Why "warning shots" are a no-go

forrestinmathews · #51 06-10-2017, 10:22 PM

I'm just telling you how the guy figured out that he could make that shot. He made the shot based on a pattern of repeated behavior where he believed the gun would be stationary at that point for a period of time sufficient to strike it with a bullet. I'm not saying I can do it and especially not that you and your rifle can do it. I'm not say that it has anything to do with warning shots and concealed carry. Just how the guy made the shot.
Now to ruffle feathers for fun...the .30-30 is a terrible cartridge...or was it a .35? ��

Rastoff · #52 06-11-2017, 11:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Walkingwolf

I am sorry, but I think I clearly saw the word sniper. As in using a rifle designed for precision shooting. Sheeeesh.

Relax, I was just having some fun. Just like the commentator on the video.

Warren Sear · #53 06-11-2017, 03:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by forrestinmathews

Warning shots are a liability. Not all self defense involves a bad guy. Sometimes it is an animal. Not all animals understand gunfire to be a bad thing. Do you really want to have one less round available to deal with a problem? If you're considering warning shots you have not committed to killing your opponent. Get a stick or a shovel they are more versatile. They don't make noises which cause people who want explanations to appear after the fact.

You should not be committed to "killing your opponent". Whisky Tango Foxtrot Over? You had best leave your gun in a locker until you understand this.

Warren Sear · #54 06-11-2017, 03:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kanewpadle

Another member here fired a warning shot during a dog attack. I gave him a hard time and others did as well.

But now having experienced the same, I can't say that I too thought about doing the same.

A few years ago I arrived home from the shooting range. I sat down to lunch and a few minutes later I heard a lot of screaming outside. I stood up and looked out the window and saw two dogs fighting. Several people were there trying to break up the fight.

Dog #1 was the attacker. Dog #2 was on a leash being walked by it's owner. In a matter a seconds dog #1 grabbed #2 by the throat and would not let go. I put my house slippers on and went out the front door. On the way out I grabbed a baton style stun gun.

As I ran the 50 or so yards I saw the owner of dog #2 hit dog #1 on top of the head with his fist. Dog #2 let go and bit the owner on the upper arm which resulted in a wound that was bleeding profusely. Dog #1 then resumed his attack on dog #2 by grabbing by the throat again.

As I closed in a turned the stun gun on. When I got close enough I put the stun gun on dog #1 rear end and pushed the button. The dog jumped straight up about 6 feet and then ran off. He ran about 40 yards and immediately turned around and came back towards us.

I was still armed after returning from the range. For a brief second I considered drawing and shooting the dog. I had a good clear backstop. Everyone was behind me. I decided against it because the dogs owner was there as well as her three little girls all under the age of 7. The owners of the attacking dog tried to separate the dogs earlier but at 5' 2" and a hundred pounds, she was unsuccessful.

As the dog closed the distance I pushed the button on the stun gun to deter him. Nothing. The batteries were gone. So I drew my gun and dropped to a knee. The dog sensed that things may no longer be in his favor and stopped.

I heard two sirens. One ambulance and the second cops. I put my gun away and let them handle things. Nobody mentioned my gun. I then became a witness.

Of all thing the owner of dog #1 got a TICKET! The dog was allowed to remain at home. A week later the same dog attacked a woman walking her dog and was severely mauled and her dog killed. Dog #1 was euthanized.

If I didn't have the stun gun, I may well have fired a warning shot into the grass instead of trying to shoot a dog that was running towards me and hoping that hit it with one or more rounds.

Where two legged attackers are involved, no, I believe they are a liability. But animals that are hell bent on attacking are very difficult to deter and either don't understand verbal commands or just ignore them altogether.

So, In the same situation, yes I may fire a warning shot. Am I wrong? Maybe.

Sorry for the long story and the dog #1 and 2 bit. I don't want to state the breed of dogs to start another argument.

Ten bucks says they were pit bulls.

Muss Muggins · #55 06-11-2017, 04:12 PM

I guess I don't understand the mindset of those who carry a pistol because they would without hesitation shoot a human being who presented a threat to them, but would clearly hesitate to shoot a charging mindless mass of teeth and fury without the capacity to understand "Stop, or I'll shoot . . . "

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kanewpadle

Another member here fired a warning shot during a dog attack. I gave him a hard time and others did as well.

But now having experienced the same, I can't say that I too thought about doing the same.

