Middle of August give or take…
3 Likes
Let me know Brother, I’m in! (No Joke)
3 Likes
I am a retired cop, and use of force instructor. Don’t over think this topic. It is not worth it. We are taught to “stop the threat.” Studies show that if you shoot 100% on the range, in combat you will shoot at 40% of that level, meaning you will miss 6 out of 10.
We are responsible as cops, and thus anyone in this situation, of ensuring where those bullets go. If you go for a leg, a much smaller body part than the torso and miss and hit the little girl behind the bad guy walking into the store to buy a soda, WE ARE responsible for where that bullet went. To me, I suggest shooting to “stop the threat” and the best way to do that is shoot for the largest body part, the torso!
I know as a civilian is not viewed exactly as a cop responding to a threat, but buy keeping these concepts in mind should we be forced to use deadly force, I believe legally the legal outcome will be much better. just my thoughts.
Scott
16 Likes
Someone else’s call to their own lawyer
4 Likes
That is just amazing! He kept being a threat for a long time. Very instructive sir.
7 Likes
Amazing video. If you happen to know the internet link, please share. I could not copy and paste this one. Be interesting for future learning and to share with others.
Looks like it was in 2022, June 20, just after 11AM.
As sad as it is, lots to learn from. Happened so fast. Hard to think, plan and act. I feel bad even trying to critique it trying to figure out if there could have been a safer way to avoid the fatalities. IDK.
Head on a swivel: Did that guard stare far too long to his right, and thus left his left side vulnerable? I work on my achy feet, but when he was leaning left with his arm to take pressure off of the feet, the criminal used that to his advantage to surprise the guard, who then needed an extra second to respond.
Was the guard positioned in too vulnerable a spot? Body armor too expensive? Ensuring hollow points so as less chance of collateral damage?
Life on the line, even with bystanders behind, there seemed safety depended on stopping that threat.
If the guard had what seemed was revolver, it did not seem his jammed.
Such an event still seems to me very rare it would happen to one during his/her life time. nothing against revolvers, I have one, but I also have a semi, God Forbid I would eve need to reload, I find I can faster with a semi.
There seemed to be very little cover, should one have maintained position and keep on firing? IDK.
Kudos to the guard, for many things, including his bravery. To me, once he saw the threat - he drew his sidearm very quickly. In some ways took the focus away from the bystanders, seemed none of them got hurt, he even went back into danger to retrieve his firearm. RIP.
But speaking about stopping life threats. I imagine the threat level varies. I can see how if the criminal still has his/her gun in their hand as high level risk, until that gun is dropped. As someone else posted, if we shoot our firearm in self defense (SD), our intention is not to end a life, but to stop that threat.
I once heard someone describe what we see as SD, as paranoia. But I have never seen it as paranoia, maybe because I have seen and heard what can happen. This being a good example, but I recently saw a documentary on road rage, which I hope to post about on another string soon.
Thank you RangeMatt.
8 Likes
I was able to copy it, here.
I hear you.
Seems the upper torso or center chest has the most mass, with less likely-hood of missing, and when struck, better chance it not being a thru and thru, thus less likeliness of innocents getting hurt. Just makes sense to me.
Forgot where I heard someone say aim for the leg, but luckily I never took that advice.
Unless of course, the threat is not showing his/her torso, but if only another body part is visible.
May it never come to that.
6 Likes
I snagged it off of reddit from here:
Bank robber gets blood all over the floor : r/ThatsInsane (reddit.com)
The entire encounter from beginning to where the guy bleeds out in the door happens in less than 40 seconds. Most people just do not understand how fast these encounters happen or the fact that you are shooting at a moving target that is turning and twisting just like you are, and the closer you are to the target, the more lateral movement it requires you to track and aim at that target, and thats before you factor in trying to aim at something small and moving a LOT like a limb.
10 Likes
lets be real weapons were ment to kill not wound, look at the bullets that we fire for self defence they are made to do the most damage posable , and even if the bad guy was wearing body armor if shot in the chest the transfer of energy could stop the heart, to many things that can’t be controled. so how do you know if you shoot to wound that would be the outcome the fact is you don’t.
4 Likes
Makes me think more and more about the pelvic girdle as a real choice. Either in conjunction with center mass stops or maybe even a primary and/or second shot.
We as defenders really have to consider that one-shot stops with a pistol are pretty unlikely in the heat of the moment.
11 Likes
I think if he had kept firing until the perp went down it would have ended better for the Security Guard. 
8 Likes
Pelvis shot would seem to generally offer a more favorable angle for missed shots hitting the ground or backstop sooner than higher shots I would think also
7 Likes
Yes sir, I had not thought of that. Very true.
4 Likes
The decision to attack was not mine. The next decision is.
STOP THE THREAT
8 Likes
Yes sir, I think so too.
6 Likes
I would 100% agree with that assessment. Willpower and determination have a weird power all of its own that gets discredited a lot these days, modern victim mentality has sadly put a hurting on willpower in general. what’s the old adage? Its not the size of the dog in the fight but the size of the fight in the dog?
10 Likes
Late to the thread here, but that video is a really sobering reminder that even with 100% fatal hits, the bad guys are still dangerous for a long time. I’m assuming the guard died after this. It looks like he took a few awful shots. It’s horrible to see how, even after his robbery was clearly stopped, and he was dying, the criminal still had to go out of his way to murder the guard, shooting him in the back like that.
Honestly, I don’t think many people could do much better than that guard did. He had his gun out and was landing shots less than a second after seeing the bad guy coming (and he was coming fast), but for all he did right, he still paid the price. 
9 Likes
Did he die because he had a revolver and not a semi auto?
Did we land on it looking like he had a revolver, he ran it dry, and had to try to crawl and run away while being shot instead of continuing to fire into the guy, possibly for CNS?
I’d hate to have had a 1911 with a 7 round mag in that situation, as well.
Capacity man.
7 Likes
Yeah, it looks to me me like they both had revolvers, and yeah, had he been able to keep shooting he might have been able to avoid being shot in the back. Capacity does matter. I love my revolvers, and often they’re all I can carry and conceal well, given how I have to dress, but when clothing allows, I’m carrying more capacity.
7 Likes