Why shoot to kill?

Post Reply
Trolldor
Gargling with Nails
Posts: 15878
Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 5:57 am
Contact:

Re: Why shoot to kill?

Post by Trolldor » Mon Oct 11, 2010 6:12 pm

Why would they need grenades when they can take him out with a well placed shot? No collateral.
"The fact is that far more crime and child abuse has been committed by zealots in the name of God, Jesus and Mohammed than has ever been committed in the name of Satan. Many people don't like that statement but few can argue with it."

User avatar
Tigger
1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 piccolos
Posts: 15714
Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 4:26 pm
About me: It's not "about" me, it's exactly me.
Location: location location.

Re: Why shoot to kill?

Post by Tigger » Mon Oct 11, 2010 6:21 pm

mistermack wrote:
The Mad Hatter wrote: No, because there was an injured girl they needed to rescue.
A job for US special forces with grenades then.
.
Aha, but US special forces just accidentally killed a hostage with a grenade, did they not?
Well placed shots, bosh: job done.
Image
Seth wrote:Fuck that, I like opening Pandora's box and shoving my tool inside it

User avatar
mistermack
Posts: 15093
Joined: Sat Apr 10, 2010 10:57 am
About me: Never rong.
Contact:

Re: Why shoot to kill?

Post by mistermack » Mon Oct 11, 2010 6:26 pm

Tigger wrote: Aha, but US special forces just accidentally killed a hostage with a grenade, did they not?
Well placed shots, bosh: job done.
Yes they did. I was just being sarky. There was no injured girl. Mad Hatter dreampt it.
.
While there is a market for shit, there will be assholes to supply it.

User avatar
Tigger
1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 piccolos
Posts: 15714
Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 4:26 pm
About me: It's not "about" me, it's exactly me.
Location: location location.

Re: Why shoot to kill?

Post by Tigger » Mon Oct 11, 2010 6:31 pm

Anyway, he won't do it again now. :sofa:
Image
Seth wrote:Fuck that, I like opening Pandora's box and shoving my tool inside it

User avatar
mistermack
Posts: 15093
Joined: Sat Apr 10, 2010 10:57 am
About me: Never rong.
Contact:

Re: Why shoot to kill?

Post by mistermack » Mon Oct 11, 2010 7:06 pm

One of the police gave the game away with a comment later.
He was asked why they didn't use a Tazer shotgun, and he said that that would have put the officer within range of the shotgun.
They knew they were safe.
.
While there is a market for shit, there will be assholes to supply it.

User avatar
Don't Panic
Evil Admin
Evil Admin
Posts: 10653
Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 12:19 am
About me: 100% Pure Evil. (Not from Concentrate)
Location: Luimneach, Eire
Contact:

Re: Why shoot to kill?

Post by Don't Panic » Mon Oct 11, 2010 7:13 pm

mistermack wrote:
Pappa wrote:
mistermack wrote:My question is why don't they shoot to wound in these situations?
Because it isn't practical to do so.
It was clearly practical to do so.
.
No, if you are targeting a criminal you aim for the centre of mass, and that just happens to be where the heart is, the object of the exercise is to protect innocent people, the moment someone picks up a gun and takes hostages they throw away any right to live beyond that day. And before you come out with some tripe about mental instability, or emotional problems, or any of that nonsense, a person in that condition, with access to guns, is a very real threat to the safety of those around them.
Gawd wrote:»
And those Zumwalts are already useless, they can be taken out with an ICBM.
The world is a thing of utter inordinate complexity and richness and strangeness that is absolutely awesome. I mean the idea that such complexity can arise not only out of such simplicity, but probably absolutely out of nothing, is the most fabulous extraordinary idea. And once you get some kind of inkling of how that might have happened, it's just wonderful. And . . . the opportunity to spend 70 or 80 years of your life in such a universe is time well spent as far as I am concerned.
D.N.A.

User avatar
mistermack
Posts: 15093
Joined: Sat Apr 10, 2010 10:57 am
About me: Never rong.
Contact:

Re: Why shoot to kill?