A few years ago I arrived home from the shooting range. I sat down to lunch and a few minutes later I heard a lot of screaming outside. I stood up and looked out the window and saw two dogs fighting. Several people were there trying to break up the fight.

Dog #1 was the attacker. Dog #2 was on a leash being walked by it's owner. In a matter a seconds dog #1 grabbed #2 by the throat and would not let go. I put my house slippers on and went out the front door. On the way out I grabbed a baton style stun gun.

As I ran the 50 or so yards I saw the owner of dog #2 hit dog #1 on top of the head with his fist. Dog #2 let go and bit the owner on the upper arm which resulted in a wound that was bleeding profusely. Dog #1 then resumed his attack on dog #2 by grabbing by the throat again.

As I closed in a turned the stun gun on. When I got close enough I put the stun gun on dog #1 rear end and pushed the button. The dog jumped straight up about 6 feet and then ran off. He ran about 40 yards and immediately turned around and came back towards us.

I was still armed after returning from the range. For a brief second I considered drawing and shooting the dog. I had a good clear backstop. Everyone was behind me. I decided against it because the dogs owner was there as well as her three little girls all under the age of 7. The owners of the attacking dog tried to separate the dogs earlier but at 5' 2" and a hundred pounds, she was unsuccessful.

As the dog closed the distance I pushed the button on the stun gun to deter him. Nothing. The batteries were gone. So I drew my gun and dropped to a knee. The dog sensed that things may no longer be in his favor and stopped.

I heard two sirens. One ambulance and the second cops. I put my gun away and let them handle things. Nobody mentioned my gun. I then became a witness.

Of all thing the owner of dog #1 got a TICKET! The dog was allowed to remain at home. A week later the same dog attacked a woman walking her dog and was severely mauled and her dog killed. Dog #1 was euthanized.

If I didn't have the stun gun, I may well have fired a warning shot into the grass instead of trying to shoot a dog that was running towards me and hoping that hit it with one or more rounds.

Where two legged attackers are involved, no, I believe they are a liability. But animals that are hell bent on attacking are very difficult to deter and either don't understand verbal commands or just ignore them altogether.

So, In the same situation, yes I may fire a warning shot. Am I wrong? Maybe.

Sorry for the long story and the dog #1 and 2 bit. I don't want to state the breed of dogs to start another argument.

Walkingwolf · #56 06-11-2017, 04:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Muss Muggins

I guess I don't understand the mindset of those who carry a pistol because they would without hesitation shoot a human being who presented a threat to them, but would clearly hesitate to shoot a charging mindless mass of teeth and fury without the capacity to understand "Stop, or I'll shoot . . . "

Well some dogs are very gun shy, we had to give away hunting dogs for that reason. I have a boat horn mounted on my bicycle after a dog attack. I found I could not get to my gun without crashing. Then the dog was almost on top of me, it was the horn blast from a driver, and him trying to run over the dog that made the dog bolt.

Not saying I would not shoot a dog, because I have about 10 years ago. A charging pit bull on my own property.

ChattanoogaPhil · #57 06-11-2017, 06:57 PM

Hey guys, let's not go down the pit bull path here. Someone will post that there is no such thing as a pit bull. Someone else will come along an agree with them, then say pit bulls get a bad rap. Then I'll think to myself if there is no such thing as a pit bull how can they get a bad rap... then my head will explode.

Moving along...

forrestinmathews · #58 06-11-2017, 07:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Warren Sear

You should not be committed to "killing your opponent". Whisky Tango Foxtrot Over? You had best leave your gun in a locker until you understand this.

When I align the sights on concentrations of vital organs and press the trigger, I am using deadly force. The possibility exists for the deadly force to make the opponent very dead, ergo when I am committed to using deadly force on an adversary, I am therefore also committed to killing them. I'm using the most effective ballistic technology available and directing it with a practiced and honed precision. Their death is not the stated goal of the exercise, but it is a distinct and regrettable possibility. It is unfortunate that you have mistaken the meaning of my previous post.

Muss Muggins · #59 06-11-2017, 08:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Walkingwolf

Well some dogs are very gun shy,

Trouble is, you, as the potential bite victim, don't know which dogs those are . . .

