Quote:
Originally Posted by safearm
This might be hi-jacking the intent of this thread, but I think it deserves an answer. I was a civilian LEO before I went into the military and was trained that I was responsible for every bullet that left my gun. Luckily, in my career as a LEO, I never had to shoot, although I had it in my hand and was prepared to do so on a number of occassions.
When I went into the military, I was always the guy that had left over rounds at the end of an exercise or mission, because I had been trained (very well I might add) to always identify my target before engaging, no "spray and pray."
As as staff/instructor navigator on B-52s, I always taught crews that they had to positively identify the target before they could drop; close enough didn't count.
Based on my experiences, I disagree strongly with the above post. Engage the target, evaluate the reaction, and either cease, or engage again. Shooting extra rounds opens up a world of explaining where you would never want to be. It could be twisted to make it look like you enjoy killing.
If all of this is an academic discussion for a zombie novel, no harm-no foul. But it's not that way in the real world.
|
This is a great response and filled with some great information and experience. I will make a few points though.
There's no inbetween in the event we unfortunately have to use our firearms to protect ourselves. You either have the right to kill the attacker or you don't.
When I say "liberal" with shots on attacker, I don't mean stand over the body and empty the magazine like in a ****** revenge movie. Since you were an officer and in the military, I'm sure you have seen this, but the human body is not as fragile as one would think. Couple this with the fact that almost all handgun rounds are underpowered when facing the human body, the "one shot, one kill" is really nothing more than a myth without nothing short of perfect shot placement.
Consider that we have no right to engage unless we expect immediate bodily harm. This translates often to "the attacker has a gun". I don't find it wise to shoot an attacker with a gun once and roll the dice that the threat is neutralized. Also look at instances in which the police unfortunately have to engage a suspect with gunfire. It is not uncommon for the officers to expend their full magazines and only result in a hit or two. Adrenaline plays a huge part in this.
I agree that you should engage the target, cease, and engage again if needed. If we were talking rifles, one shot may be plenty for engagement. If we were talking over a distance, it may apply also. If someone busts into your house with a Glock in their hand, I would stronlgy recommend firing a controlled group of 2-4 shots at center mass. You will find most self defense trainers, law enforcement, and military teach this too when talking about sidearms.
As far as caliber, I still think it is much less important than shot placement. Using the example of said Bad Guy with Glock, a .500SW isn't going to necesarily stop him if you hit, say, his support arm. It will do a lot of damage, but the Bad Guy could still fire upon you. Training and shot placement are the two most important things. As soon as more than one threat engages you, the value of capacity becomes apparent. I would much rather face Joe Schmoe Thug who has a .45acp than Larry Vickers with a .22lr. There is a reason our police chose to trade in their wheelguns for autoloaders. Are revolvers inadequate for self defense? Not at all. I carry a revolver from time to time and feel plenty comfortable with it. I just feel for self defense purposes, especially for untrained individuals, a high capacity autoloader is invaluable.
Nobody has to agree with me, but I hope you keep my training experiences in your mind, get some quality training, and decide ahead of time what you will do in the event the worst day of your life ever occurs. If you and the Bad Guy can walk away alive, that is ideal. I believe its better to put my own safety first and then worry about the criminal.
Safearm made on the most important statements here, and one that I forgot to mention. IDENTIFY YOUR TARGET FIRST!!!
Again, this is my $0.02. I strongly suggest getting your own training to better respond in the terrible circumstance you have to exercise the right to defend yourself.
Steve
Personal Security SystemsSupport our Troops, LEOs, and Responsible Gun Owners!