Hello all, here is today's article posted on TheArmoryLife.com. It is titled “How Many Self-Defense Shots Are Too Many?” and can be found at https://www.thearmorylife.com/how-many-self-defense-shots-are-too-many/.
One Too Many: Shot Count in Self Defense Shooting
- Thread starter Mike H.
- Start date
Just how many rounds does it take to stop evil... I defer to Aug 26, Polk County Sheriff Grady Judd stated "We shot him a lot" Or better yet in July 2021, "Quite frankly, we weren’t taking any chances. That’s all the bullets we had or we would have shot him more. I suspect the only reason 110 rounds was all that was fired was that’s all the ammunition they had. We were not going to take any chance of him shooting back.” -Polk County, FL Sheriff Grady Judd.
Well if the Po Po SWAT Boys have to ensure the baddie is neutralized, well...
Well if the Po Po SWAT Boys have to ensure the baddie is neutralized, well...
Last edited:
Respectfully that pound in the chest BS sounds all great. Problem as private citizen you do not have an agency backing you up!
Ask Officer Toni McBride of LAPD (link below) who is still in a legal battle because she shot a suspect with 6 rounds instead of 4.
And why I encourage everyone (even agency trained and rubber stamped agency Instructors) to take Hohn Hearns excellent Cognitive Handgun With Tactical Anatomy and or Chuck Haggard or Steve Moses and Dr Andy Anderson Tactical Anatomy course
Why half second split times are your friend
Appellate court reverses qualified immunity decision, revives lawsuit against LAPD officer
While Officer Toni McBride was initially granted qualified immunity in a 2020 shooting, an appellate court found that the shots fired while the suspect was on the ground were not within policy
www.police1.com
Chest beating or the difference in respect to the situation based on the Region and the elected DA's respect for the job that they could not do. One of the first lessons in the Academy was, 'You will judged for months over a decision you make in a split second!"Respectfully that pound in the chest BS sounds all great. Problem as private citizen you do not have an agency backing you up!
Ask Officer Toni McBride of LAPD (link below) who is still in a legal battle because she shot a suspect with 6 rounds instead of 4.
And why I encourage everyone (even agency trained and rubber stamped agency Instructors) to take Hohn Hearns excellent Cognitive Handgun With Tactical Anatomy and or Chuck Haggard or Steve Moses and Dr Andy Anderson Tactical Anatomy course
Why half second split times are your friend
Appellate court reverses qualified immunity decision, revives lawsuit against LAPD officer
While Officer Toni McBride was initially granted qualified immunity in a 2020 shooting, an appellate court found that the shots fired while the suspect was on the ground were not within policy
So the "BS" is in the response to a question about a number, that shouldn't even be asked and thus shown disrespect as the answer will never satisfy. Ask anyone that has been fighting for their life in a gunfight. If one is counting rounds, it is for the reload, not for a press release...
Finding one was being covered by an empty firearm, irritating and that is where the number of rounds counts. Worrying about a stupid question after the fact is BS. But ya know it will come followed by, "why didn't you just shoot the gun out of his hand???"
Last edited:
MtnBadger1216
Alpha
Every defense situation is different and based upon the totality of the facts behind each situation. Much of the reasonableness of actions taken by the defender, is based on what the defender based their actions on, including what they believed was reasonable action based upon the totality of the situation, and based upon what any other reasonable person would have considered reasonable under the same circumstances. There are also many other factors such as the disparities in size, age, strength, sex, level of training, and fear factor that always plays into the situation.
Deadly Force is generally defined as "that force which a person knows or should reasonably know, would create substantial risk of causing death or serious bodily harm, and is used as a last resort, and when all lesser means of force have failed.
Does this mean that when a Police Officer or a Civilian alike are faced with such a situation that they must first be assaulted or injured in order to show that they had attempted to use all lesser means available to them before employing Deadly Force? Absolutely not. But you must be able to articulate what your beliefs were at that time, were you in "fear" for serious bodily harm or the possibility of death being inflicted upon you in that situation? Then as always those who will be placed in the position of judging you and your actions as "reasonable" and "justified" under the totality of the circumstances and your beliefs at the time, will have the luxury of time on their side to make a judgement that you may have only had seconds to decide your actions.