Kanewpadle · #60 06-11-2017, 08:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Muss Muggins

I guess I don't understand the mindset of those who carry a pistol because they would without hesitation shoot a human being who presented a threat to them, but would clearly hesitate to shoot a charging mindless mass of teeth and fury without the capacity to understand "Stop, or I'll shoot . . . "

Like you cops like to say "you weren't there".

If you read closely, the dog broke off the attack. So........... That must mean that he hadn't crossed the point of no return.

You don't understand because you're a cop. You're used to such things. Us "regular folk" aren't.

Walkingwolf · #61 06-11-2017, 08:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Muss Muggins

Trouble is, you, as the potential bite victim, don't know which dogs those are . . .

I agree, I would never use a warning shot to ward off an attack. I have used pepper spray, and the boat horn when the dogs were aggressive but not full out charge.

Warren Sear · #62 06-11-2017, 10:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by forrestinmathews

When I align the sights on concentrations of vital organs and press the trigger, I am using deadly force. The possibility exists for the deadly force to make the opponent very dead, ergo when I am committed to using deadly force on an adversary, I am therefore also committed to killing them. I'm using the most effective ballistic technology available and directing it with a practiced and honed precision. Their death is not the stated goal of the exercise, but it is a distinct and regrettable possibility. It is unfortunate that you have mistaken the meaning of my previous post.

Your post was perfectly clear and I understood what you wrote. You were smart to change your position in this post.

Wise_A · #63 06-12-2017, 04:24 AM

He didn't change anything, it's just a semantic argument at this point, and thus isn't even particularly entertaining to popcorn over.

His reasoning is valid, however. A great many people carry with the idea that a gun is a talisman that Bad People are afraid of. The mistake is that Bad People don't think like law-abiding folk. Some are predatory, some aren't much afraid of anything, some are crazy, and some are stupid.

This is why you hear about people getting their guns taken off them, or being shot by an attacker they had at gunpoint. They thought that having a gun gave them control and protection, when in fact, it's the gun-carrier's preparedness and mindset that gives the weapon its defensive power.

Some people think, "Well, the chance of needing to defend myself is very low, but I still want to have a gun, so I'll carry one." Their reasoning--and the carry decisions they make based on it--is driven by the idea that they will not have to use their handgun. Ever since I realized people had that mindset, and started thinking about that position, the more bizarre it seems to me. I've heard it used to justify all manner of insane compromises--pistols carried in inaccessible ultra-deep-cover positions for no particular reason, empty chambers, comfortable holsters that can't be reliably drawn from, cheap and poorly-made gear...you name it. I've even heard some "instructors" use that logic to make poor recommendations, including all four items on the above list.

What they should be thinking is, "The world isn't dangerous, but it is unpredictable. Bad things and bad people can happen, and safety is not guaranteed. Every time I put my gun on, I know that today may be the day I have to use it to take a life to save my own." And then letting decisions flow from there. Yes, it's a more uncompromising position, but it's nothing one couldn't live with.

The other thing that happens is that people aren't comfortable with the idea of using deadly force. I think there are a lot more people that feel that way, than the number that would admit to it. They unnecessarily feel ashamed because there exists a very vocal segment of the shooting community that acts as if we should all feel just fine about shooting somebody, and you're less of a man or woman if you don't. In reality it's normal to feel trepidation at the prospect of ending a human life. However, it's also an absolute requirement that the individual resolves that ethical dilemma before they carry a gun.

forrestinmathews · #64 06-12-2017, 06:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Warren Sear

Your post was perfectly clear and I understood what you wrote. You were smart to change your position in this post.

I changed nothing. You're deceiving yourself if you believe otherwise. A commitment to use deadly force is a commitment to kill another person.

AimHigher · #65 06-12-2017, 11:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by robertrwalsh

Warning shots are, by definition, the discharge of a firearm when no IMMEDIATE danger exists. These shots also have the bad habit of doing property damage or injuring or killing people. In addition, many times (I suspect) a person will be bothered by the fact that they shot someone and then say, after the fact, "I fired a warning shot. I didn't mean to hit him." That, of course, is exactly the WRONG thing to say, even if it is true. As noted above a few posts there are, on rare occasion, instances when a warning shot can be fired safely and when it MAY be appropriate to do so. Those instances are few and far between.

