It's People AND Guns that kill people

OK, I want to address a couple of your points (please correct me if I’m wrong on this):

If you shoot someone in the leg you can sever an artery, then the guy will have blood pissing out of the wound as fast as his heart can pump it.

If you fire “warning shot” in a residential setting like a kitchen, the bullet can ricochet off a hard surface and strike you or the intruder.

**

We could all come up with all sorts of plausable scenarios that involve shooting someone when it wasn’t absolutely necessary. I could come up with all sorts of plasuable scenariors where shooting someone was necessary. To what end?

In the situation described in the OP how long do I have to process the hard evidence to determine whether or not I’m in immediate danger? Let’s take another look at your scenario. I’m awakened from deep sleep by strange noises coming from another room. I grab my pistol and head towards the area where the strange sounds are coming from. Let’s remember that in your OP I had the choice between a gun and a golf club.

Suddenly a shadowy figure is in my face and I think he has a knife. Per your OP he’s gotta be pretty close since I have the option of swinging at him with my imaginary golf clubs. So there I am. It is dark, there’s a masked man within 10 feet of me, I think he has a knilfe in his hand, and I’m scared. Please tell me, in this situation how long should I take to be absolutely sure he isn’t going to stab me?

I can’t peer into the soul of other human beings. This means I can’t always be absolutely sure that they really want to hurt me. Is the guy waving a gun in my face really going to leave me unharmed if I comply with his wishes? Beats me. I have to take the information I have at that moment and make a decision. It might be nice for us to say what we’d do while we’re sitting comfortably in our safe homes free from danger or stress. It is quite another thing to make that decision within a few seconds while you’re under considerable stress.

Marc

So… in addition to making a weapon choice and stifling the tremendous adrenaline surge, I’m supposed to See into the Future and determine that this kid in my house is just some mixed-up future insurance agent or something? Goddamn modern life is hard.

No, you’re not wrong, but it does depend on where in the leg you shoot them. Chances of intruder survival with proper first aid are still better than the golf club. You may have missed my point, I would try to kill someone with a golf club 100% percent of the time. In the case of the golf club their survival is pure luck.

Ok, I only have one thing to say to this samarm. I am not, nor are any of the gun owners I know, Yosimite Sam. :wink:

I only checked the first two…

A lot of places charge people when there is a death from any cause, fists, knife, gun … and then acquit them. never as big a head line ya know… Media = agenda …? Nah…

And IMO, it is not a tragedy when a 14 year old with a weapon or anything in his hand who does not immediately surrender or run when confronted by occupants gets killed.

The under age kids are usually given the killing jobs now days because they will not be tried as an adult. The kids know this and GLADLY do it for the GANG.

Any kid who is into breaking and entering where there is any possibility of occupation is not an innocent child who will grow up to be fine upstanding citizen.

YMMV

**

I appreciate that you went through the effort to dig up the article. I just don’t think it is much of an authority. The cite you gave really didn’t say anything valuable about the legality of using deadly force on a home intruder.

**

You really want to use this as a cite?

It could, but I was assuming that since the kid ran away after illegally entering your house, he was probably not going to report you for assault. If you kill him, though, the cops are definitely gonna be involved.

[/quote]
**

Even if he ran away I’d certainly call the police. Perhaps they’ll be able to capture him on the street or maybe they can pick him up at the hospital when he gets the split in his skull taken care of. Remember, I hit him hard enough with the club to knock him down. I’m sure I hurt him quite a bit.

**

Of course not, I didn’t say it was safe to assume anything. In varies from state to state.

Marc

Okay, you’ve set up a nice strawman there…

Fact is, the shot will probably miss. Even advanced shooters will miss around 75% of the time, even under 5 feet, in a life-threatening situation. Low light conditions will reduce this even further. And the person shooting in this example is not an advanced shooter, who would be trained to make sure of his target, and will likely keep a flashlight with his gun.

