. Druggies on PCP can shrug off a good bit of fire and still keep coming.

[Tommycat]

That's why the house shotgun is loaded with Buck shot and a slug

 

I've seen a guy shrug off buck shot...

 

Never met a man who could shrug off a slug.

[Web Rider]

To be fair, sometimes emptying loads of ammo into a guy is necessary - if you're gonna kill 'em, make sure they're dead. Druggies on PCP can shrug off a good bit of fire and still keep coming.

 

as I said in my example, a guy that only took one or two shots to take down.

[tk102]

cops shoot guys running away all the time. Why does their badge make it OK for them to kill somebody over some guy they never met's TV vs me killing a guy over my neighbor, and likly my friend's TV?

Who is saying it's OK for a cop to kill a running burglar? I didn't say so. If I was on jury duty and this was the case in front of me, I would see this as an open-and-shut case of excessive force. If this was an armed robbery or a rape, that's quite different since the nature of the crime is threatens the life of others and allowing the criminal to escape could mean another victim.

We say cops are justified because they're "protecting others"...We say cops are justified because they're trained for it...We say cops are justified because "they're cops".

Again, I don't know why you are assuming that cops can get away with shooting anyone running without consequence. The law is supposed to apply to everyone, however I would point out that the police department is part of city government and is granted certain privileges to accompany their responsibilities. This is how order is kept. The fat guy with a shotgun you mentioned (assuming you mean Joe Horn) is a vigilante.

[Corinthian]

If you run, you get what you deserve.

[mur'phon]

If you run, you get what you deserve.

even if you pannicked and ran without thinking?

[Corinthian]

Yes. You run from a cop, or even someone trying to make a citizen's arrest, you deserve what you get. You can plead Panic in court, if you survive.

[mur'phon]

So, a person deserve to be killed for an action they had no controll of and would not do if they had been thinking?

[Corinthian]

Firstly, panicking doesn't mean you go absolutely off your nut and start just spasming. Secondly, if you lose control of your actions, you need to be put down. You might say crackheads aren't in control of their actions when they start mugging people. That doesn't mean they shouldn't be punished with the business end of a Smith and Wesson.

[Ray Jones]

No, the average gun owner buys a gun, shoots it once or twice, and keeps it around for "what if" after that.

That's why noone who'd not be able to handle it proper should be allowed to own a gun.

 

 

maybe.

Of course, *you* become faster with a bullet in your leg. At least when you're on PCP, that is. I mean, everyone who runs is on PCP anyway.

 

 

isn't that what we're doing?

Don't know, do you? As of now I think you don't really have.

 

we're assuming we're shooting at the criminals now dead in this situation.

I thought we were discussing that issue in general, not just that single event.

 

I never said they were. I only said that they're likly to get crap for doing nothing, as I've seen people get, as they are to get flak for doing something.

However, that doesn't mean people that have not received proper training for guns or such situations should go out and shoot at people who they think deserve it. That's what the cops, laws and trials are for. Or am I wrong?

 

 

We say cops are justified because they're trained for it. If I have enough training with guns does that make it OK for me to do it?

If you have proper gun training you'd have at least a better preposition for handling situations with gun action. But that still doesn't mean you can handle any dangerous situation or the ones where it's about your own and other people's lives. This is where cops receive special training too.

 

That hardly makes me believe cops are a safer bet than some fat guy with a shotgun.

You know, it's often a tough choice cops have to make, especially when situations get hot and dangerous. It's always easy to judge afterwards and point the finger at those who have taken the duty to watch over the common life. And just because someone has a badge doesn't mean he will never fail from that moment on. But when you take it how a man (cop) who received proper training for guns and stress loaded situations can fail at this, why should we put any trust in gun owning people who don't even shoot their guns on a regular basis and who base their "negotiation" skills on what they saw in Schwarzenegger movies?

 

I mean, what would be next, that instead of the proper trained US Forces, they send a couple of high school kids to Iraq, solely based upon the fact that their dad owns a gun that he shot once ten years ago?

[mur'phon]

Corinthian

Secondly, if you lose control of your actions, you need to be put down.