"When no immediate danger exists"? Who says that's the definition of a "Warning Shot"? I can envision any number of scenarios whereas an immediate danger exists and the intended victim might choose to fire a warning shot first, in lieu of a lethal shot. One example that comes to mind, would be a mob-violence attack by juveniles using sticks, rocks and chains. One warning shot into the ground puts an immediate end to the violence and saves lives and injury to the victims. A teenager in my house brandishing a large knife and advancing on me. I'll fire a round into the wood floor of my house to give the young man a chance drop the knife and/or flee. If after the warning shot, my attacker seemed still intent on slashing me with his knife and I then was forced to shoot the young person, I would sleep much better and the DA would (should) take into account that I had gone to extremes to avoid the shooting. I could also say that I was in fear of my life specifically because the attacker did not fear my firearm and was not deterred by the fired shot.

Kanewpadle · #66 06-12-2017, 11:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AimHigher

"When no immediate danger exists"? Who says that's the definition of a "Warning Shot"? I can envision any number of scenarios whereas an immediate danger exists and the intended victim might choose to fire a warning shot first, in lieu of a lethal shot. One example that comes to mind, would be a mob-violence attack by juveniles using sticks, rocks and chains. One warning shot into the ground puts an immediate end to the violence and saves lives and injury to the victims. A teenager in my house brandishing a large knife and advancing on me. I'll fire a round into the wood floor of my house to give the young man a chance drop the knife and/or flee. If after the warning shot, my attacker seemed still intent on slashing me with his knife and I then was forced to shoot the young person, I would sleep much better and the DA would (should) take into account that I had gone to extremes to avoid the shooting. I could also say that I was in fear of my life specifically because the attacker did not fear my firearm and was not deterred by the fired shot.

Got to be the must misguided thinking I ever ran across. What do you not understand about "assault with a deadly weapon"? Or are you just trolling?

Good luck. Cause if you ever need to defend yourself you're going to need it.

forrestinmathews · #67 06-12-2017, 11:38 PM

Thar be trolls....

Rustyt1953 · #68 06-13-2017, 12:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AimHigher

One warning shot into the ground puts an immediate end to the violence and saves lives and injury to the victims

Do you actually believe that?

InsideWaist · #69 06-13-2017, 12:16 AM

I'm not siding with @AimHigher, but my interpretation of what he is trying to say is that he seems to want to be able to give his attacker(s) "one last chance" before he kills him/her/them/it. However, when the SHTF, you may not have the luxury of giving last chances and that could cost you your life.

Rastoff · #70 06-13-2017, 12:19 AM

If you believe your life is in danger, you don't have time to give "one last chance" before defending yourself. If you have time to do that, your life wasn't in danger. If your life wasn't in danger, why was the gun out?

Rustyt1953 · #71 06-13-2017, 12:22 AM

I am disabled. If teenagers are coming at me with clubs or knives, I consider those to be deadly weapons and I'm in no shape to physically stop them so I'm dropping them.

I'll struggle with my conscience afterwards.

Kanewpadle · #72 06-13-2017, 12:39 AM

IMO, this is how it's done. Except I would not have let the young punk go. No warning shots. Just common sense.

AimHigher · #73 06-13-2017, 01:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kanewpadle

Got to be the must misguided thinking I ever ran across. What do you not understand about "assault with a deadly weapon"? Or are you just trolling?

Good luck. Cause if you ever need to defend yourself you're going to need it.

Maybe you should re-read my post (and not read-into it). And I can assure you that I am fully aware of what constitutes ADW with a firearm. And since you have absolutely no idea of what my experience and training has been in this area, your above comment highlighted in red is rather presumptuous - bordering on absurd. In my view, your comments regarding my post show that you have little flexibility in these matters. Perhaps everything with you is black or white with little grey area. You sir, may be the one who needs good luck - and perhaps a good lawyer.

AimHigher · #74 06-13-2017, 01:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rastoff

If you believe your life is in danger, you don't have time to give "one last chance" before defending yourself. If you have time to do that, your life wasn't in danger. If your life wasn't in danger, why was the gun out?

How do you know this? Sometimes this would be true. Other times not true. There is no blanket rule of response for all situations one could potentially encounter. I choose not to pre-program myself to shoot and kill someone just because it wold be legal to do so - especially a young, troubled juvenile. That's my prerogative. IMO, you seem to have a myopic view of self defense encounters. It's not always about killing someone. It's about coming out alive and unharmed.

AimHigher · #75 06-13-2017, 01:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by InsideWaist

I'm not siding with @AimHigher, but my interpretation of what he is trying to say is that he seems to want to be able to give his attacker(s) "one last chance" before he kills him/her/them/it. However, when the SHTF, you may not have the luxury of giving last chances and that could cost you your life.