And even if the shooter does hit the subject, the subject’s not automatically dead. Gunshots are remarkably survivable. The biggest danger is bloodloss, which can be prevented with immeadiate medical care. Keep in mind, bullets are really frickin’ small, and they have to hit certain things to do the kind of damage you are just assuming. In all likelihood, that ain’t gonna happen.

As for hitting the kid in the head with a golf club…

In m states, hitting someone in the head with a club is still deadly force. Funny thing is, at least in my state, its less justified deadly force than shooting someone. Frankly, swinging a club is a short range, time-consuming deal (at least in a defense scenario). If you can do it, and not be shot or stabbed or tackled or whatever, you probably weren’t in the kind of danger that justified deadly force.

The reason its considered deadly force is because, well, it is. A golf club, swung two-handed, generates a lot of energy. More than a bullet, actually. It can easily split open a skull, break a neck, damage a brain, pop out an eye…you get the idea. While its again probably not going to result in death, serious injury is very possible. Perhaps more so than with a gun, since its easier to hit with a club than a gun.

So, your strawman is assuming the worse outcome with a gun, and the best with a club.

**

If you fire a gun then you are using deadly force. It doesn’t matter if you hit them in the pinky toe, the liver, or the brain pan. If you shot me in the leg I could bleed to death rather quickly.

**

You’re going to shoot an intruder in the legs or give him a warning shot? You must be an excellent shot if you can hit his legs in the dark while you’re under all that stress. Personally I’d just aim for his center of mass so I’d be more likely to hit my target.

**

As a gun owner I’ve come to a different conclusion. I am far more likely to kill someone instantly with a pistol then I am with any melee weapon. If someone were going to attack me I’d rather they used a golf club then a pistol. Don’t you think a bullet is more likely to penetrate my vital organs then a blow from a golf club?

Marc

Erm, “In m states” should read “In my state”…

Also, along with MGibson’s assertions, a responsible gun owner would know under what circumstances they can use a weapon in their state.

On the intruder, the ‘reasonable fear of death’ does not include them being armed. You can shoot an intruder who is simply larger/ more dangerous physically than you and still be under that. This is usually a cause for women, but it can apply to men as well.

You can also shoot an intruder and think they have a weapon. More than one jealous husband in my county has walked on that, probably at the advice of their lawyer. This really comes down to what the jury believes and how good a lawyer you get.

-Both are true, but wrong.

A) You do NOT, I repeat, NOT “shoot to wound”. Doing so is prima facie evidence you did not feel your life was truly in mortal danger. Courts have ruled against such actions many times.

If you get into a situation where you need to draw and fire your weapon, you shoot to stop. IE, if you fire once, and the perp drops his knife and runs screaming into the night, you do NOT shoot him in the back, or chase him down and “finish him off”.

Or if you cap him once and he falls over but is still obviously alive, moaning, writhing in pain, etc, to fire again would almost definitely move from “self defence” to “murder”.

B) Similarly, you do not fire a “warning shot”. Not only is the unaimed bullet itself dangerous- fire into the air and it has to come down, or fire off to the side and the bullet could pass though to the next house, fire downward and the bullet could ricochet, etcetra- but again, the action is evidence you did not feel your life was truly in danger when you drew your weapon and fired.

You do do NOT draw your weapon- or “flash” it to the perp to intimidate him- unless you truly feel you or a defenseless third party are in mortal danger, and if you draw it and are forced to fire it, you shoot for the perp’s center of mass, and shoot until he/she/it stops advancing or attacking and no more.

You should then immediately call the police and tell them there’s been a shooting. You were attacked, shots were fired, the bad guy is down, send a car, an ambulance, a couple of paramedics and maybe a bucket 'cause you’re probably gonna throw up.

As to the OP, guns are not Magic Implements Of Certain Death. I know of one person who was killed when struck with a golf ball, and I know of two individuals, one of whom I’ve met, who were shot- one, three times- and survived with little more than a scar to show for it.

