(NSFL) Man shot and killed by father-son duo in Abilene Texas - General

You really gonna do this "haha I was trolin lol" shtick then try to have a discussion immediately afterwards? Either continue the dipshittery or commit to an argument. When using a gun for self defesne, it is not at all designed to be used in a less than lethal manner. Thats the whole point; if you've exhausted all other reasonable attempts to stop a lethal confrontation, you resort to lethal force. The issue isnt that the bar for owning a lethal tool is too low, its that too many people are willing to commit crimes that may drive them into a lethal encounter. Youre completely missing the entire argument here on an astonishing level. Raising the bar for ownership is not going to stop lethal encounters from happening; youre just going to be taking away a means of self defense from would-be victims of these encounters. The bar is completely fine where its at. Quit acting dumb for the sake of your argument.

Alright, well i appreciate your opinion that gun standards are good as is.

I didn't flame you, for the record. Just pointing out I dont care for your honest opinions on a person's character nor do I care for your feigned stupidities. Hard truths, not flaming.

I find it hard to believe that this means "aim for a non-lethal spot". This has been gone over quite thoroughly in the thread, firearms are inherently lethal force, no matter where the offender is hit. Police departments here sometimes use language like "stopping the threat" to describe their intent in use of force, I suspect this is the same. It would help if we could get clarification from an actual Swedish cop, or maybe an official training video.

I love how it's like nonsense to argue gunners should try to reduce the damage they cause

I love how you blame upstanding citizens for the damage caused by criminals.

Again, why should I try to reduce damage done to an assailant? For what reason should I care about them at all?

If that’s your argument it’s a dumb hollow argument that we’ve already defeated

Again, you're generalizing millions of people for the actions of a few dozen. Do you also want to destroy the Middle East and Islam because of the actions of the few during 9/11? D'you want to wipe Germany off the map for WW2? Generalizing is stupid, even you should realize that.

I've been trying to tone down on all the murders I do as a gun owner but I'm still at 0 so its tough.

Bro i live on the fifth floor of my building overlooking the main thoroughfare of the capital city of my state but i haven't shot anyone, what do i do bro?

Sounds like your sights are misaligned. Take your murdergun to a murdergunsmith and he can bore sight it for you.

https://i.imgur.com/0Xr99DK.png

But bro i haven't even TRIED to shoot someone, how can i live as this statistical anomaly?

lemme shoot u so u can at least be involved in a shooting in some way and no longer a total ammolet

Aight m8 shoot me in the leg or something so it's not lethal

arteries are a SOCIAL CONSTRUCT, not a biological one

Moving the debate thread wont solve shit. New threads like this let the people who've been unequivocally proven wrong feign ignorance into the next thread. Theyll still be in here touting the same broken points as always.

Could just promote me to gun tzar and I'd solve the issue all together.

it'll be ok dude he'll apply a tourniquet!

Ok I can agree that we need better regulations and control over who has access to guns, but what you’re suggesting about “shooting to wound” is not feasible, ethical, or legal. First let’s look at it from a point of feasibility. Anyone who’s ever shot a gun before at any point in they’re life would tell you it’s hard enough to hit smaller targets in controlled conditions when both you and the target are stationary, nevermind when you’re under duress against a moving target trying to kill you. Also as several others have already pointed out to you, terminal ballistics on the human body is a total crapshoot. Some people die in one shot from getting hit in the leg, other people take an entire mag dump to center mass and still try to attack you. On the ethical/legal side of things, if you’re trying to disable an attacker without killing them, then you shouldn’t be using a fucking gun. In the eyes of the law, just drawing and pointing a gun at anyone is considered lethal force, so you better be damned sure either your life or someone else’s life is being threatened, otherwise you’ve just committed a felony. If you have enough time to think about attempting to disable an attacker without using lethal force, then your life is not in immediate danger. Therefore, just drawing a gun in any such situations could potentially open you up to criminal charges. Shooting at anyone regardless of your intent in this example would pretty much guarantee criminal charges.

Remember that guns are deadly and we should ban them and that also we should reduce deaths by doing non-lethal shots even though any bulletwound can easily kill and also we should do that because we should think about the feelings of a man trying to kill us, even though they already submitted to the risks of doing so totally doesn't sound retarded at all haha

This has been explained to death and back as to why they don't.

Typically the kinds of situations that would warrant what folks here would call a limb shot also mean other less lethal options are also warranted. Things like stun guns, pepper spray, bean bags, etc. In the situations that allow for that, such as a crazy man with a machete who is keeping this distance, than those are the options they generally take first. As for general police work throughout the US when a shooting happens we're mostly talking about situations that have 1 or 2 officers at most. Whenever you have a suspect that is within 25 feet ( 7.5 meters) there simply is no time to consider alternative methods. There's no space, little to no cover, and with only 1 or 2 officers dealing with a situation there's not much for support. As such officers are trained to shoot to stop a threat, they're trained to shoot center mass because it is the largest and thus easiest target to hit, and within that 25 foot distance there is little to no time to think about other considerations when a suspect becomes violent. Its not for a lack of officers trying less lethal options first, its more so that more often in violent situations a suspect has a lethal option at their disposal. Less lethal options are never a guarantee; tasers have to have their darts land and stick correctly in order to work, pepper spray is only as effective as the user spraying it and a suspects tolerance to pain, bean bags must be shot in a short distance in order to be accurate and can still kill if they land in the wrong place. Most officers, and I believe people in general, are more concerned with getting out of a deadly situation alive than risking their life to try and non-lethally wound a suspect who has or is about to use deadly force themselves. To understand how these situations unfold lets look at some videos, some involve law enforcement and some involve civilians. These are NSFW, and some are very graphic. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NCsu5JaIbuE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iNCsowxZWSI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rqyDHwZcL1Y https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2iFo1TrYMq4 Here's some example where less lethal was tried to be used first https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_BZkxLQ6zlk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=884W4l3eoQg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=98Ly2Quy4Ms - One where an officer died as he tried to use less lethal first. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cgWq48I0sxE - A Group of UK officers who all used less lethal first, which they thankfully had the power of numbers. (This one is very unnerving) Long story short more often then not the situation is not under control, and the events unfold very quickly. That is why most officers are trained the way they are in the US.

Lmao I'm not betting my life on 'non-lethally' shooting a deranged maniac in the leg, which may end up even being ignored by them. Fuck. That.

Bold claim, can you back it up?

i don't know who you are outside of your fp shitposting, but thanks a lot man. im going to go buy a handgun now

Sometimes I wish i could live in a world where my aim was as good as it was in a video game, and that medicine and physiology also worked like it does in most FPS, where i can just throw a med-bag and all those bullet wounds stop existing.

Which countries have this as a common last resort? The broken down Balkan and Eastern European ones? Or the developed Western Europe ones? Or is it one of those fancy differences from Switzerland?

ok america