Are you actually schooling me on "SHTF"? Wow!

rwsmith · #76 06-13-2017, 01:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Protected One

While I'm in agreement that *generally* warning shots are a no go, I am hesitant to be dogmatic and say "always" a no go, because for every RULE there seems to always arise an exception.

I recall reading a story (perhaps here on the forum) of a man whose wife was out for a walk and came under attack by a neighbors dog. He heard her screaming, and as he ran out of the house - gun in hand, he realized they were too far away for a pistol shot, so as he ran toward them he fired a shot into the ground (near him, not them) hoping the noise would scare the dog off, or at least maybe draw his attention away from the wife.

Perhaps you wouldn't call that a "warning shot", but it is in essence the same, and I see no harm in the action that he took, given the situation.

I consider that trying to stop an active attack more than a 'warning shot', which is ok in my book. The best he could do under the situation because he was very likely to hit the person being attacked by the dog.

InsideWaist · #77 06-13-2017, 01:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AimHigher

Obviously.

Did we miss your reply to @Rustyt1953 (about you believing something)?

AimHigher · #78 06-13-2017, 02:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rustyt1953

Do you actually believe that?

Under the circumstances I described in the scenario in my post, yes. Do you actually think that juveniles with sticks are going to sick around when their opponent produces a gun and is busting caps? If you think that, think again.

AimHigher · #79 06-13-2017, 02:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Muss Muggins

I guess I don't understand the mindset of those who carry a pistol because they would without hesitation shoot a human being who presented a threat to them, but would clearly hesitate to shoot a charging mindless mass of teeth and fury without the capacity to understand "Stop, or I'll shoot . . . "

Discharging a firearm in close proximity to an attacking dog can change the dog's mindset - instantly. If it doesn't work, there's still rounds remaining. It's not always a kill or be killed scenario.

AimHigher · #80 06-13-2017, 02:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Warren Sear

You should not be committed to "killing your opponent". Whisky Tango Foxtrot Over? You had best leave your gun in a locker until you understand this.

The voice of reason, balance and experience. Seemingly a somewhat rare commodity within parts of this thread.

InsideWaist · #81 06-13-2017, 02:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AimHigher

Are you actually schooling me on "SHTF"? Wow!

Evidently.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

forrestinmathews · #82 06-13-2017, 08:31 AM

Apparently someone these folks want to play with their attackers and believe they have the skill set and nine lives to do it. Tickle them first while you're at it. As we aren't there with them, we should let me them have their fun. It's just a stupid thread anyhow. Hardly worth such epic keyboard kommando kombat. Besides the idpa and airport police have responded and the situation is in hand now.

AimHigher · #83 06-13-2017, 06:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by InsideWaist

Evidently.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

According to you. Seriously, you must be kidding yourself. You have absolutely zero knowledge of me or my background, training and experience. But I suppose your NRA membership makes you some sort of authority? Marvelous . . .

Rastoff · #84 06-13-2017, 09:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AimHigher

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rastoff

If you believe your life is in danger, you don't have time to give "one last chance" before defending yourself. If you have time to do that, your life wasn't in danger. If your life wasn't in danger, why was the gun out?

How do you know this?

I've included my first post because you didn't read it all the way through. Look at the second and third sentences again. They explain how I know this.

InsideWaist · #85 06-13-2017, 09:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AimHigher

According to you.

By the way, I was just attempting to explain to some folks here my interpretation of what you were trying to say (about last chance to juveniles). There is a member that even called you a troll, and yet you come down on me. For what? Just because I said you may not have a lot time in a self-defense situation? Wow. If that offends you, then you either lack self-confidence, are closed-minded, watch a lot of movies, or are just an idiot. Maybe you're just afraid to kill someone? That's fine, but don't take your anger out on other forum members.

Quote:

Originally Posted by AimHigher

Seriously, you must be kidding yourself.

You have absolutely no idea who I am, my credentials, my experience, nor my background.

If you don't think you can (or should) learn from others here (or anywhere, for that matter) then you are fool. I am very leery of people that believe they "know-it-all". We are all here to learn and hopefully pass on our knowledge from here—and from life—to others.

ChattanoogaPhil · #86 06-14-2017, 10:42 AM

That's enough.