TexasCHLforum.com

I see a lot of posts about what caliber to carry and maybe 50+ years ago an old man (like I am now) gave me the best advice I ever had on that subject. He said "it is much better to hit with a .22 then miss with a .44"
Use whatever caliber you can control and consistently hit center mass.
A perfectly placed shot with even a .22 or a .380 will do the job.
Shooting someone in the leg, or shooting the gun out of someone's hand is only done in the movies.
If you aren't shooting to kill, then you shouldn't have a gun in your hands.
Just my opinion folks.

I think it more advisable to teach "shoot to stop the threat" ;)

jd

mr surveyor wrote:I think it more advisable to teach "shoot to stop the threat" ;)

jd

This.

You should never shoot to kill. You shoot to stop the threat.

Once again: "I think it more advisable to teach "shoot to stop the threat"

Why is it "shoot to stop the threat" and not "shoot to kill?"

The explanation on the intent is very important. "Shoot to kill" is self explanatory. You intended to kill the individual. "Shoot to stop the threat" is exactly what it says without you intentionally shooting to kill. In other words, you intended to stop the threat any way you could so the perpetrator could no longer do you harm, now or in the future.

Because "shoot to stop the threat" sounds better to a jury.

Because a prosecutor can claim, you set up yourself "to kill someone" AND "you confessed that you shot the victim to kill him/her". That gets you life behind closed steel doors for life if the jury buy those words.

ron_houston makes a good point regarding the oft-visited caliber discussion. Everyone has their personal preference, but essentially it is true that (with handgun cartridges at least) bullet placement is far more important than size of the projectile in stopping an attack. Carry a gun chambering the most powerful cartridge you can consistently be accurate with -- most powerful simply because that raises the likelihood of damaging important parts to the assailant's anatomy, all else being equal.

The purpose for carrying a sidearm is clear -- you want to make your odds of surviving an attack (stopping the attacker) better, so you choose to carry a force option allowing you to project force beyond the reach of your fingertips. Stopping an attack is truly the desire, but effectively stopping an attack may mean that the attacker loses their life. We must understand this and steel our minds against this eventuality, but our real desire is to simply stop the attack so we and our loved ones can continue our travels upon this earth. If merely producing a gun stops the attack, carrying the sidearm has still served its purpose.

Middle Age Russ wrote:ron_houston makes a good point regarding the oft-visited caliber discussion. Everyone has their personal preference, but essentially it is true that (with handgun cartridges at least) bullet placement is far more important than size of the projectile in stopping an attack. Carry a gun chambering the most powerful cartridge you can consistently be accurate with -- most powerful simply because that raises the likelihood of damaging important parts to the assailant's anatomy, all else being equal.

The purpose for carrying a sidearm is clear -- you want to make your odds of surviving an attack (stopping the attacker) better, so you choose to carry a force option allowing you to project force beyond the reach of your fingertips. Stopping an attack is truly the desire, but effectively stopping an attack may mean that the attacker loses their life. We must understand this and steel our minds against this eventuality, but our real desire is to simply stop the attack so we and our loved ones can continue our travels upon this earth. If merely producing a gun stops the attack, carrying the sidearm has still served its purpose.

100% Carry a round you can fire consistently accurate.

The only time a person shoots to kill another person is when they are going to commit murder.

Javier730 wrote:

Middle Age Russ wrote:ron_houston makes a good point regarding the oft-visited caliber discussion. Everyone has their personal preference, but essentially it is true that (with handgun cartridges at least) bullet placement is far more important than size of the projectile in stopping an attack. Carry a gun chambering the most powerful cartridge you can consistently be accurate with -- most powerful simply because that raises the likelihood of damaging important parts to the assailant's anatomy, all else being equal.

The purpose for carrying a sidearm is clear -- you want to make your odds of surviving an attack (stopping the attacker) better, so you choose to carry a force option allowing you to project force beyond the reach of your fingertips. Stopping an attack is truly the desire, but effectively stopping an attack may mean that the attacker loses their life. We must understand this and steel our minds against this eventuality, but our real desire is to simply stop the attack so we and our loved ones can continue our travels upon this earth. If merely producing a gun stops the attack, carrying the sidearm has still served its purpose.

100% Carry a round you can fire consistently accurate.

The only time a person shoots to kill another person is when they are going to commit murder.

Or they are on battlefield. Even though It is still war crime to execute POW or civilians.

Why not shoot to preserve life.

Beiruty wrote:

Javier730 wrote:

Middle Age Russ wrote:ron_houston makes a good point regarding the oft-visited caliber discussion. Everyone has their personal preference, but essentially it is true that (with handgun cartridges at least) bullet placement is far more important than size of the projectile in stopping an attack. Carry a gun chambering the most powerful cartridge you can consistently be accurate with -- most powerful simply because that raises the likelihood of damaging important parts to the assailant's anatomy, all else being equal.

The purpose for carrying a sidearm is clear -- you want to make your odds of surviving an attack (stopping the attacker) better, so you choose to carry a force option allowing you to project force beyond the reach of your fingertips. Stopping an attack is truly the desire, but effectively stopping an attack may mean that the attacker loses their life. We must understand this and steel our minds against this eventuality, but our real desire is to simply stop the attack so we and our loved ones can continue our travels upon this earth. If merely producing a gun stops the attack, carrying the sidearm has still served its purpose.

100% Carry a round you can fire consistently accurate.

The only time a person shoots to kill another person is when they are going to commit murder.

Or they are on battlefield. Even though It is still war crime to execute POW or civilians.

Or an execution by firing squad. Utah still uses the firing squad if the state is unable to obtain the necessary lethal injection drugs within 30 days of a scheduled execution.

suthdj wrote:Why not shoot to preserve life.

I once saw a documentary on LEO sharp shooters. One of the officers said that when people found out what he did, they always asked him how many people had he killed, they never asked how many he saved.

Shot placement is indeed the key which is why professional hit men often stop the threat with 3 .22 shorts right behind the ear. Of course, the threat they are stopping is an open mouth.

JALLEN wrote:Shot placement is indeed the key which is why professional hit men often stop the threat with 3 .22 shorts right behind the ear. Of course, the threat they are stopping is an open mouth.

Does in the eye work too, with a Pencil?!!