 

Darth333

And even then, what they say is not necessarily what they would do. When you have a gun pointed at you for real, you don't really think: you get an adrenaline boost and instinct kicks in. I've been caught in such a situation once and I was too shocked to say anything, the maid went hysteric shouting "Dios mio! Dios mio!" (Oh my god), one of my friends tried to run away, his brother froze in place (like me) and my mom stayed calm and managed to calm the guy with the gun

 

In this situation, two people lost controll of their actions. They where not harming anyone, and wheren't a danger to anyone. So, would you "put them down"? I hope (and believe) you wouldn't, but pherhaps you could clarify when you think it's okay to "put down" a person?

[Arcesious]

So it seems most people have voted no. Um... That's not right. That Man from texas understood what it would feel like to his nieghbor to be robbed of his hard earned possessions, and he defended it for him. Those criminals had crossed the line trying to steal someone's stuff for their own selfish personnal gain! Do you feel better that those criminals are dead instead of them going to jail for a few years, beign released, and going right back to burgling? if they hadn't dided and were put in jail and eventually released, how would you feel if they went and robbed YOU? I think those criminals had what was coming to them. I don't own a gun, but i'd certainly grab a some sort of weapons and probably get a dozen of my neighbors or something and defend my nieghbor's property if i saw it beign burgled! Cause those burglars would probably be long gone by time the police came if i didn't do something! Although i wouldn't fdo that if the burglars were heavily armed. thne i'd call the police. but you get my point right?

[Corinthian]

Debatable that they actually lost control of their actions, Mur'phon. I would say they did not.

[Ray Jones]

Cause those burglars would probably be long gone by time the police came if i didn't do something! Although i wouldn't fdo that if the burglars were heavily armed. thne i'd call the police. but you get my point right?

I at least got the point that you are a ~snipped~

 

As long as the "criminals" are unarmed you would shoot at them, however, when they have weapons then suddenly it's "HELP HELP PLEASE DEAR POLICE HELP".

 

Don't flame, Ray. --Jae

[mur'phon]

That Man from texas understood what it would feel like to his nieghbor to be robbed of his hard earned possessions

 

Yes he did, too bad he didn't know how it would feel for the burglars family to have their familymembers killed.

 

Those criminals had crossed the line trying to steal someone's stuff for their own selfish personnal gain!

 

Isn't everything we do ultimately for our own gain , don't worry, I know what you mean

 

Do you feel better that those criminals are dead instead of them going to jail for a few years, beign released, and going right back to burgling? if they hadn't dided and were put in jail and eventually released, how would you feel if they went and robbed YOU?

 

Isn't the point of jails to discourage people from comitting criminal acts, keep society safe, and to show criminals the error of their ways and help them become law abiding citizens? If they don't do that, we clearly need to do something about the jails

 

And if I get robbed again, I'll feel far better for helping the police catch the criminals, than how I would feel had I ended someones life. A human life>anything I own.

 

but you get my point right?

 

I do, but I disagre nontheless

 

edit: Corinthian, are you talking about the criminals or darth's friends?

And I would stil like you to clarify when you think it's okay to "put someone down"

[Darth333]

In this situation' date=' two people lost controll of their actions. They where not harming anyone, and wheren't a danger to anyone. So, would you "put them down"? I hope (and believe) you wouldn't, but pherhaps you could clarify when you think it's okay to "put down" a person?[/quote']

Err..not sure if you were referring to me or only Corinthian but I never said that I would put them down. On the contrary. I think that there was no reason whatsoever to shoot these guys who were running away and who were not threatening anyone.

 

Secondly, if you lose control of your actions, you need to be put down.

So simply not obeying means that death is justified?

 

Do you feel better that those criminals are dead instead of them going to jail for a few years, beign released, and going right back to burgling?

Talk about crime prevention! Yeah kill all the criminals (do worse than what they did!), no matter what their crime is...you can be sure that they won't do it again I wouldn't call that justice (if that's how it was in real life, I'd drop my job right now as I would be too ashamed to practice in the "legal" area.)

 

I'm with mur'phon on this.

