webhead:
FyredUp, guess you don't watch South Park. It's just wrong to shoot someone in the groin. ;-)
And for shooting to kill versus shooting to stop a threat..... sounds like a PC statement that they teach. Also sounds better in court. But be real. How do you know the threat has been stopped? When it stops moving. A euphemism is the correct term but guess that's not PC either so now it's.... well....PC.
Avid South Park fan. Butters and Kartman holding back the Chinese hourds. Butters manages to shoot everyone he shoots at in the nuts.
I guess I thought that getting shot in the groin would stop the average guy because he would worry that he was missing some parts from his fun factory.
Moreover, what I am getting from most posters here is double or triple tap to the chest. If it kills them the threat is stopped, if they go down, re-evaluate and if necessary shoot them some more. Seems logical to me. I am prepared to do what is necessary to protect myself and my loved ones. I would much prefer not to ever be put in that situation, but, if I am going to have the gun in my hand the decision to use it if necessary has already been made.