Would you fire a warning shot?

[Flatland2D]

Flat,

I'm going to guess you were tired when you wrote this.

I hope this doesn't come across as sounding "harsh", but I can think of a dozen other ways of handling that scenario that would be better.

Please do not fire a "warning" shot. There are many reasons why, (some of which you answered yourself).

Welcome to the forum.

Wow. Lot's of responses in such short time. Yes, I was tired when I wrote that and considered putting it off for another day to think about. Given all the responses I have certainly been scared off from thinking of such an idea. I'll try to respond to most things said.

How did you obtain an AK47?

Where else but the gun show? Sorry, what I meant to say was my Romanian Semi-Automatic Rifle model 1, which to most people in the gun world, would readily be accepted under the term AK-47 as all it's other variants. The major difference being not having a selectable rate of fire as on the original.

Lets stop there for a minute. There is no "right" in Texas to use deadly force. The justifications for using deadly force are a "defense to prosecution" and you are subject to prosecution for ANY use of deadly force.

Right, I understand everything is just a defense to prosecution. My wording was not the best and far from correct under legal definitions.

Oh boy....... Shooting to kill displays a mental state that you intended to kill the other. That is murder. Texas laws do not allow that. It allows you to use deadly force to STOP certain events, and the culpability is different. Deadly force is used to stop an act that is listed under Chapter 9 of the Texas Penal Code when the justification is present.

This just sounds like word games to me. Yes, PC9 gives you justification to use deadly force to stop someone in certain circumstances. I used the word "kill" when legally I meant "stop". But, what do you think you're doing when you "stop" someone by firing two shots to the chest and one to the head (I'm sure everyone here practices drills like that, correct?). You most likely killed them. In this instance, the difference between stop and kill is a mute point to me. The only difference being the legal definitions of the two words.

Paint them with a laser?

I'm sure you're familiar with gun related colloquialisms to know what I mean. "Shine" a laser on someone in the middle of the night and they will most likely freeze.

As a Use of Force instructor I am cringing reading your continued use of he "shoot to kill" phrase. See my comments above. The Penal Code does not allow deadly force because something is "personal"

Sorry again for making you cringe. I will shoot to stop. Whether or not that kills will be determined at bullet impact. I never said I would shoot for personal reasons, but an armed home invasion is a much greater offense than say attempted burglary of a vehicle. The law allows you more "justification" in protecting your personal territory. This is the manner in which I meant my statement.

Again, use of force is a defense to prosecution. In your scenario, with no evidence or even with just some evidence, you would likely have your firearm taken and you would be charged. A defense to prosecution means you have to prove beyone a reasonable doubt that you met the justification. The police do not take well to people firing guns in public areas. And remember, as you set up the scenario the guy ran off, so the police have no way of verifying your story.

Thank you. This was the response that I was looking for. How could I prove that the event even happened except for maybe a broken window, or pried open door, which could have been like that to begin with? Without anything significant the cops would have no reason to believe me, so it sounds like from what you're saying they wouldn't cut me any slack. Understood.

No, warning shots are not acceptable, and it would certainly be more than frowned upon by the cops.

Again, this was the information I was looking for. Thanks for posting it.

May I suggest that you take a concealed handgun course? Even if you are under 21 or have no desire to carry concealed, these issues are covered thoroughly in the class. The information and training will serve you well.

I'm sure it'll come as a surprise to you then to hear that I have recently just completed a CHL class. I asked the "warning shot" question in class and the only response I got from the instructor was "if you have the justification to use deadly force, you have the justification threaten deadly force." He didn't chastise me for asking an ignorant question or elaborate any further. I thought it would have been ok to have this better explained on this forum.

Thanks for the encouragement stevie.

Sorry to ruffle anyone's feathers over this. I didn't mean to cause any trouble. I figured it'd be best to have things explained rather than still be confused. In conclusion, I will not fire any warning shots and will shoot to "stop" in life-threatening situations or not shoot at all.

[Kalrog]

Where is the spout for those Kegs?

Open container law - no spout in the car officer.

[txinvestigator]

How did you obtain an AK47?

Where else but the gun show? Sorry, what I meant to say was my Romanian Semi-Automatic Rifle model 1, which to most people in the gun world, would readily be accepted under the term AK-47 as all it's other variants. The major difference being not having a selectable rate of fire as on the original.

That is a huge difference. You do not have an AK47. The general public (non-knowledgeable about firearms) think AK47 = full auto. Let not those of us who should know better perpetuate that myth. ;)

Oh boy....... Shooting to kill displays a mental state that you intended to kill the other. That is murder. Texas laws do not allow that. It allows you to use deadly force to STOP certain events, and the culpability is different. Deadly force is used to stop an act that is listed under Chapter 9 of the Texas Penal Code when the justification is present.

