Baseball bat or knife?

[It is Fake]

"I agree with him. Shotgun > bat or knife.
You worried about lethal intent and the law? Don't shoot to kill. Provied first aid while the authorities are on the way. If your life is in danger to the degree that it's actually time to shoot taking your chances with the law is probably better than the alternative."

You mean shoot to stop. In most defensive shooting classes it is called center mass or the biggest target.
You want to get sued? Shoot to wound.

[eloneamigo]

Well- my disagreement is with your idea of a 'less lethal' shotgun lowering your risk of civil and legal lawsuits . .. i think the reality is the exact opposite.

Loading your shotgun with 'less lethal' ammo has no bearing in your liability with using the shotgun. (less lethal can still kill-)
So is the increase in range- worth it- for the LIMITS in stopping power?

In my opinion- no. I think considering you will face EXACTLY the same liability- i would suggest leaving the 'less lethal' ammo for cops . ..

Yeah, I have never even fired bean bags before so I was more or less wondering if it would even stop a guy let alone provide a good source of protection from lawsuits. I did go to youtube for examples and honestly I am not impressed with what I found. I think safe to say that if a guy on pcp can be shot then tazed and still manage to steal a police cruiser after the fact, well it won't be a good day at the homestead.

If skinny teenagers can take a beanbag to the back and still manage to get up this quickly,

[/URL]

What do you do when a guy like this gets in your house? So I am officially recanting my statements about euch/shotties being worth a damn.

http://www.myfoxdc.com/story/1896272...after-shootout

[Mr. Machette]

"considering the 'less lethal' option can still kill- and either way regardless of amunition you legally have to be able to defend resorting to a firearm.

Ah. I agree. Sorry for the confusion. I personally preffer "low-base" 00 buckshot loads, but that may be a contreversial choice to some.

You mean shoot to stop. In most defensive shooting classes it is called center mass or the biggest target.

I guess this would defer to the "don't pull the gun unless it's time to use it" rule.

So yes, if it's really shotgun time it's really stopping time. But I would agure that if it's really "shank a dude in the dark time" then it probably qualifies as shotgun time as well.

[johnny_cage]

Nope- that clears it up!

(and yep i agree with the 'if its shotgun time is [certainly mere moments away from] stopping time"

And i agree entirely that if a knife is warranted- so is a shotgun.
(my disagreement- was the OP was referring to a bean-bag- i just wanted to point out that STOPPING-wise its not guaranteed- and LEGAL-wise its AS serious as a shotgun or knife anyway)


@eloneamigo

Thanks for responding/reading- cuz yeah my point was just that it SEEMS that a bean bag makes the court automatically on your side . . . BUT as ItIsFake stated- an INJURY SHOT is the MOST LIKELY you are to being in severe legal trouble. (if you need 'less lethal' force- lethal force is better suited- with an easier defense in court)

ALSO- im not certain- but i BELIEVE that a beanbag has no unique classification- (because an UNLOADED gun is still threat with deadly weapon- so on same basis . .. other types of amunition are STILL treated the same as a bullet.)

Personally- (for home defense- on the street is a slightly different matter)- my FIRST priority is to remove the grey area . .. (ie HOW MUCH of a threat- are they harmless looking for cash- or rapers with satan candles . ..)

So- start by stating and preparing threat. .. "I am armed- and indication towards me- or that you refuse to leave will be dealt with by force. Vacate the building now- refusal will be dealt with as a threat."

and then let the situation play out- but have been prepared to use force if needed (but my plan is to make the 'need' as far away from developing into a threat or danger as possible)

[It is Fake]

I guess this would defer to the "don't pull the gun unless it's time to use it" rule.

I'll take it further, don't own a gun if you are worried about killing.

[ChenPengFi]

i
Yup.

I agree with him. Shotgun > bat or knife.
You worried about lethal intent and the law? Don't shoot to kill. Provied first aid while the authorities are on the way. If your life is in danger to the degree that it's actually time to shoot taking your chances with the law is probably better than the alternative.

What I don't see after back tracking to see what I "missed" is how the shotgun thing applies to a comon verbal exchange in a parking lot.


I can too good read and stuff!

Hahahahaaaaa....
Oh, you're one of those guys.

While you did concede the main point, i'm not ignoring that bolded bit.
If i simply aim at you, i should be totally comfortable with your demise.
More importantly, one cannot reliably shoot to wound and not kill.

I also addressed the parking lot incident separately, ie "I also don't think..."

[Mr. Machette]

Hahahahaaaaa....
Oh, you're one of those guys.

While you did concede the main point, i'm not ignoring that bolded bit.
If i simply aim at you, i should be totally comfortable with your demise.
More importantly, one cannot reliably shoot to wound and not kill.

I also addressed the parking lot incident separately, ie "I also don't think..."

It was more of a reccomendation. I got the impression that some people were afraid of taking a life, which is reasonable. If that's the case, it wouldn't be terribly hard to take out a mans thigh with scatter shot at any distance you would encounter in a domicile. They may still bleed out, but you at LEAST have the defence that you aimed for a non-vital area and attmepted to provide frist aid. That was for those concerned with the legal stigma of shooting an intruder. Prosecuters love to go after the details and nit pick. I.E., if you used hollow points they will argue that you INTENDED to kill ala murder 1. This fact weighs on many a home sentinel.

Personally I don't trust my skills under preasure to aim at anything other than center mass. I also don't trust bird shot or rubber pellets to stop a threat cold. Perps get lead. They get it to the chest.

[It is Fake]

It was more of a reccomendation. I got the impression that some people were afraid of taking a life, which is reasonable. If that's the case, it wouldn't be terribly hard to take out a mans thigh with scatter shot at any distance you would encounter in a domicile. They may still bleed out, but you at LEAST have the defence that you aimed for a non-vital area and attmepted to provide frist aid. That was for those concerned with the legal stigma of shooting an intruder.

What country do you live in? You will get sued and possibly imprisoned in many states with this action.

Prosecuters love to go after the details and nit pick. I.E., if you used hollow points they will argue that you INTENDED to kill ala murder 1.

WTF? Statistics and cases please. I have NEVER heard this before.

This fact weighs on many a home sentinel.

Please get the documents to support this fact. You must live in a real shitty state.

[Mr. Machette]

What country do you live in? You will get sued and possibly imprisoned in many states with this action.

WTF? Statistics and cases please. I have NEVER heard this before.

Please get the documents to support this fact. You must live in a real shitty state.

Fake, I'm not going to spend all weekend scouring the internets to prove a point to strangers.

Hang out on some gun boards where this argument is discussed ad-nauseum. I mod on one and to me this topic is as tedious, repetitive, and pointless as Ninjitsu vs. BJJ is to you.

The whole thread has turned into fantasy football anyways so **** it...

[ChenPengFi]

Asking you to support your statements isn't asking too much, imo.