Warning shots

[KKECK5]

The older i get , more and more of my shots at the range are warning shots. BUT seriously, way back when, if i fired a warning shot, i would have either been suspended or fired. Your gun should never leave the holster unless to you intend to use it...or at least come close to it.

 

[GaryS]

All you need to know about the subject is that Joe Biden thinks it's a good idea.

 

[GaryS]

Except that Zimmerman had nothing to do with Stand Your Ground and the that the woman in FL left the scene, went to her car, retrieved a gun, went back to the scene, and fired a shot at the man. I think she also violated a no contact order in the first place.

Other than that, your post is spot on!

Long and all over the place.

I didnt post about Zimmerman. I posted about a woman who LIKE Zimmerman, also in FL, did a warning shot and got 20 years. The story compares the two due to FL stand your ground law. One stood his ground and killed ....not guilty. The other stood her ground and fired a warning shot and got 20 years.

 

[weatherby]

There is no such thing as a warning shot.

Well there could be......when bad guy #1 falls over and # 2 is still standing.

 

[shouldazagged]

Speaking of cyber-warfare...

 

[Lobster Picnic]

I can see the possible use of a warning shot in a special situation. What if you were in the yard with the kids, but they were too far away from you when a stray dog came at them? You're 4 seconds away from the kids and the dog will be on them in 2 seconds. The angle is bad for taking a direct shot at the dog because if you miss you might hit your child. Fire a warning shot? What good does it do?

Well, the dog *could* break off the attack and leave the area, which would be ideal. The dog could also be distracted and delay his attack long enough for you to move into a better position, either for a safer shot, or to get between dog and kids. Or, the dog could redirect his attack toward you, which would give you the advantage.

Is it worth possibly facing charges? Yes, I think that's better than watching your kids get mauled or even killed.

So, NEVER fire a warning shot? I wouldn't say never. Maybe 1 time out of 100 it will be the only viable strategy.

 

[ChattanoogaPhil]

BANG!

Consider this a warning shot. Knock of the bickering.

 

[shouldazagged]

BANG!

Consider this a warning shot. Knock of the bickering.

I'll drink to that. Icewater, but I'll drink to it.

 

[Silver Dollar]

Man in Seattle charged with unlawful use of a weapon and menacing and reckless endangering and had his rifle has been confiscated for firing into the ground as a warning shot.

Vet Charged, Rifle Confiscated For Firing Warning Shot At Burglar? | Tea Party

You found it. That's the story I spoke about.

 

[Arik]

If a mountain lion is dragging away a child a kill shot or bodily injury is needed not a warning shot.

A warning shot is just laud noise. An animal might not take it as a threat. Bodily injury will get the point across

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk 2

 

[Rastoff]

Man, you guys have gone completely off the farm.

Mountain lions dragging kids away? Really?

 

[blujax01]

All I'm saying is that, in Ohio anyway, in the eyes of the law what someone might claim as a "warning shot" is either an attempt to injure or kill or in the best case, if you're lucky, a negligent discharge.

I stick to what I've been taught by those who know better:

There is no such thing as a warning shot.

 

[Smitty357]

Do any of u carry a blank round in the chamber of ur carry weapon and then put live rounds into the magazine?

I didnt think so. =-)

That should answer the question at stake.

 

[Devildogcpl]

Warning shots are a no go. You own what you hit.

 

[Poodle Soup]

Delos your really stepping up your trolling attempts. Bravo : )

Does anyone consider firing a gun to scare an animal a warning shot?

 

[Kanewpadle]

Delos your really stepping up your trolling attempts. Bravo : )

Does anyone consider firing a gun to scare an animal a warning shot?

Not your fault buddy. We have a few here that I honestly think are trolls. They don't want to understand the truth as it is spoken here by many.

Do as many of us do and just skip over their posts because they have nothing to offer but BS.

 

[handejector]

Delos is off for an extended mountain lion hunt and won't be with us for some time.
I've seen him hit my radar once or twice, but nothing like this.

We try to keep an eye out for trolls, but we don't see every post. We sometimes don't see every thread.

YOU have the ability to help us out.
At top right of every post, there is a

that you can use to report that post.

This thread was finally reported, and it got handled.
So, report stuff that needs reporting.
I won't promise that we will act on every report, nor will every disagreement be because a member is a troll.
I do promise that we'll take a look.

 

[walkin' trails]

How would law enforcent differentiate all the shots that they miss a perp by mistake versus missing a perp on purpose?

Why would firing a warning shot in the ground be more dangerous than unloading a magazine at a perp with a 50% miss rate?

Most law enforcement agencies train their officers not to fire warning shots. It is policy and any officer who thinks he/she can fire a warning shot then chalk it up as a miss may have some reckoning to deal with. Law enforcement officers' livelihood depends on their truthfulness - a cop who can no longer testify in court because they were documented as being untruthful is more or less useless. And, if there are witnesses, what will they say? (the Zimmerman case was interesting because the media initially led us to believe there weren't any...) Whether we realize it or not, our credibility is all we ever really carry with us to the end, whether we're cops or armed law abiding citizens.

The miss rate is another matter. Sadly, a 50 percent miss rate is actually lower than what I understood to be the national average of 80 percent. I guess the perceived difference might be reckless versus accidental, though it is of no consolation to anyone hit by a stray bullet.

 

[BaaBaa]

"Would you, as a civilian, use or recommend a warning shot for defense of yourself or family?"

um 4 letter word NO!

If I am in a situation where deadly force is justified then I am sure as heck not going to waste one of my precious shots trying to scare someone.

The closest thing to a warning shot is that the first shell in the shotgun we carry for wildlife issues is rubber bullets, per DOW, then we have slugs following. But we won't shoot them as a warning, we will be aiming to kill and the second round is going to be following the first as fast as either hubby or I can pump the shotgun.

In my handgun I would never fire a warning shot at all. Too risky, Under stress a few are likely to be warning shots (as in not to center mass and not enough to stop the threat) no matter how much I practice, why would I deliberately do that?

 

[Malpasowildlifer]

No

As others said we are accountable for each shot fired, especially as an LEO