stopping a robbery or shooting?

[nemesisman]

i often wonder about a scenario where someone might come into a restaurant and try to rob the place or rather just start shooting. if i happen to end being seated behing him with his back to me....what would you all do? i know we are supposed to "stop" the threat..but does this mean verbally ask him to stop or do we just shoot to wound him or just shoot him in the back?

[Greybeard]

Certainly no "shoot to wound". Sorry, I'm needing to get out the door shortly but am quite cetain there will be more comments coming. The short answer for now: OODA. Observe. Orient. Decide. Act.

[AEA]

Never,.....NEVER "shoot to wound"!

If he is actually shooting and you have a shot, TAKE IT and in "legalize" - "shoot to STOP" the threat.
In common sense language, that means "Shoot to Kill".

[Briankey]

I would shoot, I believe this falls under the protection of life. But if you didn't act, someone innocent gets killed, people possibly finding out you had a CHL, and you did Nothing, and the media gets involved, well, maybe you can picture the outcome of that, but also you may not be able to live with yourself afterwards, always running that scenario over and over in your head.

[longhorn_92]

Never,.....NEVER "shoot to wound"!

If he is actually shooting and you have a shot, TAKE IT and in "legalize" - "shoot to STOP" the threat.
In common sense language, that means "Shoot to Kill".

Always shoot to Stop.....Aim for Center Mass!

[Kerbouchard]

I would not give a verbal warning. If I had a clear line of fire(between me and the BG, and beyond the BG), I would take the shot. As COM as I can get it...If that happens to catch his spine...well, I might of been having a good day.

The only time I might give a warning(verbal warning or warning shot), and it's a big MIGHT, would be if I wanted to get his attention. About the only reason I would want to get a BG's attention would be if he was advancing on my family, or if I could not get a clean shot w/out him changing the direction he was moving. Anyway, that's how it plays out in my head. Hopefully, I will never find out for sure.

If your question is also asking if I would have any qualms shooting a man without warning in the back, my answer would be...

"It is only as retaliation that force may be used and only against the man who starts its use. No, I do not share his evil or sink to his concept of morality: I merely grant him his choice, destruction, the only destruction he had a right to choose: his own." - John Galt, from Atlas Shrugged

In other words, "He started it."

[Liberty]

The "shoot to stop the threat" is an often misunderstood principal. it has little to do with point of aim and lots to do with how much shooting is required, and just a little bit to do with legalities.

To me it just means that once the threat stops it is alright for us to stop the shooting.

If the BG is flopping around and twitching and any weapon has fallen away from him. It is probably a good time to stop shooting.

If the bad guy is still running away 100 yards down the road . It is probably a good time to stop shooting.

If the Bad Guy is dead. It is probably a good time to stop shooting.

If the bad guy throws down his weapons, falls face first into the ground and is sobbing for mercy. It is probably a good time to stop shooting.

I also was taught that for the most part we shouldn't aim to kill. in other words in most life or death conflicts we should aim for center of mass not for vital organs. It just makes sense. Deciding where the vital organs are and trying to hit them is more difficult and probably not anymore effective than just dumping lead into the COM until the threat has ended.

[Rayden]

I know I would shoot if he has started shooting other people. But if he is just pointing a gun at other people with his back to me, that is a tough one ... I need to re-read the CHL laws again in preparation should something like that happens to me.

[Glock 23]

I would shoot, I believe this falls under the protection of life. But if you didn't act, someone innocent gets killed, people possibly finding out you had a CHL, and you did Nothing, and the media gets involved, well, maybe you can picture the outcome of that, but also you may not be able to live with yourself afterwards, always running that scenario over and over in your head.

media is one thing, but by law you have no obligation to "help out", thats not what a CHL is about.

I personally would do something, but I also dont have as much to lose as many on here do with families and such. I wouldnt automatically expect just anyone with a CHL to take action.

[dukalmighty]

If he's pointing a gun he has implied he is willing to use deadly force to commit a robbery,and as soon as i can take a shot to stop the threat without endangering other people,well he made the choice to put me in that position,on the other hand he fires a shot and he gets return fire until threat is stopped or i gotta change mags and reengage

[Wildscar]

Only thing I can say about shooting some one in the back while they are commiting a crime is that he should not have had his back to me. If you are in a fair fight then your tactics stink.

[Keith B]

I will always shoot to wound. That wound will be in the Center of Mass. My intention is the wound will stop them, and that wound MAY lead to death if the wound is inflicted properly.