Police shoot thief in Sosua

[cobraboy]

I don't have any experience with the handgun at all except the 10 rounds I discharged on a trip to an Asian country some years ago where it cost me $28 and about 2 minutes (expensive activity !), and I got all of the shots almost in the center circle from about 15 feet away - the usual touristy stuff they have over there.

But how hard is it to shoot someone in the leg to stop them running away rather than the head or chest !? They keep saying it is the bigger target and a better place to aim (perhaps for self-defense), but when someone is running away and has their back to you, why would they just aim at the leg and shoot a few rounds - surely one will get him and stop him and he deserves that, but no serious harm (well, he could be maimed, so he won't go robbing again - not a bad result, but still alive !).

Even in all the movies it's always the same, they either decide not to shoot and let the guy go (presumably worried they might kill him) or shoot them right in the place that drops him like a brick and dead...I don't get it... !? (Maybe they just need to train police how to shoot the legs... !)

Shooting at a stationary target 15' away when you have all the unstressed time in the world to play is a different universe from life-or-death decisions and accuracy when highly stressed and the target is shooting back.

When you pull the trigger, the intent is to kill (or be killed.)

Shoot to wound is a myth.

 

[Bronxboy]

Shoot to wound is a myth.

How about using a stun gun?

 

[cobraboy]

How about using a stun gun?

Are you willing to forfeit your life if it doesn't work? That you'd be accurate with an inaccurate single-shot devise shooting a plug and wire at slow speed?

Hollywood has destroyed reality.

 

[Bronxboy]

Hollywood has destroyed reality.

Just a curious question as I am not sure if DR police are equip with them.

And, no, I am not willing to forfeit my life.

I watch many movies but do not live my life according to what I see.

 

[SantiagoDR]

Are you willing to forfeit your life if it doesn't work? That you'd be accurate with an inaccurate single-shot devise shooting a plug and wire at slow speed?

Hollywood has destroyed reality.

Correct, you only get one shot and if you miss or strike an area that does not disable the subject, you loss the time to fire and shoot a real gun, giving the suspect time to shoot/kill you.

 

[Bronxboy]

Correct, you only get one shot and if you miss or strike an area that does not disable the subject, you loss the time to fire and shoot a real gun, giving the suspect time to shoot/kill you.

So why carry them? They are trained to use them as well if they carry them I would think.

 

[Tamborista]

How about using a stun gun?

As long as you test it out!

http://dr1.com/forums/showthread.php/107708-Shotgun-at-home?p=907685&viewfull=1#post907685

 

[Bronxboy]

As long as you test it out!

http://dr1.com/forums/showthread.php/107708-Shotgun-at-home?p=907685&viewfull=1#post907685

hahahahahahaha

 

[Uzin]

I think I didn't quite explain the situation I was thinking about.

It's quite different if some armed person is facing you and aiming at you with a gun, I was talking about a possibly un-armed person running away with his back towards you and possibly in the direction straight away from you (they don't usually do a commando zig-zag run... ! I'm sure it won't be easy, but fire at will, towards the leg, there are quite a few bullets in the handguns these days, it's not a competition, just need one of the 10 or 15 to land on target. (I bet in most cases once he hears the first shot he will be on the ground motionless, surrendering.)

As for the revenge, anyone would be in fact grateful not been killed and only wounded, imagine the angry mob of families of a dead person - just see the recent killings by police in the US, I bet those officers would have been having a different life (rest of their lives in fact) if they hadn't killed and just wounded.

All this talk about killing thieves and sling them behind trucks of course are a bit of a hot air, we all know what the consequences of killing a person is, in any part of the world, specially if it happened to be running away (possibly unarmed) and shot in the back - if you like that kind of hassle you are welcome to it...

 

[cobraboy]

I think I didn't quite explain the situation I was thinking about.

It's quite different if some armed person is facing you and aiming at you with a gun, I was talking about a possibly un-armed person running away with his back towards you and possibly in the direction straight away from you (they don't usually do a commando zig-zag run... ! I'm sure it won't be easy, but fire at will, towards the leg, there are quite a few bullets in the handguns these days, it's not a competition, just need one of the 10 or 15 to land on target. (I bet in most cases once he hears the first shot he will be on the ground motionless, surrendering.)

As for the revenge, anyone would be in fact grateful not been killed and only wounded, imagine the angry mob of families of a dead person - just see the recent killings by police in the US, I bet those officers would have been having a different life (rest of their lives in fact) if they hadn't killed and just wounded.

All this talk about killing thieves and sling them behind trucks of course are a bit of a hot air, we all know what the consequences of killing a person is, in any part of the world, specially if it happened to be running away (possibly unarmed) and shot in the back - if you like that kind of hassle you are welcome to it...

You are familiar with the concept of "collateral damage?"

When you miss your shot, that's what you may end up wit.

Remember these two words: "Center Mass." That's what you shoot for WHEN you shoot.

 

[pmey27]

You are so so right on that Cobraboy!

 

[dv8]

i think we are done here. those who want to discuss gun violence elsewhere can do so in OT forum.
closed.