Is A "Less Lethal" Weapon Really A Viable Option?

[raymo2u]

This is going deeper and farther than it should into a "what if" issue. Odds are if a attacker uses deadly force on me and i survive, i would inturn would return fire and proceed to fire until the attacker is down for good.

Talking to you from his Samsung Galaxy S4

 

[cmort666]

Center mass may not always be available when a enemy is hidden bwhind cover and a limb may be the only shot you have.

Speaking in terms of LIKELY scenarios, how often does someone attempt a robbery or other COMMON crime while employing cover and concealment?

Yes, it's POSSIBLE that in a non-law enforcement context, you COULD need to shoot somebody in a limb rather than center of mass. It's also possible that your assailant might be wearing a flame thrower and you might need to shoot at the propellant or fuel tank(s).

I cannot name a single recent (or not recent for that matter) instance where a citizen in Ohio could not have resolved a self-defense shooting situation with one or more center of mass shots to the assailant.

I can't prepare for EVERY contingency. I CAN prepare for the ones that happen over and over, day in and day out.

 

[raymo2u]

Okay so the basic concept of the "EVERYDAY FIREFIGHT" is covered-you seem way too serious and could do some to lighten up, take your aggression out on a aggressor, not a fellow man trying to make you crack a smile.

Talking to you from his Samsung Galaxy S4

 

[kyf]

Sounds to me what he's talking about is "equal force" vs "disparity of force" or responding to a threat with a level of force that an individual "perceives" to be appropriate. This is a subjective thing based on the individual's comfort level with any given situation.

If, for instance, someone has no formal self defense training and only feels comfortable drawing a weapon if confronted with an angry person threatening to punch their lights out they might feel justified doing so. However, someone with training is more comfortable and equipped to handle the same situation without drawing because they have a "less lethal" option.

It is an individual decision based on ones comfort level and regardless of how you defend yourself you need to be able to articulate it clearly.

 

[Rastoff]

That said, carrying a less lethal option is smart.

Is it? Couldn't an overzealous prosecutor argue that you could have used the OC instead of the gun regardless of the situation? If you don't have it, then the gun is your only recourse. Just spit-balling here.

Center mass may not always be available when a enemy is hidden bwhind cover and a limb may be the only shot you have.

While I understand what you mean here, center mass is always available because it's the center of the mass presented. In other words, you shoot to the largest piece of body you can see. If that's only half a torso, shoot to the middle of that. If it's a head, shoot to the middle of that. Always shoot to center mass, but realize that center mass is not always the chest.

It is an individual decision based on ones comfort level and regardless of how you defend yourself you need to be able to articulate it clearly.

Nicely said.

 

[pawncop]

Smoke,

I will respectfully disagree with your friend. My reasoning is thus - the self defense role should not be compared to law enforcement because the goal is different.

The goal of law enforcement is to apprehend the individual and to do so with the lowest level of force required. Hence we have all the various options and devices to accomplish that mission.

There is not a requirement for a citizen to apprehend. The requirement is to deal with a threat rising to the level causing one to fear for their life.

Accordingly, I would maintain an individual carry one level of force. If OC or Taser is acceptable I will not criticize. But remember, if challenged with a higher level of threat then that individual may be at a major disadvantage.

Also consider the issue of having to decide which to use (under serious stress). Having only one choice precludes that dilemma.

These are my thoughts offer for consideration. I hope you find them helpful.

 

[cmort666]

Also consider the issue of having to decide which to use (under serious stress). Having only one choice precludes that dilemma.

A BART cop did prison time for allegedly making the wrong choice.

 

[aaorb104]

A BART cop did prison time for allegedly making the wrong choice.

I was Stationed in the PDRC during that time. I believe the incident was more to do with lack of proper training than choices, and unfortunately the officer paid the price for his department failure in properly training their new officers. In my opinion the FTO and senior Training Officer should have been on the stand with him.

 

[hotrod150]

......And the good thing about OC spray is that the courts have held its justification for use to a much lower standard than the use of deadly force. I carry a "riot size" (think small fire extinguisher) can in my truck. Used it once since I retired, on a guy who followed me into a parking lot who was feeling a little road rage. Diffused a situation pretty quickly that could have become a lot more serious for both of us.

Here's a good example of the use of "appropriate force" vs "deadly force". This scenario is like many I can envision when things have maybe not escalated into a life-threatening situation , yet some sort of forceful response was needed.

 

[2ndAmendmentNut]

I think having a non-lethal weapon on hand would make you look like even more of a nut job should you actually find yourself in a situation that requires you pull your gun.

I could just see a lawyer asking, "so way didn't you just spray him?"
"No ladies and gentleman of the jury this man wanted to kill."

 

[venomballistics]

A shot to the knee seems most effective, and to those who may think that it may be a little over aggressive to do so, it was the attackers choice to cuase the problem and i was just resolving it. In any other case he wouldnt of been as lucky, but that goes on as a case by case basis. (pure sarcasm!!)

A gun is a tool, use it as needed. Shot placement is what counts!

I wouldn't even think of that shot till I knew I could shoot at least 8 out of 10 clays from a trap, with the pistol to be carried.
a kneecap moves quite a bit walking, let alone fighting.

 

[ChattanoogaPhil]

I wouldn't even think of that shot till I knew I could shoot at least 8 out of 10 clays from a trap, with the pistol to be carried.
a kneecap moves quite a bit walking, let alone fighting.

Thanks for the chuckle.

 

[JJEH]

There was a video going around quite a few month ago, showing two men fighting in an elevator. The fight was staged and the producers were interested in what people would do (or not do). It showed both laying on the floor inside the elevator and one was choking the other.

This would have been the perfect situation to deploy OC.

Since you don't know for sure what was going on (perhaps the victim could free himself and was now trying to kill the offender), the fact that's a high risk to shoot at such close range inside an elevator as well as the response time of LEO (perhaps 3 min. or more?) makes it a perfect situation imo for the use of OC. You hit both, the fight brakes up and LEO can figure out what was going on w/o having a dead body...

 

[tlay]

As the old saying goes, if all you have is a hammer then everything looks like a nail. If all you carry is a gun then how do you deal with minor problems? Such as a drunk getting pushy, a beggar getting too bold, or a barking dog. Do you shoot all of them and let God sort them out? I don't think so. Carry and get training for nonlethal items. At the very least get unarmed defensive training.

 

[VictorLouis]

, "so way didn't you just spray him?"

Really? Leave me an open-ended question like that?

"I didn't want to get stabbed with burning hot pepper-spray all over the blade!"

"Because my defensive spray wouldn't stop HIS BULLETs!"

 

[venomballistics]

As the old saying goes, if all you have is a hammer then everything looks like a nail. If all you carry is a gun then how do you deal with minor problems? Such as a drunk getting pushy, a beggar getting too bold, or a barking dog. Do you shoot all of them and let God sort them out? I don't think so. Carry and get training for nonlethal items. At the very least get unarmed defensive training.

nah .. pistol whipping and shooting are two different things a sidearm can do
seriously though, of all the stuff that occupies the modern pocket, many don't have room for a LTL. at least not somewhere it'll do any good.
I might design the occasional amplifier, program the occasional microcontroller or some other highly complicated, and technical past times. It keeps my brain earning its keep.
But life in general ... I love and favor simplicity above all