I know the legal concept of deadly force, I meant in terms of likelyhood of producing death.

Actually I am a very good shot, and not highly affected by stress. ::blows own horn:: I was trained by some of the finest firearms instructors in the world under all manner of stressful conditions.

Yes, in the case of the intruder having a gun or a golf club they are more likely to kill you with the gun, if they are trying to kill you.

To be more to the point with the golf club: I would hit someone as hard as I could in the head. If I actually hit them, this has a good likelyhood of producing death. The ‘if’ in that sentence is the other reason I choose the pistol.

Hadn’t thought about it that way, Doc Nickel, thank you. The burglars in my neighborhood may not be the better for it, but thank you.

Although I do think your post goes more into legal afterthought then the situation might produce at the time.

So you toured with 50-Cent? Cool.

To me, this has becime a silly debate. I live in Georgia, I’ll take my chance with the jury.

Also, to MGibson, there are a lot of factors from the OP that we’re filling in with our own brains, so a lot of disagreement can arise.

If I live in the woods, the chances of a warning shot harming someone can be significantly less than if I live in a close residential neighborhood, so this comes down to how well you know your own house, and ect.

Also, the type of pistol isn’t specified (And I’m actually presuming it’s a pistol and not, say, a shotgun.). The difference between a .44 magnum and a .22 would be a factor. A .44 can tear someone’s leg completely apart.

The exact level of darkness isn’t specified, but I’m presuming if you can see well enough to think someone has a knife, you can see their legs. I’d shoot for what I can see.

The scenario may be altered in my mind by the foreknowledge that it’s a 14 year old, which I wouldn’t have.

Also, ‘morning after’ legalities probably won’t change your mind if this actually happens. If your level of fear is high enough to shoot to kill, you probably will even if you’ll go to jail the next day for it. If you feel a tinge of half-heartedness(And as I said it might not be in me if it weren’t for the foreknowledge.) you may shoot someone in the leg.

If someone had broken into my home and was armed with a knife to my knowledge, I might shoot for the legs. ‘Morning after’ legalities aside, I might still do it.

This also presumes they are standing still(Or a non-threatening movement). If they are moving towards me, I would probably go for the center of mass. If it was too dark to discern anything but the figure, aside from identifying that I do indeed know they are there, I would probably shoot for the center of mass. If I think they may have a gun, I would probably shoot for the center of mass.

I would also, from the get go, assume that they intend to do me or my family some sort of bodily harm, because at my house you can tell when we’re home. I’m in the ‘bible belt’, so anyone breaking into a home when they know people are home can usually assume a firearm is also present and the owner will use it. In fact, I don’t know anybody who doesn’t own a gun. I know this is not the case in many areas.

The OP is sort of General Purpose.

A few things that should be remembered.

  1. A gun is, ALWAYS a last resort, even for trained police officers.

  2. Too few people who own guns are trained to use them in bright daylight in controlled conditions, much less in high-stress and low light conditions.

  3. Most states allow you to kill if you are protecting your life, or the life of another, they do not allow you to kill to protect your TV.

  4. The golf club idea is stupid. I’d like to think of a better word, but that just suits the idea.
    4a. First, the club is still a deadly weapon should you fatally injure the moron intruder.
    4b. Second, you have to get far too close, close enough for the intruder to grab the club, or you, and injure you, putting your family at risk.
    4c. Finally, the intruder may be armed with a gun, but most simple burglars aren’t, because the law, on the whole, goes lighter on theives than it does on murderers, or burglars with intent, the crooks know this, they stay generally unarmed, personally, I’m not willing to ask.

  5. Actually, gunshots are quite survivable indeed. Take for instance, the CDC’s data that states in 1997, 32,436 deaths resulted from firearm-related injuries while there were 64,207 non-fatal firearm injuries, this is a nearly 50% survival rate, these are better odds than you can get in your car on the way to work every morning. See the whole thing here.

