Warning Shots..Good or Bad idea?

Bad Idea, first you just told them that more force ( on the BG end ) is necessary, second, you gave away your position, and now they have time to pull on you and start shooting. Thats my nickles ( inflation ) worth anyway
 
C'mon guys. "NEVER use a warning shot". :rolleyes:

Depends where you're at. My Dad's neighbor in Texas got accosted by a group of guys at his house. They were making threats and gesturing with tire irons, etc, working their way to his front yard. He pulled his 1911 and shot into the dirt, then pointed it at them. They took off like scalded cats. Dad witnessed the whole thing.

The police arrived about 5 minutes later. Officer took notes, then stated "you did good, glad that's all it took". No charges filed, nothing.

So you simply cannot make a blanket statement that warning shots are always a bad idea. I have other stories to back this up.

Now here's a question. Fight breaks out, several individuals are beating the snot out of one person on the ground, perhaps with bats and boots. Lethal force is justified (in VA anyway) to prevent "grave bodily injury" to a third party. Lots of yelling and screaming. If you start yelling as well, it probably won't be heard. You don't necessarily want to start shooting, but get the message across you will if needed. Then what?
 
The risk of the warning shot is that it might go to the wrong place.

That's why we need the all purpose gun-o-phonics.

The gun-o-phonics makes the following sound effects quite loudly and fits on your belt:

1. Shotgun racking
2. The warning shot
3. The police siren in the distance.
4. Make my day - Clint
5. Fill your hands, you sonofabitch - John Wayne
6. Please don't hurt me
7. Or you could record other sounds of your choice.
 
The only warning shot i've ever fired was 40mm and smoke and that's only because it's what the ROE dictated. If it were up to me, if a group of men standing with m16s and m4s isn't enough warning, you're up to no good. That being said I simply can't imagine an instance where a warning shot would be justified. A mob of people intent on killing you? I'll fire 3 or so warning shots into four seperate people, then reload and see if I need to give anymore warning . I'm not about to try and waste ammo or my time by shooting pavement. All a warning shot is going to do is escalate the situation. If you're not justified to shoot, then don't shoot at all.
 
So you simply cannot make a blanket statement that warning shots are always a bad idea. I have other stories to back this up.
Click to expand...
You're not alone. Plenty of evidence, historical and recent, indicates the the warning shot has worked well on numerous instances. I've used them twice to great success, and my father has once. again, I don't recommend it as a normal course of action, but it is a tool in the box that might be just what you need sometimes.
 
A warning shot has two purposes - to stop a person who may or may not be intent on doing you harm or to effect an arrest.

For CCW, the second is out. You are not authorized to make an arrest, so any shot you fire must be in defense of yourself or (depending on the law) another innocent person.

A warning shot to stop is also problematical for a CCW. In most cases of armed attack outside the home, wasting time on a warning shot would be pointless and possibly dangerous. In the home, you don't need a CCW but are not really authorized to fire to warn someone who is outside your home. If he has broken in or is attempting to break in, you again would waste time warning, as he has already made clear his intention to invade your home and by implication, do you injury if necessary to achieve his goals.

Jim
 
Warning shot? I don't THINK so.

A bullet costs about 15 cents. After it is fired the price goes up to about a million bucks and there are 6 lawyers sitting around waiting for it to land.
 
In all of my training I have been told to get off the "X" yell "STOP!" in an authoratative voice and if they fail to comply, I stop them. No warning shots. EVERY BULLET HAS A LAWYER ATTACHED TO IT. Sorry for yelling, but its that important.
 
NukeCop - go back and reread your AFI; (I don't have a copy at home) but they do NOT mandate warning shots. Warning shots - by definition - are the "use of deadly force" (means likely to inflict grievous bodily injury). I'm not a big fan of them (they tend to quickly destabilize an already unstable situation, but they have their uses).