Sound Training, prior situational role rehearsals that are thought out before hand, placing imaginary situations before you, and the formulation and thought process of how you would act upon and resolve the situation in the most reasonable manner under the circumstances, builds a well thought-out response and a conditioned response over time when these scenarios are rehearsed. Well-trained and seasoned police officers do the same thing. And when deadly encounters materialize in reality, they are often amazed at the speed of their thoughts and the precise and reasonable manners in which they responded. Many of these situations may include the tactical decision to disengage and evade an unfavorable situation until back-up arrives, or to not press an unfavorable situation all together, where their actions might have later been judged as having escalated or insighted a situation.
In a situation that calls for Deadly Force by firearm, the end goal should be to use only that amount of force necessary to bring "To A Stop", that aggressive action that caused you to take the action you were force to take in the first place.
Call 911 and summons assistance. Render aid ONLY IF IT IS SAFE TO DO SO.
Good Legal Counsel by someone well-versed in deadly force use cases is always a top priority.
Deadly Force is generally defined as "that force which a person knows or should reasonably know, would create substantial risk of causing death or serious bodily harm, and is used as a last resort, and when all lesser means of force have failed.
Does this mean that when a Police Officer or a Civilian alike are faced with such a situation that they must first be assaulted or injured in order to show that they had attempted to use all lesser means available to them before employing Deadly Force? Absolutely not. But you must be able to articulate what your beliefs were at that time, were you in "fear" for serious bodily harm or the possibility of death being inflicted upon you in that situation? Then as always those who will be placed in the position of judging you and your actions as "reasonable" and "justified" under the totality of the circumstances and your beliefs at the time, will have the luxury of time on their side to make a judgement that you may have only had seconds to decide your actions.
Sound Training, prior situational role rehearsals that are thought out before hand, placing imaginary situations before you, and the formulation and thought process of how you would act upon and resolve the situation in the most reasonable manner under the circumstances, builds a well thought-out response and a conditioned response over time when these scenarios are rehearsed. Well-trained and seasoned police officers do the same thing. And when deadly encounters materialize in reality, they are often amazed at the speed of their thoughts and the precise and reasonable manners in which they responded. Many of these situations may include the tactical decision to disengage and evade an unfavorable situation until back-up arrives, or to not press an unfavorable situation all together, where their actions might have later been judged as having escalated or insighted a situation.
In a situation that calls for Deadly Force by firearm, the end goal should be to use only that amount of force necessary to bring "To A Stop", that aggressive action that caused you to take the action you were force to take in the first place.
Call 911 and summons assistance. Render aid ONLY IF IT IS SAFE TO DO SO.
Good Legal Counsel by someone well-versed in deadly force use cases is always a top priority.
Last edited:
Being "Criminally Charged" after a shooting incident depends a lot upon the recommendations of the Investigating Detectives. Being a non-cooperative prick will not make you any friends. And, could put unwanted focus on your behavior. Being cooperative, and promptly responding fully to inquiries will establish that your behavior was appropriate for the circumstances. Lawyering Up is usually best for Lawyers.
If the self defense shooting is justified under the statutes, it shouldn't make any difference whether you hit the bad guy with just one round or 10rds, if it can be articulated that the bad guy continued to pose a significant threat. Same with the caliber, if it's justified under the statutes.
Now if you do a hollywood Coup de gras on the bad guy while he's no longer a threat to anyone' personal safety, the odds may be against you.
Now if you do a hollywood Coup de gras on the bad guy while he's no longer a threat to anyone' personal safety, the odds may be against you.
Again respectfully Some of us (me) have been in serious stuff and Mirandized by OIG agents on use of force incidents even after the agency cleared it so we do know what we are talking about.
My original point is folks like the Sheriff mentioned are doing nothing but pandering with all the bold talk and it is BS. If force needs done you use what you need to (that whole reasonableness that’s in every statute) but I am telling you in most places anyone that continues to shoot when a perp is down stands a huge risk in being scooped up on charges or civil liability in any number of jurisdictions as that phrase “reasonable amount of force” is a thing that can be looked at!
Dobbinsky
Professional
That's something I'll find out after it's all over with. I've never had to use a gun in self defense or in defense of another, nor have used a weapon against an enemy while in the military.
So....like most people in my situation, it will all be a blurr, and no one will be keeping count.
