Herr Walther
New member
You never ever, ever, talk to the police without an attorney.
MTT TL said:He didn't go looking. He saw the guy climbing out of his neighbors window.
MTT TL said:A warning shot is deadly force. If the situation merits deadly force than you should not be shooting warning shots.
Skans said:I'm in the camp of those that see no purpose whatsoever to warning shots. Either your life is in danger or its not.
Really? I don't think so.A warning shot is deadly force. If the situation merits deadly force than you should not be shooting warning shots.
You can correct me if I'm wrong, but here's a continuum of action/force:
Threatening to use a gun,
unholstering and pointing a gun at a person,
actually shooting the gun,
hitting the target, and finally
if the target dies from the hit.
In this situation the shooter only needs to justify the threat of use, pointing the gun, and discharging a "warning shot." Which is much better than if he had actually shot the burglar. Was he justified, I believe so.
"I didn't think I could handle this guy physically, so I fired into the ground," Fleming told FoxNews.com. "He stopped. He knew I was serious. I was angry … and I was worried that this guy was going to come after me."
"I didn't know it was illegal [to fire into the ground], but I had to make that guy realize I was serious," Fleming said. "I've got a clean record. I really don't want to be convicted."
"I have 14 grandchildren, I don't want to be a felon and go to jail," he said. "I'm kind of wound up about it."
Sounds more like a negligent discharge caused by a dump of adrenalin to me. At least that's the way I'd sell it to a jury.
Really? I don't think so.
+1000I disagree with you one hundred percent. This man was in a possible life threatening situation. I can't knock him for this either because he is potentially saving other people's lives(there are numerous possibilities not being my main point). This burglar had conducted multiple home invasions by this point. He was a danger to children, women, men, and families. If this Grandfather had taken no action, somebody could've been hurt. Also, this Grandfather isn't a tactical expert. The guy is in a very high adrenalized situation and had the balls to do something. He shouldn't be held accountable for non-mailiciously shooting his firearm into the ground in a non-dangerous manner to stop the perp.
Actually, I believe he did not do good at all. I don't believe he understood the current state of gun laws whether we like them or not, they are what they are.
I disagree with you one hundred percent. This man was in a possible life threatening situation. I can't knock him for this either because he is potentially saving other people's lives(there are numerous possibilities not being my main point).
This burglar had conducted multiple home invasions by this point. He was a danger to children, women, men, and families. If this Grandfather had taken no action, somebody could've been hurt.
Not relevant. Being a tactical expert or not isn't a valid basis to justify his shooting.Also, this Grandfather isn't a tactical expert.
The guy is in a very high adrenalized situation and had the balls to do something. He shouldn't be held accountable for non-mailiciously shooting his firearm into the ground in a non-dangerous manner to stop the perp.