  6. Of those who died in 1997, 13,677 were homocides and 17,767 were suicides, more people are killing themselves than are being killed by others.

  7. MGibson, no I don’t think a bullet is more likely to penetrate a vital organ than a golf club, unless you don’t consider your brain a vital organ.

  8. Kitfox, you’re right about the size of bullets, however… there is something called tissue expansion, which means that if a bullet strikes you, the energy it carries with it is displaced in your body causing, a temporary cavity (think a entry shaped like this <) making the bullet far more dangerous to surrounding tissue.

  9. Doc, you’re right on. Never shoot to wound, always shoot to kill, it adds much credibility to the “fear for my life” angle.

  10. Anyone who owns a firearm for self-defense should do the following…

a. Know the rules of their home state front to back regarding firearms and their uses in home defense.

b. Take a firearms safety course, and then an advanced shooting course.

c. Use frangible ammunition or “safety slugs” in hand guns, or, use shotguns, especially in crowded residential areas.

d. Get a home alarm, this will reduce the chances of your particular abode being broken into by at least 40 percent (or so my insurance lady tells me).

e. Train on your weapon once per month, use that weapon only for home defense, and for the love of God, if you have kids in your house, train them about the weapon, by doing so, you demystify the weapon, and keep a trigger lock on it.

In as far as my opinion goes, I’ll say only this…

  1. If someone breaks into my home, they had better be prepared to die there.

  2. If they didn’t have a weapon when they came in, they would as their body was being carried out.

  3. I don’t care about the age of the intruder, I don’t care what ‘could have been’ in the life of the misfit who chose to enter my house without my permission, and I don’t care if his parents will miss him.

  4. A rule to always live by regarding firearms
    “Never aim at anything you do not intend to shoot, never shoot at anything, you do not intend to kill”

Kimstu imo your cites and sites are beyond disingenuous.

Johnny Rodriguez acquitted
http://www.oakridger.com/stories/101499/stt_1014990033.html

Kenny Der acquitted
http://www.kennyder.org

According to the story about the collage student there was reasonable cause for the police to think it wasn’t a clean
self-defense shooting, ie the shooter knew his assailant and the witness stories didn’t match.

The fourth? She shot a cop fer god sakes! That changes every thing.

And as for the “Journal of Non-lethal Combative” :rolleyes:

In my state the philosophy behind the law is that breaking into someone’s home is all the intent of aggression needed to justify lethal force. Hell here the law says you don’t even have to take an ass kicken

Example:

A few years ago I ccl holder was in a traffic altercation. His assailant got out of his vehicle walked back to our hero’s vehicle a grabbed him through his open window and proceeded to pummel him while he sat in his car. A double tap later and the assailant lay dying in the street. The shooter was no-billed by a Dallas country grand jury and walked away a free man

In my home your 14 year old “kid” would be stopped. Most probably by my having killed him.

That should be: A ccl holder:smack:

It strikes me that the OP’s use of a 14 year old boy as the “surprise assailant” is designed to provoke an emotional response. And any counter situations are being rejected if they don’t result in the emotional event of a 14 year old dying.

If it’s a 40 year old guy with a knife in your house, it’s okay, but if it’s a 14 year old, well… you just shot a cute little kid, you monster! ?

In any case, we can make up arbitrary scenarios until the cows come home. For every ‘you killed a 14 year old/armed toddler/80 year old grandma/the easter bunny!’ scenario you can arbitrarily create, I can create a ‘you got stabbed in the face while trying to sing cumbaya to soothe your assailant’s inner child’ scenario.

It doesn’t prove anything, and it just seems to be an appeal to emotion - which isn’t a basis for a rational view.

Oh, and ironically, I should note that my defense plan, in the exceedingly unlikely event that my apartment is invaded, is to probably use a gun as a club. My rifles are too powerful to use in an apartment, for risk of my neighbors, but my mauser, with it’s nice, strong teak wood and steel butt plate makes an excellent bludgeoning platform.