Defensive Carry banner

Is a stray round/casualty ever acceptable?

16K views 186 replies 68 participants last post by  livewire 
#1 ·
This question was triggered by my thoughts on the CO incident in another thread. If you could have stopped the shooter in CO right after he started shooting, but there was an innocent person right next to him that you might hit, what is the right thing to do?

I am not 100% sure how I feel and am looking for honest evaluation, not platitudes about the basic firearm rules. What is the right thing to do, and what should you do legally?

We know he shot 70 people. If you could have stopped it at 1 or 2, would it be worth it? Could you shoot knowing that you might sacrifice 1 person to save 11 more, or 50 more. Could you emotionally handle the one death by your hand to prevent more deaths by his?

The family of the person you might hit would probably say don't do it, but how do you know that he won't just turn and gun her down next anyway? But they would ask who you are that you should play God and decide who lives or dies. Is it better for me to make that decision about 1 person, or let the madman continue to exercise that decision about many many more.

Could you handle being villanized by the anti's and the hindsight is 20-20 people who would then not know how many lives you had saved, because you did not allow the madman to continue. There would surely be jail time for you if they figured out that it was your gun that killed this person, especially if the media got wind of it.

I understand that as a random citizen we do not have the "responsibility" to intervene, we are not police, and many will say that my responsibility is to my family and myself, but even so, I feel at least some responsibility as a human to not let bad things happen if I am in a position to stop them. I guess this is part of my cost/benefit analysis on this type of sittuation. From the LEO or military in the crowd, how are you guys trained on this topic, and do they explain how that training might apply to average citizens?

What do you all think?
 
See less See more
#67 ·
Unfortunately, the reality is the cops weren't there to protect anyone (Are they ever?), and I will protect myself, in almost any case I can imagine. The shooter wasn't holding "hostages," he was trying to kill everyone in sight. If I happen to hit some innocent, I will try to make amends by any means I can--but I will be alive to do so.
 
#3 ·
I would have to weigh the risks as best I could and, if I truly believed that putting one person at risk would lead to saving the lives of a dozen...well... We used to have a saying, which sort of applies here (though it sounds incredibly callous, it really isn't): "Being a hostage is a dangerous job."
 
#6 ·
I normally agree with you but on this I totally disagree. If you are a member of an HRT, SWAT team, ST6, SFOD, sure. But you as a civilian should not be making that decision on who lives and who dies based on your moral comfort.

If you are in imminent danger yourself that is different.
 
#10 ·
As I said in the other thread, it is easy in hindsight to say "I would SAVE lives if I hit an innocent person (or three) if I took the shooter out" but the reality is you don't have that luxury in the moment. If I killed an innocent bystander that is all I would be able to remember about the event, not the lives I MAYBE saved.
 
#13 ·
I feel that it is 100% unacceptable. I also dont think there is much to say as to why I feel this way. Could it be worth the life of one to save many? MAYBE. But that is not a choice I will make. If I go to jail but succesfully stopped the threat, I may feel it was a worthy sacrafice but not at the cost of someone other than the gunmans life.
 
#16 ·
I feel that it is 100% unacceptable. I also dont think there is much to say as to why I feel this way. Could it be worth the life of one to save many? MAYBE. But that is not a choice I will make. If I go to jail but succesfully stopped the threat, I may feel it was a worthy sacrafice but not at the cost of someone other than the gunmans life.
But what about the cost of the lives he took that you could have saved?

I know, I hate it when people try to shift blame, and the blood would be on his hands for all of the deaths. What would you tell the daughter of the woman that you didn't save? But then, what do you tell the daughter of the woman that you hit accidentally? I don't know.

I agree it is not our responsibility to act, we are not cops, but I still feel some "responsibility" for lack of a better word.
 
#14 ·
Well, I'm not exactly a "civilian." And I totally understand, and for the most part agree with, all the arguments against taking the shot. I am certainly not saying that I WOULD. I am saying that, based on the totality of the circumstances, I won't write off any possibility of taking the shot. That's all.
 
#18 ·
I don't think it's acceptable, but I also don't presume it to be unavoidable in a situation like CO. I think something important to realize is that if I was there and I picked up one of your rounds through the arm; later on I'd shake your hand for putting some rounds in the BG and ending the threat, but then NCIS Gibb's slap you for pushing past your limits and missing the shot. However, I wonder if the average civilian is going to care that you "saved their life." It's a sue happy world and you might suddenly become very liable. Especially if it's a hardcore anti who's already crazed and upset about the BG shooting everyone.

