Glenn E. Meyer
New member
I know a case where the good guy intervened and was winning in the struggle with the bad guy. The law arrived and killed the good guy - despite the witnesses saying he was the good guy. Oops.
csmss said:If the robber raised the gun such that it was then pointed at someone's head, I would likely conclude that he was planning to fire and react accordingly.
Don't patronize me. Pointing a firearm at someone else's head is ESPECIALLY provocative and a headshot is far more likely to produce instantaneous (or nearly so) death than a shot to the torso.Is there some special robber training that teaches only headshots somewhere?
Does the phrase "center of mass" have any meaning to you?
cmss said:Don't patronize me. Pointing a firearm at someone else's head is ESPECIALLY provocative and a headshot is far more likely to produce instantaneous (or nearly so) death than a shot to the torso.
cmss said:If the robber raised the gun such that it was then pointed at someone's head, I would likely conclude that he was planning to fire and react accordingly.
You just seem not to want to understand the point. Yes, I've seen plenty of photographs of GSW's to virtually every part of the human body, and yes, strikes to the vital organs of the torso (ie heart, lungs, liver, kidney, etc.) are quite dangerous and frequently deadly. However, given prompt medical attention, these wounds are more survivable than penetrating injuries to the brain. If you can't understand that, I simply do not know what to tell you.Sorry, pointing a firearm at someone ANYWHERE is "especially provocative".
Have you ever seen someone shot in the abdomen or chest? You don't believe those wounds are worth worrying about?
cmss said:One thing I think I would find important in such a situation is where exactly the robber has his/her weapon pointed. If it's at the storekeep's waist, that's an entirely different kettle of fish than if it's pointed at the storekeep's head.
Maybe a couple of examples from you would help enlighten me.
1) Let's say you're in the store, the bad guy has his gun pointed at the storekeep's waist, your gun is in your holster. What do you do?
2) Same situation as #1, except the bad guy's gun is pointed at the storekeep's head. What do you do differently?
3) You're in the store, the bad guy has his gun pointed at the storekeep's waist, your gun is in your hand pointed at the bad guy. What do you do?
4) Same situation as #3, except the bad guy's gun is pointed at the storekeep's head. What do you do differently?
I personally see no difference between 1 & 2, or between 3 & 4. My reaction will be the same for 1 & 2, and the same for 3 & 4. I'm not going to base my reaction on something (bad guy's specific point of aim) that the bad guy has the option to change literally in the blink of an eye.
The storekeep is being threatened with deadly force in every case. If the bad guy decides to shoot, then the difference in the time required for him to take the headshot, or else to shift his point of aim from the torso to the head then take the headshot, is measured in hundredths of a second. Far quicker than you'll have time to do anything about it.
You know this how, exactly? Are you a robot? You always know exactly how you will react in every situation, no matter how the actual context varies from how you imagined it? Sheesh.Seems pretty simple to me. My reaction will be the same whether the threat weapon is pointed at the head or the torso.
***? I have no problem at all describing the difference. A gunshot wound to the brain is nearly universally lethal, whereas with prompt treatment, the victim generally has a reasonable chance of surviving a torso wound.You seem to have a problem describing what you believe the appropriate difference would be.
Glad I don't live in your county.But I've only been a sheriff for about 8 years.
No class on earth is a substitute for sound reasoning - and if you think going into a deadly force situation with a checklist is sound reasoning, well then your judgment is suspect indeed.Exactly NONE of the training or classes that I have been a part of have covered optional tactics based on whether the threat weapon is pointed at the head or torso.
Sigh. Your reading comprehension is tragically deficient. You still don't get the point, and probably never will. I will repeat it one last time, and then I'm done with this because it is, quite frankly, boring me. The point is that if the bad guy changes his point of aim from a place where it would be less dangerous to the victim to one that is MORE dangerous, that it would be an escalating factor/variable that makes the danger to the other party greater. Period. I simply do not understand why you cannot grasp what should be a very simple truth.Do you have ANY references to ANY kind of recognized literature or training that supports your blatherings?
Are you capable of sharing at least a minimal thought on what you would do differently between a gun pointed at someone's torso and one pointed at someone's head?
You're the sheriff?
Sgt Lumpy
is there anything else I could have possibly done, being that I would've had my gun on me? Thanks.
is there anything else I could have possibly done, being that I would've had my gun on me?
Quote:
But I've only been a sheriff for about 8 years
You're the sheriff?
Sgt Lumpy