When would you fire warning shots? - Page 2

When would you fire warning shots?

This is a discussion on When would you fire warning shots? within the Carry & Defensive Scenarios forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; I am going to go against the grain here a bit. In a SD situation at home, my office or out in public in town ...

Page 2 of 9 FirstFirst 123456 ... LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 132
Like Tree46Likes

Thread: When would you fire warning shots?

  1. #16
    VIP Member Array farronwolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    4,886
    I am going to go against the grain here a bit. In a SD situation at home, my office or out in public in town I will not fire any warning shots.

    However, there are instances where I would. Example, at deer camp we have had a lot of stuff come up missing (stolen). From game cameras, deer stands, wiring, battery bank, you name it, if it was of value they have pretty much helped themselves to it. They are clearly tresspassing, have cut fence and are entering property which they are clearly not supposed to be on.

    Now if I happen to go through the locked gate some time and I see a 4 wheeler heading towards the place where they like to enter the property, I seriously might take some "warning shots" depending on the exact circumstances. I would not have to worry about hitting innocents, or whether I could call back the bullet or any of that type of thing. I have zero tolerance for folks who help themselves to others property.

    So I can't say that there is never a time when warning shots would not be used by me. If you disagree, that's your call, but I know the layout of this area, and the history of folks who frequent it illegally. "Warning" them would definately be in order in my view.
    Just remember that shot placement is much more important with what you carry than how big a bang you get with each trigger pull.
    www.ddchl.com
    Texas CHL Instructor
    Texas Hunter Education Instructor
    NRA Instructor


  2. #17
    VIP Member Array Civil_Response's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Minnesota, USA
    Posts
    2,558
    Never... my only warning shot would be an unintentional miss.

  3. #18
    VIP Member Array Hiram25's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Wyoming, DE
    Posts
    11,264
    NEVER!
    Hiram25
    You can educate ignorance, you can't fix stupid
    Retired DE Trooper, SA XD40 SC, S&W 2" Airweight
    dukalmighty & Pure Kustom Black Ops Pro "Trooper" Holsters, DE CCDW and LEOSA Permits, Vietnam Vet 68-69 Pleiku

  4. #19
    VIP Member
    Array ksholder's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    4,005
    I would only fire a warning shot if there were multiple perps. The second and following perps are warned when I shoot the first perp.
    Bubbiesdad likes this.
    It's the Land of Opportunity, not the Land of Entitlements - Vote America!!!

    "When governments fear the people there is liberty. When the people fear the government there is tyranny." Thomas Jefferson

    You are only paranoid until you are right - then you are a visionary.

  5. #20
    VIP Member Array dukalmighty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    texas
    Posts
    15,179
    Quote Originally Posted by Biggie313 View Post
    Never. If you draw, be prepared to shoot. If you shoot, shoot to kill
    /Thread
    You shoot to stop the threat,even tho your shooting COM and that round may end somebodys life to say your shooting to kill if you ever get caught up in a SD shooting that post may come back to haunt you,not all DA's are on the side of using deadly force for self defense,they can come out and say,so your first shot struck him in the chest,but you kept shooting because your intent was to kill,not just stop the threat
    "Outside of the killings, Washington has one of the lowest crime rates in the country,"
    --Mayor Marion Barry, Washington , DC .

  6. #21
    Member Array Oaklands's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    TN
    Posts
    87
    I'll have to agree with everyone else. If I pull it, I am ready to use it. My first warning shot would be right at the BG and if he is still standing a safe distance away, I would give him the courtesy to ask, "Do you want some more, as that was my last warning." If he his still coming he gets another warning shot fired AT him.
    I must have more 1911's. Someone donate me a Springfield EMP.

  7. #22
    cj
    cj is offline
    Senior Member Array cj's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    1,008
    Never. There might be a situation where I might intentionally not hit an aggressor, but I WOULD be hitting something safe, and the intended purpose of the shot would be to deter with the sound of the shot...that's for deep back country hiking situations where an animal is threatening/attacking.

  8. #23
    JD
    JD is offline
    Administrator
    Array JD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Central Iowa
    Posts
    19,361
    In the military a warning shot may be authorized as part of continuation of force protocol. Possibly the same for law enforcement but IMHO in civilian life they have no place.

    Sent via Tapatalk...and still using real words.

  9. #24
    Senior Moderator
    Array limatunes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Iowa
    Posts
    4,246
    Quote Originally Posted by 9MMare View Post
    I've posted on this before, but I dont remember all my examples. I know that one was if someone had grabbed a child and was running off with it and I couldnt catch up, in that case I might make a carefully aimed warning shot. I might do so at a dog, esp. if I believed the owner was the guilty party.

    If someone was clearly mentally ill or impaired and was outside of the 22 foot mark, maybe but I'd be prepared to immediately follow up with an aimed response.

