Shooting in self defense....

[kelcarry]

You never shoot to kill, period. You always shoot to stop. Inside your home or on the street. If someone breaks into your home in the middle of the night, you shoot them, the fall down unconscious (your good so far), then you walk up and put another round in the back of their head you might anticipate a bunch of free meals served on steel trays. If they turn around and run away you stop shooting.

You always shoot to stop. You keep shooting till they stop or you run out of bullets. This is why it is recommended that you have one or more reloads. If death occurs that is a side effect. It is generally accepted that the fastest and most reliable way to stop someone in a high stress situation is to aim for center mass. If you try to shoot someone in the arm or leg you will probably miss and it is unlikely to stop them any way. A head shot would probably stop them but here again it is a hard one to make in a high stress situation.

Hey Caribou: Why are you just playing with my words? Shooting to stop? Center mass? What in the world do you think these words infer? If he dies, I really do not care---I was in imminent danger and I will do WHATEVER IT TAKES to stop the threat. I sure as heck am not discharging my weapon for anything other than stopping him and if he dies, so be it--I will not have nightmares over it--my only concern in my house will be the costs to replace door jams and carpet. Inyour first paragraph you infer a (my) potential to shoot the BG once he is down and not an imminent threat. That is an insult to me. As far as shooting him in the back I do agree but FYI, in SC (only at night), if you affect a citizens arrest and the BG decides to evade same, you can use any and all means to stop his evasion and that includes shooting him in the back--not that I approve, but case law in SC backs up this potential.
I think we are saying the same things but, for whatever reason, you are wordsmithing.

[Caribou]

Hey Caribou: Why are you just playing with my words? Shooting to stop? Center mass? What in the world do you think these words infer? If he dies, I really do not care---I was in imminent danger and I will do WHATEVER IT TAKES to stop the threat. I sure as heck am not discharging my weapon for anything other than stopping him and if he dies, so be it--I will not have nightmares over it--my only concern in my house will be the costs to replace door jams and carpet. Inyour first paragraph you infer a (my) potential to shoot the BG once he is down and not an imminent threat. That is an insult to me. As far as shooting him in the back I do agree but FYI, in SC (only at night), if you affect a citizens arrest and the BG decides to evade same, you can use any and all means to stop his evasion and that includes shooting him in the back--not that I approve, but case law in SC backs up this potential.
I think we are saying the same things but, for whatever reason, you are wordsmithing.

I am sorry you were offended, no insult was intended. Call it word smithing if you wish but the words you use can make the difference between freedom and jail. I gave you the best information I had. Take what you like and leave the rest.