Page 9 of 9 FirstFirst ... 789
Results 81 to 83 of 83

Thread: Arvada Shooting Mess

  1. #81
    Site Supporter Hambo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Location
    Behind the Photonic Curtain
    Quote Originally Posted by Caballoflaco View Post
    I think in an active shooter situation where you have other victims you could make a pretty strong legal argument for a couple of anchor shots on the shooter after he is down so that you can begin to provide aid for the victims without worrying about him regaining consciousness due to an increase in blood pressure while he’s laying down, or the possibility dude’s playing opossum.
    I think your guy regaining consciousness to the point of getting back in the fight is unlikely, but if he did and he becomes a threat again, you're justified in shooting him more.

    While an active shooter situation is different than an armed robbery attempt, your objectives are the same. Stop the threat in such a way as to avoid a future in prison, and don't get shot by responding officers.
    "Gunfighting is a thinking man's game. So we might want to bring thinking back into it."-MDFA

  2. #82
    Site Supporter Erick Gelhaus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    The Wasatch Front
    Quote Originally Posted by ST911 View Post
    The topic of "anchor shots", "security rounds", etc comes up in active killer training pretty predictably. The typical scenario presented to single or paired responders is that one killer has been shot or surrendered but another is still verified active. The discussions are interesting.
    There's a recent Orange County, CA on the issue of anchoring a suspect. It's resulted in a criminal prosecution.

  3. #83

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
  •