    Truthfully, I dont go out of my way to think up these examples because I certainly dont want it to be my mindset. I also believe warning shots are generally a bad idea.

    But I'm also a believer in 'never say never.' Esp. when lives are involved.
    In all three of the scenarios you mentioned I'm getting a strong vibe that you would not be willing to shoot the actual threatening presence.

    1. You wouldn't shoot someone with a child because perhaps because you fear hitting the child.

    2. You wouldn't want to shoot a dog for its master's error.

    3. You wouldn't want to shoot someone who was mentally ill or impaired.

    If I'm incorrect in any of my conclusions, please let me know.

    You stated you would be willing to consider a warning shot for these scenarios but I'm curious as to why you would bring a gun into a scenario at all if you were hesitant to use it against the object of threat?

    First scenario: Man kidnapping a child? If you are unwilling to shoot someone fleeing with a child a gun should not enter the equation at all. The possibilities of something going wrong are far too great. You trip.. your warning shot ricochets.. he makes an unexpected move into the path of your warning shot.. he stumbles out of surprise or changes course into dangerous traffic because of the warning shot.. he decides to throw the child.. your well-aimed warning shot is not as well-aimed as you thought and you end up hitting something you did not intent... way too much can go wrong bringing a gun into a kidnapping situation that you aren't sure your ready/willing to use against the kidnapper.

    For my own child? Yes. I would draw and I would shoot AT THE KIDNAPPER. I would accept the consequences for that action. For someone else's child? No way. Not that I am not willing but they may not be so understanding if their child was injured in the gunfire. Therefore, no gun would enter the equation at all and no shots (warning or otherwise) would be fired. As stated.. far too much could go horribly wrong bringing a gun into a scenario (ANY scenario) where it was not willing to be used immediately and ONLY AGAINST the threat.

    In scenario #2... either the dog is a lethal threat or he isn't. Either you have to shoot him or you don't. I'm not sure how the owner would change how you perceived the level of threat to your own self. Can you explain?

    #3.. Again, why would you be bringing a gun into a scenario where you weren't sure whether or not your life was in jeopardy or not? If someone is outside of a distance you consider to be dangerous and acting mentally unstable, why is a gun entering the equation? If he's threatening you does he have the ability and opportunity to cause death or serious bodily harm? Do you feel your life is in jeopardy? If not, a gun should not be entering the equation and a warning shot should be out of the questions.. again.. too much can go wrong and if someone is there to witness this exchange you could very well be charged with a variety of charges depending on your local laws up to and including assault with a deadly weapon, brandishing and more.

    I'm very curious as to your thoughts on the legalities of the scenarios your expressed you would consider using a warning shot for and how the outcome might be both legally and practically.

  10. #25
    Member Array Cattus Vir's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Granville County NC
    Posts
    439
    NEVER. If I feel the need to ever draw my weapon I have already made the decision that I MAY have to use it. Please note I said may have to use not have already decided to fire.
    Last edited by Cattus Vir; June 6th, 2011 at 06:00 PM. Reason: addition info

  11. #26
    VIP Member Array 9MMare's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Outside Seattle, WA
    Posts
    3,309
    Quote Originally Posted by SirNapsAlot View Post

    If your gun is out in your hand, it has to be (legally and via common sense) your life is in danger.

    .
    This isnt true, esp. in your own state. You are allowed to protecdt property and livestock. And to use it against the commission of a felony, even being committed against someone else. (The last one applies in my state, possibly not in TX)
    Fortune favors the bold.

    Freedom doesn't mean safe, it means free.

    The thing about "defense" is that it has practically nothing to do with guns. (As passed on by CCW9MM)

  12. #27
    VIP Member Array 9MMare's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Outside Seattle, WA
    Posts
    3,309
    Quote Originally Posted by limatunes View Post
    In all three of the scenarios you mentioned I'm getting a strong vibe that you would not be willing to shoot the actual threatening presence.

    1. You wouldn't shoot someone with a child because perhaps because you fear hitting the child.

    2. You wouldn't want to shoot a dog for its master's error.

    3. You wouldn't want to shoot someone who was mentally ill or impaired.

    If I'm incorrect in any of my conclusions, please let me know.

    You stated you would be willing to consider a warning shot for these scenarios but I'm curious as to why you would bring a gun into a scenario at all if you were hesitant to use it against the object of threat?

    First scenario: Man kidnapping a child? If you are unwilling to shoot someone fleeing with a child a gun should not enter the equation at all. The possibilities of something going wrong are far too great. You trip.. your warning shot ricochets.. he makes an unexpected move into the path of your warning shot.. he stumbles out of surprise or changes course into dangerous traffic because of the warning shot.. he decides to throw the child.. your well-aimed warning shot is not as well-aimed as you thought and you end up hitting something you did not intent... way too much can go wrong bringing a gun into a kidnapping situation that you aren't sure your ready/willing to use against the kidnapper.

