Chicks With Guns
09-29-2011, 08:42 PM
#41
With The Resistance
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Position: Burning the Agitprop of the Apparat
Posts: 6,191
Just a few comments. I have to agree with Airhoss on this one, some gurus have all the answers and some gurus have the correct answers.
Those of us that have been to more than a few of uncle sugar's trade schools and have carried a weapon for a living tend to have a view that is a little different from some.
"Weapon handling, marksmanship and mindset" The mindset is the most important.
The home defense situation is the one where you have the most control, windows and doors can be hardened and you can control many other factors.
Outside it gets more complicated, but the goal is the same, control your environment to the maximum extent possible.
This guy has some good ideas geared to the non-pro, scroll down to "Standing on the X" and continue:http://xavierthoughts.blogspot.com/
Those of us that have been to more than a few of uncle sugar's trade schools and have carried a weapon for a living tend to have a view that is a little different from some.
"Weapon handling, marksmanship and mindset" The mindset is the most important.
The home defense situation is the one where you have the most control, windows and doors can be hardened and you can control many other factors.
Outside it gets more complicated, but the goal is the same, control your environment to the maximum extent possible.
This guy has some good ideas geared to the non-pro, scroll down to "Standing on the X" and continue:http://xavierthoughts.blogspot.com/
09-29-2011, 10:23 PM
#42
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: Sleeping in the black swan’s nest.
Posts: 5,725
Cub,
My apologies to you regarding my poor debating skills. I was simply trying to induce a reality based scenario or two so that you might broaden your horizons a bit. However please feel free to disregard any and all of what I've said as your vast experience and training in this field has obviously solidly concreted your philosophy and methodology.
One more piece of advice that you can disregard wholesale is this.
YOU are liable and fully legally responsible for every bullet that fires from your weapon. Just make sure you know exactly where your warning shot is going to end up. That could be the one which gets you put away for Man Slaughter. It can also be argued that if you had time to fire that warning shot your life was not in imminent danger. (Case law BTW)
My apologies to you regarding my poor debating skills. I was simply trying to induce a reality based scenario or two so that you might broaden your horizons a bit. However please feel free to disregard any and all of what I've said as your vast experience and training in this field has obviously solidly concreted your philosophy and methodology.
by Ken Hanson, Esq.
One of the first things I point out to concealed carry classes is "I don't need to make any of this stuff up." The real world we live in is so much more bizarre than anything I can make up.
My book, the Ohio Guide to Firearm Laws, is now out in a Fourth Edition. Something I have been writing about for years, in the past and current editions, is the myth of the warning shot.
Particularly with older students, there is a pervasive misconception that firing a warning shot serves some purpose. Prosecutors have a different label for a warning shot, attempted murder. Here is what I write in my current edition:
A SPECIAL NOTE ON BRANDISHING, SHOOTING TO WOUND, WARNING SHOTS AND SIMILAR HALF-MEASURES. Prosecutors have another term for warning shots: attempted felonious assault, improper discharge of a firearm etc. Shooting someone in the leg rather than center mass is similarly misguided and will not evade serious felony charges. Similarly, pulling out a gun just to “defuse the situation” is a legal non-starter. Do not be tempted to do this. If the gun comes out of the holster, the gun owner had better be justified in immediately employing it fully. There is no such thing as a warning shot or shooting to wound. This will be construed as a miss, bad marksmanship and perhaps even attempted murder.
One of the first things I point out to concealed carry classes is "I don't need to make any of this stuff up." The real world we live in is so much more bizarre than anything I can make up.
My book, the Ohio Guide to Firearm Laws, is now out in a Fourth Edition. Something I have been writing about for years, in the past and current editions, is the myth of the warning shot.
Particularly with older students, there is a pervasive misconception that firing a warning shot serves some purpose. Prosecutors have a different label for a warning shot, attempted murder. Here is what I write in my current edition:
A SPECIAL NOTE ON BRANDISHING, SHOOTING TO WOUND, WARNING SHOTS AND SIMILAR HALF-MEASURES. Prosecutors have another term for warning shots: attempted felonious assault, improper discharge of a firearm etc. Shooting someone in the leg rather than center mass is similarly misguided and will not evade serious felony charges. Similarly, pulling out a gun just to “defuse the situation” is a legal non-starter. Do not be tempted to do this. If the gun comes out of the holster, the gun owner had better be justified in immediately employing it fully. There is no such thing as a warning shot or shooting to wound. This will be construed as a miss, bad marksmanship and perhaps even attempted murder.
YOU are liable and fully legally responsible for every bullet that fires from your weapon. Just make sure you know exactly where your warning shot is going to end up. That could be the one which gets you put away for Man Slaughter. It can also be argued that if you had time to fire that warning shot your life was not in imminent danger. (Case law BTW)
09-30-2011, 04:38 PM
#44
Line Holder
Joined APC: Jun 2006
Position: Over 60 and Still Living the Dream
Posts: 122
10-01-2011, 12:43 PM
#46
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2009
Posts: 276
I live in a Castle Doctrine state. Something I have noticed in this whole debate is, and I am against the warning shot, if you are awakened at night and deem it is necessary to shoot (which should happen in a fraction of a second), that first shot could likely leave you initially deaf (short term). You have just given away your location, you will not necessarily be able to hear what is going on with the perp let alone anything else going on in the house. Was he alone? Are there others that you now may not be able to hear their movement? Kids crying, coming into your room to see what happened? Are you of the presence of mind to not shoot now at the first movement you see afterwards, which may be your kids? I will not hesitate to shoot to kill in my home for ANYONE who breaks into my home. They are not supposed to be there in the first place. Too many slick defense attorneys out there to turn the tide on you.
