4 ms·

This concept you can shoot to maim is silly. Hitting a man is hard if you practice shooting. In a chaotic situation with adrenaline its even harder. Shooting t

by geggam 7y ago

This concept you can shoot to maim is silly. Hitting a man is hard if you practice shooting. In a chaotic situation with adrenaline its even harder. Shooting to hit is all you can do.

jacobush 7y ago
The police in Sweden is trained to shoot to maim, but only in somewhat controlled situations, such as someone wielding a knife approaching officers from a distance. First warn verbally, then fire a warning shot, then fire at the legs. When there is no margin left, fire to stop. (Which means in practice, often death.) https://polisen.se/om-polisen/polisens-arbete/polisens-befogenheter/hur-ofta-anvander-polisen-skjutvapen/ https://polisen.se/om-polisen/polisens-arbete/polisens-befog...
- geggam 7y ago
  The only way this sort of training would work IMO would be with sociopaths or psychopaths who dont have the huge adrenaline jump from emotional attachment to other humans.
  - jacobush 7y ago
    I don't understand this notion. The training is exactly to make people just respond with how they were trained, automatically. This is also how the military works. Since you just do it, you aren't as likely to ponder what will happen to the human in the cross hairs. These thoughts come afterwards.
    - geggam 7y ago
      Never had a person in your cross hairs i take it ?
- LandR 7y ago
  THis might be a stupid question, but where are Warning shots fired? Are they fired close to the target, but far enough away to miss? Can this only be done if there is no one behind the target, are they shot into the sky? If so is their no danger of bullets hitting people falling back down? Or do they lose enough speed on the downward arc to be safe? Or is the chance of a warning shot hitting someone innocent so staggering low that it isn't worth worrying about?
  - dx87 7y ago
    I live in the USA, and the only place I've ever seen warning shots being recommended was by the military in Iraq when civilian vehicles would drive too close to a convoy. If a gun is used, it's because you feel that your life or someone elses is in imminent danger. Warning shots can ricochet and kill someone, and bullets can still come down with lethal force if a warning shot is fired into the air. Shooting to maim is possible if the situation allows for it, but warning shots can end up killing someone besides the intended target.
    - pzo 7y ago
      I was skeptical in the beginning that "bullets can still come down with lethal force if a warning shot is fired into the air" but I guess you are correct. Mythbusters were testing this in one episode and [1]"Because of this potentiality, firing a gun into the air is illegal in most states, and even in the states that it is legal, it is not recommended by the police. Also the MythBusters were able to identify two people who had been injured by falling bullets, one of them fatally injured" [1] https://mythresults.com/episode50 https://mythresults.com/episode50
- JoeAltmaier 7y ago
  The distance has to be very great - 21 feet is often quoted as the minimum distance where a gun wins over a knife. And many barrooms are less than that. So in theory its a kind idea. But hardly ever significant in practice?
  - geggam 7y ago
    I would argue a sawed off double barrel 12 gauge with double / triple aught buck would reduce that down to a few feet. Problem would be how you train people to hold their cool
    - JoeAltmaier 7y ago
      That cavalier attitude is what gets officers killed in bar fights. It takes a couple seconds to cross 21 feet. About what it takes to recognize the danger and raise the weapon.
      - geggam 7y ago
        The shoot first attitude is what gets unarmed citizens and other cops killed in bar fights https://www.cnn.com/2019/09/30/us/bronx-officer-shot-dead/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2019/09/30/us/bronx-officer-shot-dead/in...
  - Faark 7y ago
    > 21 feet is often quoted as the minimum distance where a gun wins over a knife Against an already drawn gun and a trained as well as attentive officer? Do you have a source for that? I have a hard time believing that. Or is this the case after factoring into the US mentality of "there may not ever be any residual risk for a cop"?

by geggam 7y ago

This concept you can shoot to maim is silly. Hitting a man is hard if you practice shooting. In a chaotic situation with adrenaline its even harder. Shooting to hit is all you can do.

jacobush 7y ago

The police in Sweden is trained to shoot to maim, but only in somewhat controlled situations, such as someone wielding a knife approaching officers from a distance. First warn verbally, then fire a warning shot, then fire at the legs. When there is no margin left, fire to stop. (Which means in practice, often death.) https://polisen.se/om-polisen/polisens-arbete/polisens-befogenheter/hur-ofta-anvander-polisen-skjutvapen/ https://polisen.se/om-polisen/polisens-arbete/polisens-befog...

geggam 7y ago
The only way this sort of training would work IMO would be with sociopaths or psychopaths who dont have the huge adrenaline jump from emotional attachment to other humans.
- jacobush 7y ago
  I don't understand this notion. The training is exactly to make people just respond with how they were trained, automatically. This is also how the military works. Since you just do it, you aren't as likely to ponder what will happen to the human in the cross hairs. These thoughts come afterwards.
  - geggam 7y ago
    Never had a person in your cross hairs i take it ?
LandR 7y ago
THis might be a stupid question, but where are Warning shots fired? Are they fired close to the target, but far enough away to miss? Can this only be done if there is no one behind the target, are they shot into the sky? If so is their no danger of bullets hitting people falling back down? Or do they lose enough speed on the downward arc to be safe? Or is the chance of a warning shot hitting someone innocent so staggering low that it isn't worth worrying about?
- dx87 7y ago
  I live in the USA, and the only place I've ever seen warning shots being recommended was by the military in Iraq when civilian vehicles would drive too close to a convoy. If a gun is used, it's because you feel that your life or someone elses is in imminent danger. Warning shots can ricochet and kill someone, and bullets can still come down with lethal force if a warning shot is fired into the air. Shooting to maim is possible if the situation allows for it, but warning shots can end up killing someone besides the intended target.
  - pzo 7y ago
    I was skeptical in the beginning that "bullets can still come down with lethal force if a warning shot is fired into the air" but I guess you are correct. Mythbusters were testing this in one episode and [1]"Because of this potentiality, firing a gun into the air is illegal in most states, and even in the states that it is legal, it is not recommended by the police. Also the MythBusters were able to identify two people who had been injured by falling bullets, one of them fatally injured" [1] https://mythresults.com/episode50 https://mythresults.com/episode50
JoeAltmaier 7y ago
The distance has to be very great - 21 feet is often quoted as the minimum distance where a gun wins over a knife. And many barrooms are less than that. So in theory its a kind idea. But hardly ever significant in practice?
- geggam 7y ago
  I would argue a sawed off double barrel 12 gauge with double / triple aught buck would reduce that down to a few feet. Problem would be how you train people to hold their cool
  - JoeAltmaier 7y ago
    That cavalier attitude is what gets officers killed in bar fights. It takes a couple seconds to cross 21 feet. About what it takes to recognize the danger and raise the weapon.
    - geggam 7y ago
      The shoot first attitude is what gets unarmed citizens and other cops killed in bar fights https://www.cnn.com/2019/09/30/us/bronx-officer-shot-dead/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2019/09/30/us/bronx-officer-shot-dead/in...
- Faark 7y ago
  > 21 feet is often quoted as the minimum distance where a gun wins over a knife Against an already drawn gun and a trained as well as attentive officer? Do you have a source for that? I have a hard time believing that. Or is this the case after factoring into the US mentality of "there may not ever be any residual risk for a cop"?