This just sounds like word games to me. Yes, PC9 gives you justification to use deadly force to stop someone in certain circumstances. I used the word "kill" when legally I meant "stop". But, what do you think you're doing when you "stop" someone by firing two shots to the chest and one to the head (I'm sure everyone here practices drills like that, correct?). You most likely killed them. In this instance, the difference between stop and kill is a mute point to me. The only difference being the legal definitions of the two words.

Words have meaning, and in this type of situation, legal meanings are the only ones that matter. And 2/1 drills are only applicable in a narrow set of circumstances. 85% of people shot with handguns survive, so in all likelyhood your criminal will survive a handgun shot.

Paint them with a laser?

I'm sure you're familiar with gun related colloquialisms to know what I mean. "Shine" a laser on someone in the middle of the night and they will most likely freeze.

You have been watching too much TV I think. There is no evidence of that, and I certainly would not count on it.

As a Use of Force instructor I am cringing reading your continued use of he "shoot to kill" phrase. See my comments above. The Penal Code does not allow deadly force because something is "personal"

Sorry again for making you cringe. I will shoot to stop. Whether or not that kills will be determined at bullet impact. I never said I would shoot for personal reasons, but an armed home invasion is a much greater offense than say attempted burglary of a vehicle. The law allows you more "justification" in protecting your personal territory. This is the manner in which I meant my statement.

Under the law, the justifications are the same. Your "territority" is not defensable under chapter 9.

Again, use of force is a defense to prosecution. In your scenario, with no evidence or even with just some evidence, you would likely have your firearm taken and you would be charged. A defense to prosecution means you have to prove beyone a reasonable doubt that you met the justification. The police do not take well to people firing guns in public areas. And remember, as you set up the scenario the guy ran off, so the police have no way of verifying your story.

Thank you. This was the response that I was looking for. How could I prove that the event even happened except for maybe a broken window, or pried open door, which could have been like that to begin with? Without anything significant the cops would have no reason to believe me, so it sounds like from what you're saying they wouldn't cut me any slack. Understood.

You are welcome.

No, warning shots are not acceptable, and it would certainly be more than frowned upon by the cops.

Again, this was the information I was looking for. Thanks for posting it.[/quote

May I suggest that you take a concealed handgun course? Even if you are under 21 or have no desire to carry concealed, these issues are covered thoroughly in the class. The information and training will serve you well.

I'm sure it'll come as a surprise to you then to hear that I have recently just completed a CHL class. I asked the "warning shot" question in class and the only response I got from the instructor was "if you have the justification to use deadly force, you have the justification threaten deadly force." He didn't chastise me for asking an ignorant question or elaborate any further. I thought it would have been ok to have this better explained on this forum.

Thanks for the encouragement stevie.

Sorry to ruffle anyone's feathers over this. I didn't mean to cause any trouble. I figured it'd be best to have things explained rather than still be confused. In conclusion, I will not fire any warning shots and will shoot to "stop" in life-threatening situations or not shoot at all.

I don't think your question is ignorant at all, and I certainly am not chastising you. I tend to post rather matter-of-factly, but seldom is there any emotion attached.

I do think that your instructor short-changed you in that answer. If you presented this scenario, he had an excellent opportunity to show your class how the specific wording of the law can apply to different situations.

[txinvestigator]

Where is the spout for those Kegs?

Open container law - no spout in the car officer.

Then how do you get the beer out?

[Flatland2D]

That is a huge difference. You do not have an AK47. The general public (non-knowledgeable about firearms) think AK47 = full auto. Let not those of us who should know better perpetuate that myth. ;)

Didn't mean to perpetuate a myth, but I think everyone here would agree the "general public" does not view this forum. Many things said in general firearms discussion would have to be claried to someone ignorant of the field.

Words have meaning, and in this type of situation, legal meanings are the only ones that matter. And 2/1 drills are only applicable in a narrow set of circumstances. 85% of people shot with handguns survive, so in all likelyhood your criminal will survive a handgun shot.

Well, that's why I'm here, to better understand things legally. That's an interesting statistic though, about the percentage of people shot by a handgun survive.

You have been watching too much TV I think. There is no evidence of that, and I certainly would not count on it.

Most likely. However, I do not feel the need to stick with such a strict vocabulary under every circumstance and may sometimes throw in a word like "paint" in reference to the red dot of a laser. For the same reasons shining a gazillion power spotlight on someone would cause them to stop or flee, don't you think the laser would have the same effect? I should have added "flee" when I talked about shining a laser on someone, not just freeze.

Under the law, the justifications are the same. Your "territority" is not defensable under chapter 9.

But under the law, isn't armed breaking and entering of a home much worse than attempted burglary of a vehicle (not talking PC9 here)? Again, scratch out my use of territory and insert "property".

I don't think your question is ignorant at all, and I certainly am not chastising you. I tend to post rather matter-of-factly, but seldom is there any emotion attached.

I do think that your instructor short-changed you in that answer. If you presented this scenario, he had an excellent opportunity to show your class how the specific wording of the law can apply to different situations.