10-01-2011, 01:17 PM
#47
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2008
Position: The Far Side
Posts: 968
Make sure that your bullet is launched toward a non-friendly, and not your sixteen-year old daughter returning home at 0300 (when you maybe didn't know she had gone out in the first place). There tragedies happen all the time. Be certain of your target.
10-02-2011, 10:02 AM
#48
Line Holder
Joined APC: Jun 2008
Posts: 44
+1
I trained at Gunsite, and they taught us:
1. All guns are always loaded.
2. Never let the muzzle cover anything you are not willing to destroy.
3. Keep your finger off the trigger till your sights are on the target.
4. Identify your target, and what is behind it.
A warning shot violates 3 out of 4 of those rules.
I can't speak for other military branches, but the USMC teaches an almost identical doctrine.
I trained at Gunsite, and they taught us:
1. All guns are always loaded.
2. Never let the muzzle cover anything you are not willing to destroy.
3. Keep your finger off the trigger till your sights are on the target.
4. Identify your target, and what is behind it.
A warning shot violates 3 out of 4 of those rules.
I can't speak for other military branches, but the USMC teaches an almost identical doctrine.
10-03-2011, 07:31 AM
#49
Moderator
Joined APC: May 2006
Position: ATP, CFI etc.
Posts: 6,056
For what it's worth, I emailed my CCW instructor and asked him for clarification about this. Here is our exchange. It appears I had it wrong all along. Not sure how it happened but at least it is clarified as far as that is concerned. There is also a possibility that his instruction on this has changed, as the state laws have changed since I took his course (see response).
-----------------------
Hi (CCW Instructor),
I took your CCW class a couple of years ago at your place and I have a question about that. I came away with the impression you support the use of a warning shot when defending against a home invader. I am not sure I have it right since it has been two years, but I wanted to clarify that. Warning shots seem to be controversial among gun owners, and I get varying opinions from various parties. Is a warning shot ever advisable, and if so when? Does it help in the legal aftermath of a shooting situation such as a home invasion? I moved to (another state) a few months ago. I decided to study this a bit and give it some thought. I have not done a lot of concealed carry since the class but I value the right to bear arms and feel a need to understand the subject as best I can.
Thanks for your time.
Sincerely,
(Cubdriver)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Hi (Cubdriver),
I have never taught that a warning shot was a good idea because (as I understand it) it would mean that you did not need to discharge that firearm as a last resort in defense. Depending on a states laws, a person could be charged with brandishing, illegal discharge of a firearm or even wrongful use of deadly force for firing a warning shot. While I could see where a warning shot might have a useful effect in some instances, I believe the legal position generally is to not do so and fire only in defense at the threat and then only until the threat is stopped or neutralized.
Of course, laws for concealed carry as well as home defense vary from state to state, so you'll want to be clear on the laws in your state. These laws have changed dramatically in (my state) over the last few years as well.
Thanks!
(CCW Instructor)
-----------------------
Hi (CCW Instructor),
I took your CCW class a couple of years ago at your place and I have a question about that. I came away with the impression you support the use of a warning shot when defending against a home invader. I am not sure I have it right since it has been two years, but I wanted to clarify that. Warning shots seem to be controversial among gun owners, and I get varying opinions from various parties. Is a warning shot ever advisable, and if so when? Does it help in the legal aftermath of a shooting situation such as a home invasion? I moved to (another state) a few months ago. I decided to study this a bit and give it some thought. I have not done a lot of concealed carry since the class but I value the right to bear arms and feel a need to understand the subject as best I can.
Thanks for your time.
Sincerely,
(Cubdriver)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Hi (Cubdriver),
I have never taught that a warning shot was a good idea because (as I understand it) it would mean that you did not need to discharge that firearm as a last resort in defense. Depending on a states laws, a person could be charged with brandishing, illegal discharge of a firearm or even wrongful use of deadly force for firing a warning shot. While I could see where a warning shot might have a useful effect in some instances, I believe the legal position generally is to not do so and fire only in defense at the threat and then only until the threat is stopped or neutralized.
Of course, laws for concealed carry as well as home defense vary from state to state, so you'll want to be clear on the laws in your state. These laws have changed dramatically in (my state) over the last few years as well.
Thanks!
(CCW Instructor)
10-03-2011, 02:16 PM
#50
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: Sleeping in the black swan’s nest.
Posts: 5,725
Hi (Cubdriver),
I have never taught that a warning shot was a good idea because (as I understand it) it would mean that you did not need to discharge that firearm as a last resort in defense. Depending on a states laws, a person could be charged with brandishing, illegal discharge of a firearm or even wrongful use of deadly force for firing a warning shot. While I could see where a warning shot might have a useful effect in some instances, I believe the legal position generally is to not do so and fire only in defense at the threat and then only until the threat is stopped or neutralized.
Of course, laws for concealed carry as well as home defense vary from state to state, so you'll want to be clear on the laws in your state. These laws have changed dramatically in (my state) over the last few years as well.
Thanks!
(CCW Instructor)
I have never taught that a warning shot was a good idea because (as I understand it) it would mean that you did not need to discharge that firearm as a last resort in defense. Depending on a states laws, a person could be charged with brandishing, illegal discharge of a firearm or even wrongful use of deadly force for firing a warning shot. While I could see where a warning shot might have a useful effect in some instances, I believe the legal position generally is to not do so and fire only in defense at the threat and then only until the threat is stopped or neutralized.
Of course, laws for concealed carry as well as home defense vary from state to state, so you'll want to be clear on the laws in your state. These laws have changed dramatically in (my state) over the last few years as well.
Thanks!
(CCW Instructor)
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