    The gun is with me, most of the time. I cant catch the person running with the kid. I have no other options. And you're right, no way would I attempt to shoot someone holding a kid. A warning shot is an attempt to scare kidnapper into dropping kid, into thinking I mean it. No one says it would work. I'd certainly hope someone would do everything possible if it were my kid.

    .

    In scenario #2... either the dog is a lethal threat or he isn't. Either you have to shoot him or you don't. I'm not sure how the owner would change how you perceived the level of threat to your own self. Can you explain?

    [B]I can read dogs and I will do so. My judgement, my life or my dogs. Depends on time and distance and dog's actual attitude. I dont care to punish animals for their owner's misdeeds. If I have options, I will take them. That's why I carry pepper spray and have used it in the same situation. I'm alot safer if I try a warning shot...or an actual shot, than risking myself with pepper spray, but that was my choice.[/B]

    #3.. Again, why would you be bringing a gun into a scenario where you weren't sure whether or not your life was in jeopardy or not? If someone is outside of a distance you consider to be dangerous and acting mentally unstable, why is a gun entering the equation? If he's threatening you does he have the ability and opportunity to cause death or serious bodily harm? Do you feel your life is in jeopardy? If not, a gun should not be entering the equation and a warning shot should be out of the questions.. again.. too much can go wrong and if someone is there to witness this exchange you could very well be charged with a variety of charges depending on your local laws up to and including assault with a deadly weapon, brandishing and more.

    In this scenario I would be retreating. If no retreat was possible and I had time/distance, I might choose a warning shot. That extreme, abrupt noise can disrupt alot of hysteria/fuge states/panic, etc. Or make it worse. I know of a case here in WA St where a naked mentally ill man killed a cop with his own gun, so I am not minimizing the risks. I hold the decision to take another's live extremely seriously.

    I'm very curious as to your thoughts on the legalities of the scenarios your expressed you would consider using a warning shot for and how the outcome might be both legally and practically.
    Legally, I'd let the chips fall where they may. If I end up killing the person or dog anyway, then it goes in my favor as mercy and not really wanting to kill.

    I'm in for way less legal hassles if I dont kill the person or dog. And I edited my original post to say that a warning shot does not mean it's not a deliberately placed shot.
    Fortune favors the bold.

    Freedom doesn't mean safe, it means free.

    The thing about "defense" is that it has practically nothing to do with guns. (As passed on by CCW9MM)

  13. #28
    sgb
    sgb is offline
    VIP Member Array sgb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    You don't need to know
    Posts
    2,414
    Quote Originally Posted by tomtsr View Post

    My question is when, if ever, would you fire a warning shot?

    NEVER!
    "There is a secret pride in every human heart that revolts at tyranny. You may order and drive an individual, but you cannot make him respect you." William Hazlitt (1778 - 1830)

    Best Choices for Self Defense Ammunition

  14. #29
    Member Array ISR MATRIX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    SW Florida
    Posts
    55
    As an LEO, we are instructed to never fire warning shots for a couple of different reasons...

    * We may need that round.

    * We are responsible for where the round goes and the damage it may cause.

    * At the time we decide to pull the trigger, we are committing to the use of force that is likely to result in the death or serious bodily injury/ permanent physical difigurement of someone. We don't want to muddy that decision in retrospect by reducing the gun to a high decibel "attention getter". In an incident that will be later picked apart by people who don't understand use of force, self defense or the realities of gun ballistics, we want to minimize the amount of free association and "coulda, shoulda, woulda".

  15. #30
    VIP Member Array MitchellCT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    I don't post here anymore...Sorry
    Posts
    2,333
    Quote Originally Posted by 9MMare View Post
    If someone was clearly mentally ill or impaired and was outside of the 22 foot mark, maybe but I'd be prepared to immediately follow up with an aimed response.

    Well...Looks like someone's been misunderstanding the Tuller Drill.

    The Police Policy Studies Council

    We have done some testing along those lines recently and have found that an average healthy adult male can cover the traditional seven yard distance in a time of (you guessed it) about one and one-half seconds. It would be safe to say then that an armed attacker at 21 feet is well within your Danger Zone.


    7 yards is NOT a line seperating you from danger - its a drill which justifies you shooting someone at that distance or possibly further if they are armed with an edged weapon.

Page 2 of 9 FirstFirst 123456 ... LastLast

Sponsored Links

Posting Permissions

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

Search tags for this page

are warning shots illegal

,
can i fire a warning short in florida
,

can you fire a warning shot

,

firing warning shots illegal

,

is it illegal to fire a warning shot

,

is it legal to fire a warning shot

,
is it legal to fire warning shots
,
ny state for firing 4 warning shots
,
should you fire a warning shot
,
warning shot illegal
,
warning shots are illegal
,

warning shots illegal

Click on a term to search for related topics.