Is collateral damage ok?

View Poll Results: Collateral damage if SHTF

Voters
45. You may not vote on this poll
  • Do nothing and seek cover.

    2 4.44%
  • Move to a better position and try to limit any damage except to the BG.

    41 91.11%
  • Blast away, you're within your right to protect your life from these scumbags

    2 4.44%
Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 44

Thread: Is collateral damage ok?

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Santa Fe Area, New Mexico
    Posts
    3,487

    Is collateral damage ok?

    I ask the question because it's a main thought that crosses my mind if SHTF. Are you willing to engage a BG if you know that others around the BG may take hits? Or will you refrain and take cover and not engage? I cannot cover every scenario but if you don't have a clear shot at the BG and you know he's going too or already has starting shooting. Are you willing to accept that others may get hit, possibly die from your return fire?
    I know tuff question but would like some feed back cause I'm still not sure which road I would go down. Of the FIRST road would be to maneuver to a position to ensure full engagement without collateral damage. What say you?
    "The smallest minority on earth is the individual. Those who deny individual rights cannot claim to be defenders of minorities." --author and philosopher Ayn Rand (1905-1982)

  2.   
  3. #2
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Rocky River, Ohio
    Posts
    1,519
    I'll TRY to avoid harm to bystanders.

    I'm NEVER just going to LET somebody maim or murder me.

  4. #3
    I believe the answer goes without saying, there is just no reason for innocents to have to take the fall for a BG's actions.
    I'd rather be a Conservative Nutjob. Than a Liberal with NO Nuts & NO Job

  5. #4
    Every shooter is responsible for every shot he sends downrange. Watching the background is a key part of threat assessment, isn't it? That's why I don't carry FMJ ammunition, even for home defense. I live in a townhouse in the middle of suburbia; the thought of a round going through the BG and into the neighbor's house scares the cr*p out of me.

  6. #5
    I do not want to die, but I would find it hard to live with myself, knowing I killed an innocent bystander. Know what your pointed at, and know your limitation.
    Even though I walk through the valley of the Shadow of Death, I will fear no Evil, for YOU are with me; Remington 44 Mag:

  7. #6
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Louisville Ky.
    Posts
    1,043
    Quote Originally Posted by nathanwriter View Post
    Every shooter is responsible for every shot he sends downrange. Watching the background is a key part of threat assessment, isn't it? That's why I don't carry FMJ ammunition, even for home defense. I live in a townhouse in the middle of suburbia; the thought of a round going through the BG and into the neighbor's house scares the cr*p out of me.
    Same here as I live in a condo apartment. We are all responsible for our actions, including shooting when unsure what is beyond our target (negligence) or disregarding what is beyond our target (wanton endangerment).

  8. #7
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    The Great State of Texas "Remember the Alamo"
    Posts
    2,825

    Arrow

    Quote Originally Posted by mappow View Post
    I ask the question because it's a main thought that crosses my mind if SHTF. Are you willing to engage a BG if you know that others around the BG may take hits? Or will you refrain and take cover and not engage? I cannot cover every scenario but if you don't have a clear shot at the BG and you know he's going too or already has starting shooting. Are you willing to accept that others may get hit, possibly die from your return fire?
    I know tuff question but would like some feed back cause I'm still not sure which road I would go down. Of the FIRST road would be to maneuver to a position to ensure full engagement without collateral damage. What say you?
    "Is collateral damage okay?"

    The short answer is "No".
    As an armed citizen, You are responsible for every round that comes out of your firearm.
    (Unlike Many LEO's As Of Late Unfortunately).
    Fascist's are Magicians...They can make our Property, our Freedom's & even our Children 'Disappear'.
    ~Outlaw~

  9. #8
    ezkl2230 Guest
    As a team leader for one of my church's security teams, I recently went through a shoot/no shoot class. Although none of us ever want to be in such a situation, we were walked through at least one scenario in which DELIBERATELY shooting through a hostage was the only way to stop the bad guy - a kobayashi maru scenario. Obviously such a solution is an absolute last resort, but it serves to remind us that there might be situations so extreme that collateral damage might be unavoidable.

    That doesn't make it OK, but it might make it absolutely critical in the worst case scenario to avoid even more injuries or deaths.

  10. This is a good question. No matter the scenario, it's usually a split second decision. I think it's a call that would vary even if the collateral risk is constant. Kids in the scene would cause me to hesitate, I'd do everything to reposition so that a stray shot or a through put shot would avoid the crowd. I guess it's a case by case decision. Regardless, collateral injury or death would nearly seal your fate, legally. A text book defense scenario damn near sends you down the line anyhow since lib DAs and judges prevail these days. So, think how they'd crucify you in an imperfect defense scenario; perhaps a win after two years awaiting trial but lose, financially and mentally. Bottom line - 30 years ago a clear cut self defense was honored. Today it's heavily challenged and nearly a nullification of your constitutional rights and I'm not basing this on the Zimmerman trial. Only LEOs and military can cause collateral damage (even massive) and usually escape prison after token investigations are completed.

    Quote Originally Posted by mappow View Post
    I ask the question because it's a main thought that crosses my mind if SHTF. Are you willing to engage a BG if you know that others around the BG may take hits? Or will you refrain and take cover and not engage? I cannot cover every scenario but if you don't have a clear shot at the BG and you know he's going too or already has starting shooting. Are you willing to accept that others may get hit, possibly die from your return fire?
    I know tuff question but would like some feed back cause I'm still not sure which road I would go down. Of the FIRST road would be to maneuver to a position to ensure full engagement without collateral damage. What say you?
    "There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics." attributed to Benjamin Disraeli by Mark Twain

  11. Behind every bullet is a lawyer. Remember that.
    I'm a firm believer in two term limits for all politicians; one in office, the other in prison.

Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Quantcast