Food for thought
 
#21 ·
I don't ever want to have to use a firearm to defend myself or anyone else for that matter. Let alone having to think of hitting an innocent. I would like to believe that with each shot, I am 100% sure that it is going to find the intended target and not just putting lead downrange until the BG is down. It would be bad enough to have to kill someone in self defense. It would be extremely hard to live with the fact that I killed someone who was innocent. And a hostage situation? Don't call me unless I have a rifle and the cavalry can't make it for some reason.
 
#22 ·
I am not very experience with rifles but in a situation like a crowded theater if I HAD to engage, I would want precision. The unfortunate trade off of course would be over penatration which puts us back to the point of this thread.

Question: In a state where one can OC, Im assuming handguns only? Just wondering.
 
#26 ·
I would never actually consider such a thing of course. Curiosity wont kill this cat. Well maybe once altzheimers kicks in it might
 
#25 ·
Much depends on the exact circumstances. In that theater scenario if you "took out" the shooter and say...missed with "X" number of shots and one of your bullets passed through a closed door behind the Perp and took out the janitor....or one of your bullets actually passed through the Perp and killed same janitor.

It might be a radically different story than if you accidently shot a little kid that was fleeing and happened to be in close proximity to the shooter.

Of course...the life of one "innocent" is no more or less valuable than the life of another "innocent" person but, unfortunately we were not born with X-Ray Vision and we cannot always know what (or who) might be hidden behind the intended deadly threat.

Which is where where qualified training and an ability to place solid hits comes in mighty handy.
 
#89 ·
But!

What if said shooter has a bead on your child or your spouse and they are sure to be the next victims if you don't shoot?

Situations like this are never cut & dry! There are exceptions to every rule and sometimes what is 100% UNACCEPTABLE is not 100% "avoidable".

--------------------------------------------

BTW;
I would yell to draw the attention of the BG & hopefully the "innocent" in the way; in hopes that I would have that fraction of a second to take a clear shot & protect my wife & child. However, if it is within my power to do so, the BG is going down!

-
 
#28 ·
First it will depend on the situation. Innocent victims die in war all the time. In a active shooter situation, it is a war of survival. If I am under direct fire from the BG and must return fire to survive, I will return fire. I will do my best to minimize collateral damage, but if it a matter of me dying or a stranger dying, I'm sorry, but I vote for me to live.

I've put my asbestos suit on, so flame away.
 
#29 ·
Yes, it would be justifiable and it is survivable.
This is the norm of all combat military persons. It is kill or be killed. If you do not kill your opponent, your opponent just may kill you and/or many of your service mates.
It is a little different for civilians who were never trained for this but if one carries a gun for self protection one must be prepared to make sacrifices or don't bother carrying.
This is what I think. YMMV :)
 
#32 ·
Years ago I was working in a fast food restaurant when it was robbed. The gunman laid his weapon on the counter to grab money from the till I sat down in front of him. I picked up the weapon, pointed at him, he ran to the door, running into a customer entering. I dropped the weapon to my side ... so, I can say, NO - did not take the chance, and WON'T in the future.

Chased him out the door, where I dropped the weapon on the grass, and tackled him. Weapon ended up being a BB gun. He got probation and a slap on the wrist.

sent from my sending device
 
#33 ·
Did you read the original post? Because it was absolutely NOT about shooting at an unarmed would-be robber who is in the process of running away....
 
#34 ·
Is a stray round/casualty ever acceptable?
How's about you tell me? Fair enough? I think it is.
You want to know the risk of one life to save 10.....100.....1000?
You make the call.
Could you shoot knowing that you might sacrifice 1 person to save 11 more, or 50 more.
People are not my pawns in a game. I cannot sacrifice anyone else' life for an end means. Life is not a gamble, and it's sure not something left for us to decide. You'll never be a hero at others' expense. Get that notion out of your mind right now.
However....if you would kindly post a list of your criteria of 'at risk' folks to sacrifice.....it's possible that you and I might come to terms in a hostage situation. For the time being, I think you an I are on different sides, and I would be more than happy to shoot through you in order to stop a massacre. How do ya like me now?
 
#37 ·
How's about you tell me? Fair enough? I think it is.
You want to know the risk of one life to save 10.....100.....1000?
You make the call.

People are not my pawns in a game. I cannot sacrifice anyone else' life for an end means. Life is not a gamble, and it's sure not something left for us to decide. You'll never be a hero at others' expense. Get that notion out of your mind right now.
However....if you would kindly post a list of your criteria of 'at risk' folks to sacrifice.....it's possible that you and I might come to terms in a hostage situation. For the time being, I think you an I are on different sides, and I would be more than happy to shoot through you in order to stop a massacre. How do ya like me now?
I think you've got me wrong Ramrod. I am trying to put out the thoughts that are most persuasive in a discussion to bring up internal conflict. I do not think I could, nor should sacrifice any other persons life, period. And if I was a hostage, and the only option for you to stop a massacre was to shoot through me, I would tell you to take the shot (preferably to a non-vital zone if possible).

