Originally Posted by
nick95673
It(.380) makes a noise that scares people. I am banking on the fact that the suspect doesn't really want to kill Nick, he just wants to do harm to that guy over there. So when faced with the sight of a gun hopefully he will run. I will fire a warning shot if given the chance. Hopefully the sound will make him flee. If I shoot him I have a lot to worry about. The real weapon to have is a tazer that shoots the darts. It inflicts the most pain. From talking to inmates who have had every weapon used on them in terms of pain it goes Tazer>knife>(OC(only the immediate effect)=gun)>batton>less than lethal rounds
However the gun scares them the most. It represents the chance that it can all be over if they continue. I like it for the idea that I only need 1 for multiple attackers, it doesn't actually need to be used to be effective.
As far as numbers go it would be anecdotal for me to say. It is hard to tell because a lot of people who say they are innocent bystanders, actually are very guilty. It is rare that a good person has a crime directed directly towards them. Normally you must do something to instigate an attack. They do happen but not as often. I do know that you are twice as likely to intentionally kill yourself with a gun than you are to use it in self defense. It is almost 2 to 1 in the number of gun related suicides to any gun related death.
The results are always negative. In one way or another. A partner of mine was robbed at an ATM he pulled out a snub nose and dropped the suspect. He was arrested and sent to prison where he sued my partner. The stress destroyed his marriage. Had he killed the suspect his family could have sued. This is why given the chance I will fire a round in to the dirt or water and give them a chance to run or cuff up.
I am not trying to call you out by any means, i just think you bring up alot of interesting points. Most departments have strict "no warning-shot" policys. The weapon that one carries must always remain a defensive weapon (only fired in the defense of life), by firing "warning shots" or trying to scare or force submission you turn it into an offensive weapon, therefore opening yourself up to lots of legal issues. Use your verbal commands as attempts to scare or force submission, but never fire a warning shot. Not to mention that shooting dirt is an incredibly dangerous practice as you can never garuntee where that bullet is going to end up. If your gun is out of your holster and pointed anywhere toward another individual you better intend on killing that person in defense of a deadly force assualt.
As far as tazers go, they are a great tool. They are quick and shocking (pun intended) yet leave little lasting symptoms. They are genereally looked upon as cruel and unnessasery by the public. However they do exactly what they were designed for, to quickly stun and incapcitate. They work very well in law enforcement applications because of the situations. Officers carry hand handcuffs, and can call back up. As a citizen i doubt thier effectiveness, the Tazer lasts for a 5 second cycle then after which an officer has a small (2-3 second) window to restrain and cuff. As a citizen without cuffs or training or back up when those 5 seconds are up then what? (they are trying to make it so anyone with a CCW permit in MI can carry a tazer, i am avidly opposed to this) As someone who has been tazed (volunteer) i can say that it is significantly painful but when the cycle is up you are back to almost full ability instantly. There is no lasting incapicitation effect. However a tazer being a less then lethel option can be used to scare or force submission (its amazing how fast people comply when you pull out and spark test your tazer in front of them).
Lastly about being sued, its going to happen. Its going to happen weather the incident invloves a gun or not. I have seen many officers end up in court becuase they were simply doing their job, any type of
"use of force" situation weather it be just physical controls (wristlocks/joint locks), or something more serious (batons/tazers) all they way up to deadly force (certian punchs/chops, baton strikes, firearms) will most likely be hovered over by attorneys. Make sure you are making the right choice and you will be fine.
My father used to be a security guard for some rich peoples houses. He was checking one of them and an intruder opened fire on him when we walked into the kitchen, the guy fired 6 shots. My dad ducked behind a island counter and wasnt hit. He then popped up and fired two shots at the intruder and hit him in the shoulder. The guy ended up losing his arm and sued my dad and the company he worked for. In court the guys attorney asked my dad if he intended to maim the intruder:
"Well, no i wasnt intending to maim him, i was intending to kill him. I was aiming for his heart and i guess hes pretty lucky i missed".
The judge dismissed the case.