The law of war is NOT a suicide pact. ALL Fed Circuits allow deadly force without mandating "warning shots" if the situation so warrants it; all services allow you to go immediately to deadly force if needed. You either have a risk-averse Commander; or an attorney who doesn't know what the heck they are talking about.

Look at your AFI; the SROE//RUF; and the Chairman's instruction - you are getting some bad poop.
 
Texas has different rules than the other states.
My opinion doesn't matter much,but I think it is a legal mistake to consider a deadly weapon an instrument of power to control the bad behavior of others and restore order(warning shot) "I got a gun so you better be nice,oh,you don't believe me bang now you better be nice" That is controlling.
I think the legal use(in most cases) deadly force is for when someone is in the process of killing you and you save your life.
 
BAD GUY: Giveme yo money BIATCH

MILITARY COP: HALT or I will fire a WARNING SHOT

BAD GUY: GO ahead ******

MILITARY COP: BANG SH($ I missed and hit him in the head with my warning shot How the Hell am I going to explaine that one to the Sarge?


Shooting towards someone's head is a good way to hit them in the head is it not? So what happens if said bad guy zigs when he should have zaged and you tag him in the grape? How do you explaine that one to the Host Nation?
 
A warning shot can be a bad habit ie. it's something one shouldn't be conditioned to do...BUT never say never ie. there's situations where it
might do more good than harm.

Anecdotal: I knew a lady who was at home when she heard a local thug<bad neighborhood>beating up on one of her young teenage sons. She came out of the house and saw the thug on top of her son<no clear shot> in their yard... She yelled for the thug to get off her son...and there was no response. She then pulled out her .380 and fired a warning shot into the air above... She got everybody's attention. The thug turned on her and pulled out a knife. She shot the thug in the arm, and he ran off...and he was later apprehended.


Anecdotal: Waaaaay out in the country far from a quick police response, a gentleman heard something out in his yard in the weeee hours of the dark morning... Lo and Behold somebody was messing with his car - stealing it?
Rather than go out and confront the stranger, and not wanting to watch his car get stolen or otherwise diminished, he decided to take out his 12ga. shotgun and do a little shooting at the moon through an open upstairs window. The stranger ran off.
 
Here's a good reason why warning shots are a bad idea. Despite being just plain ignorant, the shooting puts responsible gun owners in a bad light. Not helpful.

For the record, it does not matter whose sign was in the yard. The 1st amenedment is just as important as the 2nd. Both are freedoms I want to keep and will die for if needed.
 
Recon7 said:
not a very relevant example when we are talking about SD also the thread is about 2 months old.
Click to expand...

Fair enough. I did a search for "warning shots" and this thread came up. I didn't want to start a new thread. No reason to give such an idiot any undue prominence.
 
If you do not believe someone is a threat you shouldn't have a gun in your hand to start with. If the person is a threat and your life is in danger all shots should be directed at that person to stop the threat.
 
The only warning shot ill ever give a BG is an unintentional miss and you better bet the follow up shot is gonna hit the mark
 
A couple of paragraphs from my training manual:

"Pull your gun ONLY if you feel you or someone else is on mortal danger. Then shoot if the danger does not stop immediately."

"Take note that you are to shoot only to stop whatever is endangering you. The ground in front of you is not endangering you. The air above you is not endangering you. Don't shoot them. Shoot the danger, to stop the danger."

Pops
 
If you're gonna fire a warning shot, you might as well just yell, "Hey I'm over here, SHOOT ME!!!" Also, it displays what might be interpreted as an unwillingness to kill, which the BG can only use as leverage against you. No matter how willing you are to kill, a warning shot is an all around bad idea.

Another note on this. discharging a firearm is no small thing. When you pull the trigger, it must be to do something. Firing a warning shot can be a reckless endangerment of those around you. The typical warning shot is into the air, and bullets do in fact, come down. Even if you shoot into the ground, warning shots are still a bad idea.
 
If I feel that the situation is such that I need to draw my pistol, then the bad guy only gets one verbal warning.

And maybe not even that depending on the situation.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top