I'm sure this will draw me lots of condescension and even ridicule, and no, I have not had to face death, but I would be willing to sacrifice myself to save others. I am confident in my eternal salvation. To give others a chance to continue on and find that same peace and salvation is a worthy cause.

I can sacrifice what is mine to give, but I would not presume to make that decision for another individual. I was just looking for others' perspectives and thought I would ask a difficult question. I have always been facinated by utilitarianism, and the thought of sacrificing one for the good of many has merit (que cheesy Star Trek quote). While I don't necessarily agree with the idea, it is an interesting concept.
 
#36 ·
There are way too many variables in those situations,I don't really know what my response will be,but if I'm armed and have a clear shot I'm gonna shoot til the threat is stopped or I'm dead
 
#38 ·
The question "kill three to save twenty" is purely theoretical, and better suited for the classroom. This is not a moral reasoning question we have to consider at all.

All you know, at any given moment, is whether or not you have the shot; whether or not you have the ability to make that shot; what your carry ammo can and cannot do. Don't shoot if you don't have the shot. I don't think we should start out thinking, if I spray some bullets in his general direction, maybe it will all work out, cuz it's OK to kill three to save twenty!
 
#39 ·
While it is unacceptable, the fact is real fights are fluid and dynamic.

It may very well be that both parties are moving and shooting. It may be dark and/or bad weather.

And you may very well miss with your shot(s).

It won't be anything like shooting at a stationary target on the square range.

Real life just sucks sometimes.
 
#40 ·
A casual look at the replies tends to agree with my assessment of the question. If I, as a reasonable person, can presume that I am in imminent danger of death or great bodily injury (that is the way it is stated in the gun law of SC), I can discharge my firearm and, in the process, if I should injure or kill someone else, but can really prove my "reasonable presumption" within the law, I do not believe that criminal charges, per se, are in the future--not so sure on civil repercussions, however, even though civil possibilities filed by the BG or his family cannot be sustained. In SC we also have the alter ego rule that allows you to intercede in a "situation" where you, as a reasonable person, can act with your firearm in the assistance of someone else who is in imminent danger (say in a movie theatre in Aurora), as if that person is yourself. In this situation, you not only have to prove that you acted reasonably but that you reasonably interpreted what was happening to someone else--if this situation ended with an errant shot and an injury or death, you have additional problems. Bottom line as some have said--bullet leaves your firearm it is your responsibility--before and after. In this country these days, which has turned into an asylum run by inmates, you can never be sure of anything about anything as long as there is a lawyer or a democrat or a liberal out there.
 
#41 ·
This is a REALLY good question.

This IMO is a question that would be best answered by speaking to a local lawyer, or studying the local laws governing the use of deadly physical force.

However like everyone else I have an opinion. I have spoken before about the various culpable mental states of mind having a lot to do with justification or criminal charges. While intent being the major player... Recklessnes, and neglect may also be considered.

In such a case a CCW shoots a person actively shooting other people shoots several rounds, and one of those rounds ACCIDENTALLY kills an innocent. The CCW's intent was to shoot to stop a real ongoing threat to life of himself and others. The innocent was killed by ACCIDENT. There was no intent to do so. The question would be was the CCW'er reckless, or negligent? If the CCW shot while the shooter was shooting there would need be some really critical level of circumstance to justify an accusation of negligence, or recklessness. A standard used to prove these issues is the question "DID the CCW pose a greater threat or cause a greater likelyhood of death than the shooter"
 
#42 ·
While I have not read all post in this thread, my take on is the shooting of another worth the risk to stop the attack. Ask the family of the 5th-12th to die that night in CO.

I did read that the attack in CO was not WAR will I think it is IT'S WAR BETWEEN GOOD AND EVIL. And all of us that are good at heart are in the fight to the end. Whether we want to be or not. So prepare to become a Warrior for good.
 
#43 ·
While I have not read all post in this thread, my take on is the shooting of another worth the risk to stop the attack. Ask the family of the 5th-12th to die that night in CO.
An argument based on emotion (much like the Brady family did after he was shot in an attempt to use emotion to muster support for gun control). In the scenario being discussed in this thread, I would counter with "Ask the families of the innocent people killed by the CCW."
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top