Post by mistermack » Mon Oct 11, 2010 7:20 pm

Don't Panic wrote: No, if you are targeting a criminal you aim for the centre of mass, and that just happens to be where the heart is, the object of the exercise is to protect innocent people, the moment someone picks up a gun and takes hostages they throw away any right to live beyond that day. And before you come out with some tripe about mental instability, or emotional problems, or any of that nonsense, a person in that condition, with access to guns, is a very real threat to the safety of those around them.
Why change the subject? I'm talking about situations where they clearly don't need to shoot to kill. Not hostage situations.
.
While there is a market for shit, there will be assholes to supply it.

User avatar
Don't Panic
Evil Admin
Evil Admin
Posts: 10653
Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 12:19 am
About me: 100% Pure Evil. (Not from Concentrate)
Location: Luimneach, Eire
Contact:

Re: Why shoot to kill?

Post by Don't Panic » Mon Oct 11, 2010 7:29 pm

mistermack wrote:
Don't Panic wrote: No, if you are targeting a criminal you aim for the centre of mass, and that just happens to be where the heart is, the object of the exercise is to protect innocent people, the moment someone picks up a gun and takes hostages they throw away any right to live beyond that day. And before you come out with some tripe about mental instability, or emotional problems, or any of that nonsense, a person in that condition, with access to guns, is a very real threat to the safety of those around them.
Why change the subject? I'm talking about situations where they clearly don't need to shoot to kill. Not hostage situations.
.
Doesn't matter, an armed criminal is a legitimate target. Shooting to wound means aiming for the periphery, and a greater chance of the shot missing.
Gawd wrote:»
And those Zumwalts are already useless, they can be taken out with an ICBM.
The world is a thing of utter inordinate complexity and richness and strangeness that is absolutely awesome. I mean the idea that such complexity can arise not only out of such simplicity, but probably absolutely out of nothing, is the most fabulous extraordinary idea. And once you get some kind of inkling of how that might have happened, it's just wonderful. And . . . the opportunity to spend 70 or 80 years of your life in such a universe is time well spent as far as I am concerned.
D.N.A.

User avatar
Link
Posts: 726
Joined: Tue Apr 13, 2010 1:19 pm
About me: I'm here to save the princess Zelda
Location: Shakespeareville
Contact:

Re: Why shoot to kill?

Post by Link » Mon Oct 11, 2010 7:56 pm

I've never fired a gun but from what I understand it's not always as easy as "just shoot him in the arm" or just shoot him in the leg" often the guy is moving and returning fire.

In which instance it's going to be hard to do anything but aim to kill, The centre mass is the biggest target, better to get a shot on the guy than to completely miss and give him reason to start shooting civilians.

User avatar
mistermack
Posts: 15093
Joined: Sat Apr 10, 2010 10:57 am
About me: Never rong.
Contact:

Re: Why shoot to kill?

Post by mistermack » Mon Oct 11, 2010 8:14 pm

Don't Panic wrote: Doesn't matter, an armed criminal is a legitimate target. Shooting to wound means aiming for the periphery, and a greater chance of the shot missing.
I don't think you've bothered to read what this is about.
.
While there is a market for shit, there will be assholes to supply it.

User avatar
Don't Panic
Evil Admin
Evil Admin
Posts: 10653
Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 12:19 am
About me: 100% Pure Evil. (Not from Concentrate)
Location: Luimneach, Eire
Contact:

Re: Why shoot to kill?

Post by Don't Panic » Mon Oct 11, 2010 8:20 pm

mistermack wrote:
Don't Panic wrote: Doesn't matter, an armed criminal is a legitimate target. Shooting to wound means aiming for the periphery, and a greater chance of the shot missing.
I don't think you've bothered to read what this is about.
.
From your OP:
The latest example was a lawyer in London, who snapped, and started shooting out of his window with a shotgun.
That is why you shoot to kill. He wasn't worried about shooting to wound, was he?
Gawd wrote:»
And those Zumwalts are already useless, they can be taken out with an ICBM.
The world is a thing of utter inordinate complexity and richness and strangeness that is absolutely awesome. I mean the idea that such complexity can arise not only out of such simplicity, but probably absolutely out of nothing, is the most fabulous extraordinary idea. And once you get some kind of inkling of how that might have happened, it's just wonderful. And . . . the opportunity to spend 70 or 80 years of your life in such a universe is time well spent as far as I am concerned.
D.N.A.

User avatar
mistermack
Posts: 15093
Joined: Sat Apr 10, 2010 10:57 am
About me: Never rong.
Contact:

Re: Why shoot to kill?

