Back Shooting. Why not?

Back Shooting. Why not?

This is a discussion on Back Shooting. Why not? within the Carry & Defensive Scenarios forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; I have read numerous scenarios where a person who is legally carrying a weapon is present during an attack or robbery. I am referring to ...

Page 1 of 8 12345 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 107
Like Tree33Likes

Thread: Back Shooting. Why not?

  1. #1
    VIP Member Array mlr1m's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    okla
    Posts
    4,298

    Back Shooting. Why not?

    I have read numerous scenarios where a person who is legally carrying a weapon is present during an attack or robbery. I am referring to cases where the bad guys have their backs to you. Many people say they would be a good witness and keep their weapon holstered. I fully understand that logic.
    There is another group who say they would get the attackers attention by whatever means and once they turn around take a shot. This I do not understand. Seems to me a a surprise shot would be the safer way to take them out.

    Is there some legal reasoning behind this? A moral one about not being a back shooter? Why would you do anything that increases the bad guys chance of success?

    Michael


  2. #2
    Member Array carverelli's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    82
    depends on the situation, but I'd say if their back was to you then you're life wasnt in grave and immediate danger and you'd prolly go to jail

  3. #3
    Senior Member Array xsigma40cal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    North Dakota is open for business!!
    Posts
    646
    One little trick of mine... if caught off guard by a mugger, I usually have a fake empty wallet in my right pocket when I go downtown. When asked politely by the young gentlemen, I grab the fake wallet, throw it over his shoulder. Draw as he turns to go fetch, warn him to keep walking and if turns around, then pop him. he demonstrated his intent to continue the attack.

  4. #4
    Senior Member Array IAm_Not_Lost's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Northern AZ
    Posts
    979
    Quote Originally Posted by mlr1m View Post
    I have read numerous scenarios where a person who is legally carrying a weapon is present during an attack or robbery. I am referring to cases where the bad guys have their backs to you. Many people say they would be a good witness and keep their weapon holstered. I fully understand that logic.
    There is another group who say they would get the attackers attention by whatever means and once they turn around take a shot. This I do not understand. Seems to me a a surprise shot would be the safer way to take them out.

    Is there some legal reasoning behind this? A moral one about not being a back shooter? Why would you do anything that increases the bad guys chance of success?

    Michael
    You present one of the few scenarios that you may be able to come out in the clear after shooting someone in the back. Lot's of people to testify for you, especially if the bank robber has harmed anyone. In general though, what a DA is going to argue is that since the person you shot had their back turned, they were no threat to you, and thus you should not have shot them in the back. This is why most folks advocate to be a good witness, stay prepared, and be ready if the situation changes.
    "Brilliant. So now we got a huge guy theory, and a serial crusher theory. Top notch. What's your name?" - Paul Smecker

  5. #5
    VIP Member Array mlr1m's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    okla
    Posts
    4,298
    Quote Originally Posted by IAm_Not_Lost View Post
    You present one of the few scenarios that you may be able to come out in the clear after shooting someone in the back. Lot's of people to testify for you, especially if the bank robber has harmed anyone. In general though, what a DA is going to argue is that since the person you shot had their back turned, they were no threat to you, and thus you should not have shot them in the back. This is why most folks advocate to be a good witness, stay prepared, and be ready if the situation changes.
    It would seem to me that anyone in close proximity to me brandishing a weapon is a threat.

    Michael
    Dadsnugun and Anubis like this.

  6. #6
    VIP Member
    Array tacman605's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Arkansas/On the X in Afghanistan
    Posts
    3,053
    A lot depends on your specific state law but in general a person who is not a direct, immediate threat to you, (not the clerk, another person, or the family pet) but to you, would not be a legitimate target of opprotunity.

    One of the reasonable man standards is a car is speeding towards you, you have no where to go, you draw and fire killing the driver, he was a threat using the car as a weapon, good shoot. Same situation car is speeding towards you, you jump out of the way, as the car passes you you fire into the back window killing the driver, bad shoot, he is/was no longer a direct, immediate threat. You can not base the shoot on he woulda, coulda, shoulda or he might have done whatever.

    Note: A lot depends on state law and individual circumstance, there is always a "well what if this happened" scenario.
    "A first rate man with a third rate gun is far better than the other way around". The gun is a tool, you are the craftsman that makes it work. There are those who say "if I had to do it, I could" yet they never go out and train to do it. Don't let stupid be your mindset. Harryball 2013

  7. #7
    Distinguished Member Array noway2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    1,889
    There is also the question of whether or not your state allows use of deadly force in the defense of another. In the places that do, it typically requires that the defendant have the same rights and claims to self defense that you would have had, with a specific example being they could not have been an aggressor to the situation. Now, in a store with a goon wearing a hoodie, pointing a gun at a cashier who is wearing a store uniform and yelling for them to empty the cash drawer, it is probably pretty obvious and this would probably be classified as a good shoot, but are you absolutely certain? Once the BG turns the threat towards you, the situation has changed and the defense of other criteria becomes irrelevant.
    oneshot likes this.