 

Use of dealy force should the very last recourse. I can't understand how people can value simple proterty such as tvs and dvds (which can be replaced after all) more than human life.

[tk102]

Use of dealy force should the very last recourse. I can't understand how people can value simple proterty such as tvs and dvds (which can be replaced after all) more than human life.

QFE.

[Web Rider]

As long as the "criminals" are unarmed you would shoot at them, however, when they have weapons then suddenly it's "HELP HELP PLEASE DEAR POLICE HELP".

 

an armed criminal does not always stop citizens from shooting. In fact it'd probly make them shoot first and warn second.

 

That's why noone who'd not be able to handle it proper should be allowed to own a gun.

shooting once or twice =/= inability. It doesn't take much to learn how to point, steady yourself, and shoot.

 

Of course, *you* become faster with a bullet in your leg. At least when you're on PCP, that is. I mean, everyone who runs is on PCP anyway.

point is, a wounding shot is not as surefire a way to stop a criminal as a fatal one. Thats why cops aren't told to shoot to wound.

 

Don't know, do you? As of now I think you don't really have.

From what I hear from "the people" here, they think he was justified a good 50% at least. My family and neighbor agreed.

 

I thought we were discussing that issue in general, not just that single event.

the event in general has too many variables.

 

However, that doesn't mean people that have not received proper training for guns or such situations should go out and shoot at people who they think deserve it. That's what the cops, laws and trials are for. Or am I wrong?

yes, and no. Cops are just people with special clothes and training. It's an Officer's position to enforce the law, but if burglars know that ONLY cops enforce the law, and the cop-to-citizen ratio is like 1:10,000, thenburglars have a pretty good chance. If a cop isn't around to enfoce a law, or protect others, citizens need to do so. This mindset of "do nothing, wait for a cop", is bogus.

 

If you have proper gun training you'd have at least a better preposition for handling situations with gun action. But that still doesn't mean you can handle any dangerous situation or the ones where it's about your own and other people's lives. This is where cops receive special training too.

I've yet to see a gun raining program where you shoot at other people. Shooting at targets all day does not prepare you for shooting another human. And what is this special training? "duck and roll"? "aim better"?

 

You know, it's often a tough choice cops have to make, especially when situations get hot and dangerous. It's always easy to judge afterwards and point the finger at those who have taken the duty to watch over the common life. And just because someone has a badge doesn't mean he will never fail from that moment on. But when you take it how a man (cop) who received proper training for guns and stress loaded situations can fail at this, why should we put any trust in gun owning people who don't even shoot their guns on a regular basis and who base their "negotiation" skills on what they saw in Schwarzenegger movies?

it is our duty to protect ourselves. If we are capable of doing that, we should. The idea that only cops are allowed to protect is dumb.

 

Yes. You run from a cop, or even someone trying to make a citizen's arrest, you deserve what you get. You can plead Panic in court, if you survive.

 

I don't think running away is justifiable cause to kill.

 

Who is saying it's OK for a cop to kill a running burglar? I didn't say so. If I was on jury duty and this was the case in front of me, I would see this as an open-and-shut case of excessive force. If this was an armed robbery or a rape, that's quite different since the nature of the crime is threatens the life of others and allowing the criminal to escape could mean another victim.

Again, I don't know why you are assuming that cops can get away with shooting anyone running without consequence. The law is supposed to apply to everyone, however I would point out that the police department is part of city government and is granted certain privileges to accompany their responsibilities. This is how order is kept. The fat guy with a shotgun you mentioned (assuming you mean Joe Horn) is a vigilante.

 

Laws tend to say it's OK for cops to kill just about anyone for a variety of reasons. I bought up cops because I'm saying that cops aren't some special breed of humans bred and trained from birth to deal with this stuff. yeah, many have years of experience, but they're still human. If we are entrusting ourselves to any human with special clothes and good training to protect everyone, is it such a stretch to believe one man with some training can protect one other person?

 

Almost every criminal who escapes will repeat, sometimes bolder and more violently. A simple robbery could be a build up to a bigger one, where people are home, when the criminal has a gun, and he could kill or rape whoever is there. Especially if his experience tells him the cops won't get there in time, and nobody will protect those people.

