Page 6 of 12 FirstFirst ... 45678 ... LastLast
Results 51 to 60 of 120

Thread: Question about pointing pistol at someone

  1. #51
    As to your thinking out loud, I think the point of this thread is to test assumptions, and refine our own thinking. (Before going further, TGS, I wasn't trying to insult you by asking if you were an easterner, although I see how it could be construed that way. Sorry.)

    I don't have experience pointing weapons at people, and hope to keep it that way. However, I agree that the objective is to stop the threat, without injury to you or anyone else. If the situation allowed for it, it seems muzzling would certainly be preferential to shooting the person. Along those lines, I have stopped one moose charge and two bear charges by firing a warning shot in the dirt in front of the animal at close range. In each instance, I was legally able and morally willing to use lethal force, but I chose to try one last thing prior to using lethal force.

    It does seem that muzzling someone would be the rare exception as opposed to SOP, although I may hang out in different places and with different type folks than some that may be forced to be in places on account of their profession.

  2. #52
    Site Supporter
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    TEXAS !
    Quote Originally Posted by SouthNarc View Post
    You know I'm developing this mentally as I interact with everyone in the thread and it's interesting to see where the thinking has gone. Let me ask everyone a question:

    Have we come to a point where we believe that we can't point a gun at someone unless we shoot them? Really?
    No, I believe you are spot on about "People DO respond to "looking down the muzzle"." - My experience has been more force sooner = less force later....

    Though it may be drifting away from the OP's original question, it comes back to Lt Col. Dave Grossman's argument that the old "Fight or Flight" model is flawed and should include two other options: "Posture" and "Submit".

    Pointing a weapon at someone is a form of posturing indicating a willingness to fight.

  3. #53
    In what circumstance would an armed civilian need to point a weapon at a perceived threat and not press the trigger? I think this is where lines start to get crossed, when dealing with LE or Mil types vs the armed citizen. You have no duty to act as a civi, you have no purpose to threaten or use deadly force unless you are protecting yourself, a third person or personal property. If you have a reason to threaten deadly force, it is because you are justified in using deadly force, which means you are in fact in danger of being seriously injured or killed. So if that is the case, why on god’s green earth would you give a person (or animal being that it has been brought up) a second chance to change their mind?

    I would agree that it is very different for both MIL & LE, however, the context of a armed citizen protecting one’s self, family or property, the reality is that the threat has already committed to attacking, robbing you. That type of a threat should not be given a “.5 second to change their mind” that threat should be dealt with as quickly as you effectively can.

    I have actually pointed a weapon at a few people and not fired, as a soldier and a civilian. I once over reacted with an Iraqi and was pointing a weapon at him with no real justification to shoot him, and what made it worse was that the Iraqi knew it. More or less made me look like a fool and rightfully so, I was being a fool attempting to use the threat of deadly force when it was not warranted. I had a similar situation happen here in San Antonio, helping a buddy run a firework stand during the New Year. Had a group of dipshits pull up and start tossing fireworks at the stand. So I draw down on the shit heads and tell them to leave. They sat there and antagonize me telling me to “shoot then”. Both times, I was totally shocked at the flagrant disregard people from two different geographical areas could have towards having a loaded weapon pointed at them.

    Are there going to be times the gun comes out and you don’t have to fire? Sure! Is it something you should plan for (draw than assess for further threat at a low ready or ready position)? In my personal opinion, no way! Should you think that a threat is going to all the sudden stop and give in, once you have pointed a weapon at him? I think that could end up being a fatal mistake if you were wrong.

    But again same disclaimer, seek real legal advice…

  4. #54
    In what circumstance would an armed civilian need to point a weapon at a perceived threat and not press the trigger? I think this is where lines start to get crossed, when dealing with LE or Mil types vs the armed citizen.
    I think you provided your own example.

    I had a similar situation happen here in San Antonio, helping a buddy run a firework stand during the New Year. Had a group of dipshits pull up and start tossing fireworks at the stand. So I draw down on the shit heads and tell them to leave. They sat there and antagonize me telling me to “shoot then”. Both times, I was totally shocked at the flagrant disregard people from two different geographical areas could have towards having a loaded weapon pointed at them.

    So........was this a poor decision in retrospect? And your "shock" at having someone ignore your gun doesn't "shock" me in the least. BTDT more than once.

    ...however, the context of a armed citizen protecting one’s self, family or property, the reality is that the threat has already committed to attacking, robbing you
    What if they haven't already committed to attacking/robbing you? Are you saying that one should wait until they do BEFORE a gun is drawn from the holster?

  5. #55
    With the discussion of laws pertaining to pointing a gun at someone without actually aiming it at them etc... would any of the instructors here testify on behalf of a student who was being charged with something ridiculous for a well handled lethal force incident. stating that the low ready position was the correct thing to do as trained etc...

  6. #56
    I'm willing to testify on ANYTHING I teach someone. Haven't done it for a citizen yet but have on more than one occasion as an academy instructor.

  7. #57
    Member 98z28's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    South Mississippi
    Quote Originally Posted by digiadaamore View Post
    With the discussion of laws pertaining to pointing a gun at someone without actually aiming it at them etc... would any of the instructors here testify on behalf of a student who was being charged with something ridiculous for a well handled lethal force incident. stating that the low ready position was the correct thing to do as trained etc...
    Sure would. I have never trained non-LE, but would testify in a heartbeat for any of the guys I have trained. I can't imagine a decent instructor that wouldn't.

  8. #58
    Member TGS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Back in northern Virginia
    Quote Originally Posted by SouthNarc View Post
    You know I'm developing this mentally as I interact with everyone in the thread and it's interesting to see where the thinking has gone. Let me ask everyone a question:

    Have we come to a point where we believe that we can't point a gun at someone unless we shoot them? Really?
    I didn't see anyone, or myself, state that. I understood the conversation was:

    You don't point a gun in someone's direction unless you've already satisfied conditions for shooting them. You don't have to shoot them, but you already need the conditions set for the lawful use of lethal force...because a gun, whether point at them, in the holster with a grip/flashing it at someone, waving in the hand, whatever, is still giving you the ability to project lethal force. Muzzle orientation does not in itself determine a person's intent to use lethal force.
    "Are you ready? Okay. Let's roll."- Last words of Todd Beamer

  9. #59
    You don't point a gun in someone's direction unless you've already satisfied conditions for shooting them. You don't have to shoot them, but you already need the conditions set for the lawful use of lethal force...because a gun, whether point at them, in the holster, waving in the hand, whatever, is still giving you the ability to project lethal force. Muzzle orientation does not in itself determine a person's intent to use lethal force.
    Totally in agreement here. Where I disagree is that the conversation wasn't trending that way. If I'm wrong.....hey it's the internet.

    And I completely understand your perspective on the inverse that weapon orientation doesn't change one's perceived level of threat. I've been teaching cops from that perspective since the mid-90s and it was VERY controversial back then. Not so much now.

  10. #60
    Member TGS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Back in northern Virginia
    Quote Originally Posted by SouthNarc View Post
    hey it's the internet.
    And that's why I'm in ECQC in 2 weeks Because learning never stops.
    "Are you ready? Okay. Let's roll."- Last words of Todd Beamer

User Tag List

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •