5 ms·
The police are allowed to shoot someone in the leg. Lethal force is not the only option with a firearm.
by vnchr 7y ago
The police are allowed to shoot someone in the leg. Lethal force is not the only option with a firearm.
- tyingq 7y agoCurious if there's any place where this is common. I assumed everyone trains center mass. Also, there's a femoral artery in your leg... you'll be just as dead if that gets hit.
- kube-system 7y agoAny use of a firearm is potentially lethal and should be treated as such. The precision necessary for the scenario you are proposing is not physiologically possible during an active conflict.
- ptero 7y agoDifferent police units are trained for different rules. Somewhere it is a verbal warning, warning shot, shot in the leg, shot to kill. Sometimes it is just a verbal warning and a shot to kill. Not defending the police in this specific case (I do not know the details), but blaming an officer for following the sequence he has been trained for is misplacing the blame. My 2c.
- radmarshallb 7y agoI highly doubt any officers anywhere are trained to fire a warning shot, much less a precise disabling shot in the leg. When you fire your weapon, it is with the intent to kill.
- MichaelApproved 7y agoCitation needed. Which police force trains their officers to shoot people in the leg? My understanding is that, if you need to shoot someone, there’s an immediate threat. You shoot for the largest target, so you won’t miss and so you do the most damage. If you aim for the leg, you’re likely to miss. Even if you hit the leg, there’s a femoral artery in there. If you hit that person will bleed out in just a few minutes.
- jacobush 7y agoThe Swedish police. They are allowed to shoot to kill, but in some circumstances (likely not a riot, but it's a case by case judgement) are instructed to aim for the legs.
- MS90 7y agoThis is strange to me. Firstly, because hitting a target with a pistol under high stress can be extremely difficult and legs are smaller than torso, and secondly, because "aiming for the legs" doesn't guarantee that it won't be lethal. If you take a shot to the femoral artery your chances of surviving aren't great. In fact, they're probably worse than taking a shot to the torso. There was a video going around a few years ago where a policeman shot a robber in the thigh. The round hit his femoral artery and he was dead within five minutes.
- jacobush 7y agoIt is kind of strange, but nevertheless, that's how it is. They are supposed to use the maim option with discretion. And it has caused death several times. The police used to have smaller caliber pistols, and IIRC they put 14 rounds in someone leg, which didn't stop him from approaching the policemen doing the shooting. He still died though! This incident was one reason why they were later equipped with the more powerful SigSauer for more stopping power.
- MS90 7y agoJeez that's crazy. 14 rounds in a leg...how was that thing even still attached? Do the police there have tasers? That could be a good tool for this type of thing.
- jacobush 7y agoSmall caliber rounds. Tasers may come in the future. But back when that incident happened, tasers were not a thing. Edit: I am torn on tasers. It’s a viable tool. I am just very pessimistic. I fully expect them to used VERY liberally in all sorts of situations where we got along very fine without them. It’s yet another way of dehumanising an encounter
- goles 7y agoIn defensive shootings the objective is to stop the immediate threat which is best accomplished by shooting center mass and damaging the vital organs. Shooting to maim will give the attacker the opportunity to disable you or take the weapon from you which will likely result in your death.
- doomleika 7y agoAt that scenario you might shoot right through someone's brain. There's significant high chance to shoot through arteries at leg shots.