So....like most people in my situation, it will all be a blurr, and no one will be keeping count.
MauriceDouglas
Alpha
I have to strongly disagree with this, particularly the "promptly responding fully to inquiries" part. I certainly agree with "don't be a prick", but contrary to your last statement, lawyering up is for everyone. Any good lawyer will tell you that talking to police in a serious situation like this will never do you any good, and will often do harm. I have seen too many people get screwed over just because they were trying to be open and honest.
Everyone has a right to remain silent, and there's a reason the 5th amendment refers to a person not being compelled "to be a witness against himself." Unless the only cop involved is your uncle or something, say the bare minimum until you've talked to a lawyer.
Valkyrie14
Operator
What does Barrier Blind ammunition mean? Are you referring to Hollow points?
If I may answer Barrier Blind is a term/phrase used (marketing really) for Moderen bonded hollow point ammunition (HST Gold Dot WTC) that performs as designed wether they go through a barrier first or not
Most LE Agencies use or require some type of barrier blind handgun ammo
Nothing since that is what most modern handgun ammo is HST Gold Dot ETC which is what’s probably used by LE in your Jurisdictions
It is the Sheriff that was standing with the use of force; he was making that a strong point with the so-called "bravado" and stood soundly behind the actions of his deputies. Being elected as well, put his weight behind the action and the round count question is irrelevant. Having been one on the use of force boards or in the fray, I stated the Region has a lot to do with the support the officer gets. I have never read an officer Miranda Warnings on a use of force and hearing you were, doesn't bode well with the task you have sworn to uphold. I mean the Agency, not you. As that being a part of the policy, disturbing...
That includes the Feds and their yearlong Civil Right Violations investigations on cases of which I have yet to see a Federal Officer face the same scrutiny. That is telling as well and a facet that will surely be following, based on skin tone alone, not the ones of the officers involved, as we are all blue.
I have not stated, nor did the Sheriff, an execution was the intent. As the subject was offered the option of surrender/compliance, even though they had already shown the intent of deadly force. My point is stupid questions over the manner enwhich the subject was neutralized by round count, isn't relevant as to why he was. Next is why didn't you use a taser or the former point of shooting the gun out of his hand. He was such a nice boy. You know the normal officer skill levels as well as I. The shock of how many rounds they actually fire versus what they thought they fired. I have seen that fear and second guessing in the officer's eyes...
I get your point, having been in courtroom listening to a defense attorney pleading his client was the only one shot and by a "police .357 magnum" after the Baddie's weapon malfunctioned. I did enjoy the Judge's response as to "are we supposed to forget he was shooting at the police?"
Just like the gunfight at the OK Coral, what was reasonable lies with the victor that is still talking, Monday Morning needs to be seen as just that. Wyatt Earp hunting down who escaped, well... Society has fallen a long way due to the politics, allowed to skew any fairness and trial by MSM and pre-paid civil suits to sway juries and shall I say agenda driven prosecutors. Strong support from a Boss goes a long way...
I fully get your point of what is reasonable and would expect the Sheriff was already looking at that, as he supports the actions of his deputies and makes that point clear as he can, that is what he is doing. The Officers involved need to know where they stand as the investigating Agency starts reading the Miranda Warning...
Last edited:
Thank you for the respectful discussion.
Yeah I am well aware I watched the video as it’s several years old and he seems to like running to a camera woth his “bravado” every chance he had. (I’m not saying the Sheriff is a bad guy it’s the I’ll call it boasting is not something I find favorable)
I am more of the mindset of the quiet professional. I get some people just need to be shot. But in this Sheriffs case (and many like him) think it’s a theatrical move and cheesy. You know how a flag gets thrown for doing certain things after a touchdown!
That said I have given links that an extra shot or two (that someone else gets to decide and not only your agency that backs you and clears you, even mine cleared me and I still got mirandized for a possible civil rights violation and it was just a less lethal use)
And the way the Feds work now in the case of a complaint they almost always come in and start to look (at least whem other Federal agencies are involved and that was my case)
But everyone can do whatever they “feel” they just should be sure their career and bank account can handle it.
Carrying a firearm wether professional under an agency banner or especially as a private citizen is a huge lifestyle change a lot of folks find oyt too late!