I do wish the instructor would have gone into greater detail. To his credit, he says he normally teaches a 2 day, 15 hour course, so he had to speed it up a little. I did have some misconceptions coming out of that class that I had clarified on here in my other thread. Just goes to show taking the class doesn't make you an expert. The way I figure is I have at least a full 60 days to educate myself on the consequences, good and bad, of carrying concealed.

[da.suxor]

Where is the spout for those Kegs?

No DUI here.

[da.suxor]

Then how do you get the beer out?

Those hoses pipe it to the headrests.

[txinvestigator]

That is a huge difference. You do not have an AK47. The general public (non-knowledgeable about firearms) think AK47 = full auto. Let not those of us who should know better perpetuate that myth. ;)

Didn't mean to perpetuate a myth, but I think everyone here would agree the "general public" does not view this forum. Many things said in general firearms discussion would have to be claried to someone ignorant of the field.

OK. I don't mean to beat a dead horse, but if we are suppose to be more knowledgeable I think we would use terms that are more accurate. I don't call my AR 15 an M16. ;)

You have been watching too much TV I think. There is no evidence of that, and I certainly would not count on it.

Most likely. However, I do not feel the need to stick with such a strict vocabulary under every circumstance and may sometimes throw in a word like "paint" in reference to the red dot of a laser. For the same reasons shining a gazillion power spotlight on someone would cause them to stop or flee, don't you think the laser would have the same effect? I should have added "flee" when I talked about shining a laser on someone, not just freeze.

I do not think shining a laser on someone would have the same effect, nor necessarily any effect.

Under the law, the justifications are the same. Your "territority" is not defensable under chapter 9.

But under the law, isn't armed breaking and entering of a home much worse than attempted burglary of a vehicle (not talking PC9 here)? Again, scratch out my use of territory and insert "property".

I see your point. Burglary of a residence is a higher classified crime in the TPC than Burglay of a vehicle.

I don't think your question is ignorant at all, and I certainly am not chastising you. I tend to post rather matter-of-factly, but seldom is there any emotion attached.

I do think that your instructor short-changed you in that answer. If you presented this scenario, he had an excellent opportunity to show your class how the specific wording of the law can apply to different situations.

I do wish the instructor would have gone into greater detail. To his credit, he says he normally teaches a 2 day, 15 hour course, so he had to speed it up a little. I did have some misconceptions coming out of that class that I had clarified on here in my other thread. Just goes to show taking the class doesn't make you an expert. The way I figure is I have at least a full 60 days to educate myself on the consequences, good and bad, of carrying concealed.

Good and responsible thinking on your part!!

Have you decided what and how to carry?

[Charles L. Cotton]

Remember what Charles said a while back,

"...every round has a lawyer attached to it..."

Hold on now; don't attribute that one to me! Forgive me Clint, but I strongly disagree with that commonly taught theory, at least in Texas.

Regards,
Chas.

[Flatland2D]

Have you decided what and how to carry?

Steyr M9 (about the size of a Glock 19) and I'll probably be ordering a Smart Carry in the next few days so I can try and get used to wearing it around the apartment before I venture outside when my license arrives. Maybe an IWB holster also to compare with the Smart Carry. I may end up preferring one or the other for certain kinds of clothing or activities. Only one way to find out.

[quidni]

Remember you are responsible for every round, every thing it touches, what it passes through, and where it stops.

Tomcat

May I quote you?

[ElGato]

Help Yourself Young Lady, To be honest I have made that statement for so many years I don't remember if I made it up or heard it somewhere.

Tomcat

[txinvestigator]

Have you decided what and how to carry?

Steyr M9 (about the size of a Glock 19) and I'll probably be ordering a Smart Carry in the next few days so I can try and get used to wearing it around the apartment before I venture outside when my license arrives. Maybe an IWB holster also to compare with the Smart Carry. I may end up preferring one or the other for certain kinds of clothing or activities. Only one way to find out.

The M9 is a really fine weapon. We have sold several at the range. I like the feel, trigger and especially the sights.

[Flatland2D]

Yeah, I really like it. It's my first handgun. On a good day when I'm doing my part, the gun has awesome accuracy. I feel I can get a more precise sight picture with the triangle/trapezoidal sights than the normal post style. It has a manual safety that I'm debating whether or not to use. It requires two hands to engage and theoretically only your trigger finger to disengage it, but it's a really awkward motion and sometimes I don't have a good enough grip to disengage it in a quick draw. It has the same style trigger safety as Glocks, and a lockable safety with a key that I doubt anyone has ever used. Well that brings up another question. Do you guys carry with your safety on, if your gun has a manual safety?

It was $300 at CDNN last summer (they may still have the deal), including two 10 and two 14 round magazines. Lowest price I've seen them at. Not bad for something comparable to a Glock.

[Paladin]

Do you guys carry with your safety on, if your gun has a manual safety?

Yes, although it can depend on the gun/method of carry. I personally prefer to carry "cocked and locked" with my USP45