Would you fire a warning shot?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Captain Crunch

Are we detecting a pattern here?:wink:

---

I definitely see a pattern forming!:scruntiny:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Captain Crunch

Are we detecting a pattern here?:wink:

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mojave_pistolero

I definitely see a pattern forming!:scruntiny:

---

Really? Seems to me to be equal. Either no warning shot or 2 COM. :gah:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by exactlymypoint

I have read a lot of posts about people using their firearms to defend themselves and in worse case scenarios actually having to shoot the BG. The aftermath is never pretty and can be very, very expensive.

The last post I read was about some BGs that were inebriated and were out to cause some type of trouble. The poster drew his weapon and they fled. Probably the best outcome.

But let’s say that they don’t flee. Let’s say that there is enough distance between them and you that they are not an “immediate” threat. (Yes, I know that the distance can be closed quite rapidly. But let’s forgo that for now.) Now one of the BGs states, “Come on buddy. You don’t want to use that. Think of all the trouble that it is going to cause YOU. Legal fees, law enforcement, etc., etc., etc.” (I know. He is quite eloquent for being drunk. What if he is not drunk?) Then he starts walking toward you, not fast, but he is closing the distance. What do you do?

Some thought that come to mind is trying to use your command voice and make your intentions known. Something like, “STOP NOW OR I WILL SHOOT”. But he ignores you. Would you fire a WARNING shot, say at his feet?

I can see the good and bad to this. But was wondering what your opinions are.

---

First lets define "warning shot"

According to my wife a "warning shot" is a shot fired into a BG that warns other BG's that they will be next if they come between her and her kids. (I love that woman)

So if that's what you mean then yes, if not lemme just say my gun only breaks leather for a few occasions.

1. cleaning
2. storage
3. to make bad things dead.

-Alex

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SonofASniper

Warning shots are only for the NAVY, and that is simply to let the bad guy know that they are in range.

---

I am a retired Sailor and my first shot will be COM.

NO. Just like the gun itself, you also own the bullets, weather you shoot them or not. Especially if you shoot 'em. Your sidearm AND the ammo have only one purpose at that point.....and a warning shot isn't that purpose.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Old Chief

I am a retired Sailor and my first shot will be COM.

---

I'm active duty.......COM only!
Only when out at sea, safely away from EVERYTHING will a warning shot be fired, and Son ofASniper is right, it's only to let 'em know thier sighted in:image035:

no....... that "warning shot" is going to come down somewhere and possible hurt some inicent person.

I wouldn't fire a warning shot. I would only draw and fire if, in my opinion, my life or the life of someone else was in jeopardy. If such was the case, then I would shoot COM until the threat stops.

I was originally going to say, "if by warning shot you mean 2 to COM, then yes", but since that's been overdone already, I'll take the opposite position. In the case you are describing, no, I would not fire a warning shot. It would just let make the BG think that I really didn't want to shoot him and probably inspire a rush.

Unlike other posters though, I can imagine when a warning shot would be necessary and appropriate. I recall the thread where there was a BG on top of a woman continually stabbing her. That is a shot that might be too chancy to take due to the GG and BG proximity. So, I guess to answer your question, do defend myself, I would probably never fire a warning shot. To defend somebody else or to draw attention to myself to get a better shot, I might. And before all the flames start, I know I wouldn't generally want to attract attention to myself from a BG comitting a felony, but I also couldn't stand there and do nothing. If a warning shot was the only way to get a pause from the BG, or to cause him to look up, then I might fire a warning. But it's impossible to know for sure without being in the middle of the situation.

Absolutly not!!!! I would give a very strong verbal warning but if I have to draw, its to shoot.

So I'm confused on everyone's position...:slap:

No warning shot.
The first warning is verbal, the last warning is the sound of steel sliding from leather.

There IS one situation where I'd CONSIDER a warning shot.

It's not uncommon for us to run across a bear family while out mountain biking. In the past, the sound of a shot fired has been enough to send mama and babies packing. If mama seems to be lingering and upset that we rode up on her babies, she'll get a warning shot, although typically, despite all the stories, they all just run off as soon as we get close.

Never huge liability

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by exactlymypoint

Really? Seems to me to be equal. Either no warning shot or 2 COM. :gah:

---

The pattern I was referring to is the unanimous consensus in this thread: No warning shots.