  8. #8
    Moderator
    Array RETSUPT99's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Central Florida
    Posts
    44,783
    Quote Originally Posted by xsigma40cal View Post
    One little trick of mine... if caught off guard by a mugger, I usually have a fake empty wallet in my right pocket when I go downtown. When asked politely by the young gentlemen, I grab the fake wallet, throw it over his shoulder. Draw as he turns to go fetch, warn him to keep walking and if turns around, then pop him. he demonstrated his intent to continue the attack.
    You're new to this robbery kind of stuff, eh?
    I hope you get a copy of the kind-hearted, soft-spoken dirtbag robbery perp schedule.
    The last Blood Moon Tetrad for this millennium starts in April 2014 and ends in September 2015...according to NASA.

    ***********************************
    Certified Glock Armorer
    NRA Life Member[/B]

  9. #9
    VIP Member
    Array OldVet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    S. Florida, north of the Miami mess, south of the Mouse trap
    Posts
    16,485
    I know I didn't spell his name correctly, but Massoob just had an article about the many reasons a BG might be shot in the back--legimately. No doubt it will be hard to explain to the authorities, but if you gotta--you gotta.
    Retired USAF E-8. Lighten up and enjoy life because:
    Paranoia strikes deep, into your heart it will creep. It starts when you're always afraid... "For What It's Worth" Buffalo Springfield

  10. #10
    Senior Member Array SFury's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Posts
    757
    If someone is holding a gun, and threatening people, and I was behind them then I would shoot.

    If they are holding anything else, I have to hesitate and see what happens. I will probably unholster my weapon because the situation could change in one second and I don't want to be hurt/killed. I would also move to keep the gun hidden from the BG as well so as to not escalate the situation.

  11. #11
    Distinguished Member Array kelcarry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    charleston, SC
    Posts
    1,876
    Good answer noway in reply #7. Alter Ego rule is on the books in SC and, as noway says, it allows you to act as if the person who is in immediate danger, is indeed, you. If someone else has a loaded firearm pointed at them they have a presumption of immediate death or great bodily injury--in alter ego, that person is now you and you have every right under SC law to draw your firearm and discharge same. In SC, we also have an old law on the books that has been validated in many cases concerning citizens arrest AT NIGHT AND ONLY AT NIGHT. If someone is presumed to be committing a felony (ie have their head in the back of your pickup truck looking around) you can draw your firearm, tell them to stand still, and call LEOs. If that perp decides to run, you CAN USE ANY MEANS INCLUDING DEATH TO STOP HIS EVASION FROM YOUR CITIZENS ARREST---That, plain and simple, means you can shoot him in the back and it has been validated in SC courts. Jusy sayin--it just is not me but it is there in black and white.
    phreddy likes this.

  12. #12
    VIP Member
    Array Mike1956's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Marion County, Ohio
    Posts
    10,695
    This one has been linked before. This Ohio CCW permit holder and instructor firmly planted three rounds in the BG as he ran away, in close proximity to innocent bystanders, and was not charged. The BG survived and is currently serving his sentence for armed robbery. Motel Robbery Thwarted - YouTube

  13. #13
    VIP Member Array oakchas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Iowa
    Posts
    7,414
    In the scenarios I have presented as RE: Shooting in the back, without distraction, I would take the shot only with angle.

    brief scenario: Bank robber who shot the last teller as seen on tv, you recognize him, he is at the teller window at your bank, and you see him begin to draw his "shiny revolver." I would shoot "with angle*" before he raised his gun. I would not shoot if he had his gun on the teller. I would draw his attention to toward me. When the muzzle is between teller and me, then the shot.

    *with angle= from below and the side to avoid a miss or through and through hitting teller or others.

    If the BG(s) has gun drawn on victims, I will not take the shot, without drawing their attention and the muzzle of their weapon toward me. If you have the time to draw, set up your shot or sequence, aim at the back of his head, you also have the time to call his attention away from his "task at hand," as soon as that attention is drawn away from the victims and towards you. take the shot.

    This is certainly no more ridiculous a scenario than taking a handgun shot at a moving head target at 50-100 yards, as promulgated by some "warriors."
    Rats!
    It could be worse!
    I suppose

  14. #14
    VIP Member Array MitchellCT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    I don't post here anymore...Sorry
    Posts
    2,333
    A lot of people in this thread who need to go read "In the Gravest Extreme" by Massad Ayoob...

  15. #15
    Senior Member Array ep1953's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Kodak TN
    Posts
    1,155
    Remember the post several months ago where the BG walked into a convenience store and aimed his pistol at the female clerk. He pulled the trigger and fortunately for the lady it misfired. Also fortunate for the lady was the fact that her husband was there visiting her. He pulled his own pistol and shot the BG. I can't remember if the perp died or not but in any case the husband was able to defend his wife.

    I would take the same attitude if I witnessed a robbery. You never know when a BG is going to shoot an innocent so go ahead and take the POS out if you have a clear shoot. I don't care what angle he happens to be at.
    carverelli likes this.

Page 1 of 8 12345 ... LastLast

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

backshooting
,
can you shoot someone who has his back turned
,
conseal carry scenarios when to shoot
,
shoot a man with his back turned
,
shoot someone in their spine
,
shoot someone with back turned
,

shooting a man with his back turned

,

shooting someone in the back

,
shot someone in the back ohio
,
why can't you shoot a person at his back
,
why cant tou shoot a man in the back
,

why do they say never shoot a man with his back turned to you

Click on a term to search for related topics.

» Log in

User Name:

Password:

Not a member yet?
Register Now!

» DefensiveCarry Sponsors