 

I assume it because that tends to be the case. We say "oh, they're cops, that's OK then." And the idea you support that ONLY cops can defend us is destructive to society.

[Darth333]

Laws tend to say it's OK for cops to kill just about anyone for a variety of reasons. I bought up cops because I'm saying that cops aren't some special breed of humans bred and trained from birth to deal with this stuff. yeah, many have years of experience, but they're still human. If we are entrusting ourselves to any human with special clothes and good training to protect everyone, is it such a stretch to believe one man with some training can protect one other person?

I don't know about the laws of where you live (I doubt police officers have carte blanche to shoot people who are running away), but that is certainly not the case where I live. Here, when someone tries to escape arrest, police officers are entitled to use " force that is intended or is likely to cause death or grievous bodily harm to a person to be arrested", if the following conditions are all met ( section 25 of the Canadian Criminal Code):

 

(a) the peace officer is proceeding lawfully to arrest, with or without warrant, the person to be arrested;

 

(b) the offence for which the person is to be arrested is one for which that person may be arrested without warrant;

 

© the person to be arrested takes flight to avoid arrest;

 

(d) the peace officer or other person using the force believes on reasonable grounds that the force is necessary for the purpose of protecting the peace officer, the person lawfully assisting the peace officer or any other person from imminent or future death or grievous bodily harm; and

 

(e) the flight cannot be prevented by reasonable means in a less violent manner.

[mur'phon]

Darth333

Err..not sure if you were referring to me or only Corinthian

 

I was referring to corinthian, just using your experience as an example, sorry if I didn't make that clear.

 

Web Rider

Almost every criminal who escapes will repeat, sometimes bolder and more violently. A simple robbery could be a build up to a bigger one, where people are home, when the criminal has a gun, and he could kill or rape whoever is there. Especially if his experience tells him the cops won't get there in time, and nobody will protect those people.

 

But if offenders are so likely to comit crimes when they get out of jail, we really need to do something about how people are punished. Besides, very few burgulars go on to become murderers. If we are going to kill anyone who might become a murderer, we might as well start shooting husbands of cheating wives

[Web Rider]

But if offenders are so likely to comit crimes when they get out of jail' date=' we really need to do something about how people are punished. Besides, very few burgulars go on to become murderers. If we are going to kill anyone who [b']might[/b] become a murderer, we might as well start shooting husbands of cheating wives

 

Perhaps not murderers intentfully. Perhaps they move up to armed robbery, and they get spooked and kill somebody. Whether or not they meant it, they are not a murderer.

But I do agree, we need a bit of a harsher punishment system to prevent institutionalization of petty criminals, and more efforts into rehabilitation of criminals most likly to be reformed.

 

And wouldn't it be better to shoot the wives? I know I hear more threats about "killing" or "maiming the genitals" of men from women regarding a cheating husband than men making such threats about a cheating wife....Or especially if he's the one cheating.

 

"If she ever finds out I'm cheating, I'll kill 'er!" lolwut?

 

I don't know about the laws of where you live, but that is certainly not the case where I live. Here, when someone tries to escape arrest, police officers are entitled to use " force that is intended or is likely to cause death or grievous bodily harm to a person to be arrested", if the following conditions are all met ( section 25 of the Canadian Criminal Code):

Well, I'm in the US. Where LA Police have long prided themselves on shooting first and asking questions later.....and having fancy lawyers to protect them.

[mur'phon]

But I do agree, we need a bit of a harsher punishment system to prevent institutionalization of petty criminals, and more efforts into rehabilitation of criminals most likly to be reformed.

 

Well, at least we agree that something needs to be done. Though we seem to dissagre on what that should be.

 

And wouldn't it be better to shoot the wives?

 

Wouldn't it be best to simply not shoot anyone?

 

Well, I'm in the US. Where LA Police have long prided themselves on shooting first and asking questions later.....and having fancy lawyers to protect them.

 

Different rules in different places, where I live most cops don't bear arms

[Darth Xander]

Deadly force wouldn't be nessecary If everyone just got along!