Post by mistermack » Mon Oct 11, 2010 8:22 pm

Link wrote:I've never fired a gun but from what I understand it's not always as easy as "just shoot him in the arm" or just shoot him in the leg" often the guy is moving and returning fire.

In which instance it's going to be hard to do anything but aim to kill, The centre mass is the biggest target, better to get a shot on the guy than to completely miss and give him reason to start shooting civilians.
I don't think you've bothered to read what this is about either. There WAS no chance of civilians getting hurt. There WAS no chance of officers getting hurt. This was the end of a five hour stand-off, with a suicidal drunken barrister.
Lee Harvey Oswald hit Kennedy in the head from a long way off, in a moving car, with a gun made fifty years ago.
He wasn't a marksman. They definitely COULD have wounded this guy. There is no doubt about it.
See the video clip that tigger linked. A police marksman shot the gun out of a suicides hand. It can and has been done.
In a case like this, where nobody is in any real danger, why not?
If you miss, so what?
.
While there is a market for shit, there will be assholes to supply it.

User avatar
Pappa
Non-Practicing Anarchist
Non-Practicing Anarchist
Posts: 56488
Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2009 10:42 am
About me: I am sacrificing a turnip as I type.
Location: Le sud du Pays de Galles.
Contact:

Re: Why shoot to kill?

Post by Pappa » Mon Oct 11, 2010 8:22 pm

mistermack wrote:I'm asking why shoot to kill, why do they never shoot to incapacitate or wound?
Because it's too dangerous to take the risk and it's too difficult to attempt a non-lethal shot (too random a chance too).
For information on ways to help support Rationalia financially, see our funding page.


When the aliens do come, everything we once thought was cool will then make us ashamed.

User avatar
mistermack
Posts: 15093
Joined: Sat Apr 10, 2010 10:57 am
About me: Never rong.
Contact:

Re: Why shoot to kill?

Post by mistermack » Mon Oct 11, 2010 8:29 pm

Don't Panic wrote:
mistermack wrote:
Don't Panic wrote: Doesn't matter, an armed criminal is a legitimate target. Shooting to wound means aiming for the periphery, and a greater chance of the shot missing.
I don't think you've bothered to read what this is about.
.
From your OP:
The latest example was a lawyer in London, who snapped, and started shooting out of his window with a shotgun.
That is why you shoot to kill. He wasn't worried about shooting to wound, was he?
This was at the end of a five hour stand-off. He wanted to get shot. He knew, just as well as everybody else, that he wasn't going to kill anyone at a distance with a bird gun. The shotgun was there to get them to shoot him. He said on the phone over and over that he was only a danger to himself.
.
While there is a market for shit, there will be assholes to supply it.

User avatar
Don't Panic
Evil Admin
Evil Admin
Posts: 10653
Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 12:19 am
About me: 100% Pure Evil. (Not from Concentrate)
Location: Luimneach, Eire
Contact:

Re: Why shoot to kill?

Post by Don't Panic » Mon Oct 11, 2010 8:33 pm

mistermack wrote:
Don't Panic wrote:
mistermack wrote:
Don't Panic wrote: Doesn't matter, an armed criminal is a legitimate target. Shooting to wound means aiming for the periphery, and a greater chance of the shot missing.
I don't think you've bothered to read what this is about.
.
From your OP:
The latest example was a lawyer in London, who snapped, and started shooting out of his window with a shotgun.
That is why you shoot to kill. He wasn't worried about shooting to wound, was he?
This was at the end of a five hour stand-off. He wanted to get shot. He knew, just as well as everybody else, that he wasn't going to kill anyone at a distance with a bird gun. The shotgun was there to get them to shoot him. He said on the phone over and over that he was only a danger to himself.
.
Where does it say that the shotgun was firing pellets? How do you know he wasn't using slugs? He was unstable, why should anyone believe him if he says he's only a danger to himself?
Gawd wrote:»
And those Zumwalts are already useless, they can be taken out with an ICBM.
The world is a thing of utter inordinate complexity and richness and strangeness that is absolutely awesome. I mean the idea that such complexity can arise not only out of such simplicity, but probably absolutely out of nothing, is the most fabulous extraordinary idea. And once you get some kind of inkling of how that might have happened, it's just wonderful. And . . . the opportunity to spend 70 or 80 years of your life in such a universe is time well spent as far as I am concerned.
D.N.A.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 13 guests