Can a case be made in court that you were not ! trying to kill someone,?
because you intentionally shot him in the leg?

https://wqad.com/2018/06/20/ga...ng-one-car-accident/

Maybe in looney tune land but not anywhere else on the planet.

The femoral artery is in the leg. If that is severed you bleed out quickly.

Looks like a shit police investigation. The shooter had his ass beat, and still got arrested?

Need more details.

I believe this is why you always shoot to stop someone.
There is no such thing as using a deadly weapon for non-deadly purposes.
He'll have to explain why he shot him if he didn't feel his life was in danger.

What the idiots of the world don't get, and never will is that there are several reasons you don't shoot for the leg or arm. The most obvious is that you are exercising DEADLY FORCE, not less than deadly force. The point is to stop the actor as quickly and efficiently as possible.

Shooting center of mass is the easiest target area to hit, especially repeatedly. A static arm or leg is hard enough to hit, especially under stress. A moving arm or leg is easier to hit with random chance than by aiming.

Even a solid hit in the arm or leg has nowhere the act stopping ability that a center of mass hit carries. The fight goes on, and the cop will end up getting vilified when the perp bleeds out anyway.

When the poor ol shooting victim gets wheeled in to the court room with a shattered femur, complete with halo-style pin cage, the civil case against the officer is not going to go well. Regardless of why the turd was shot in the first place.

The list continues on and on, but thankfully, with the Supreme Court fleshing out the way it is, I don't think we have to sweat it.

Tic-toc Ginsburg...

quote:

Originally posted by bubbatime:
Looks like a shit police investigation. The shooter had his ass beat, and still got arrested?

Need more details.

quote:

“To my knowledge, Hartman did not have a weapon ... never been a mention of a weapon” so far in the investigation, Clague said at about 2:30 p.m. Tuesday.

Yeah, for sure. I'd like to know how the guy comes out of a "confrontation" with a laceration if the other guy didn't have a knife.

They did that in cowboy and cop movies when I was a kid (a long time ago). They shot guns and knives out of bad guys hands too.
I doubt real cops or cowboys did it intentionally.

In this case there are a number of things the shooter did wrong, starting with going outside to investigate with a handgun. If he felt he needed a gun, he should have stayed safely inside his home and called 911.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: 220-9er,

quote:

Originally posted by Expert308:
Yeah, for sure. I'd like to know how the guy comes out of a "confrontation" with a laceration if the other guy didn't have a knife.

Fists and feet cause lacerations all the time. Strikes to certain areas cause tissue to be compressed against the edges of bones, causing lacerations from the inside out.

Lacerations on the inside of the mouth are also extremely common in fistfights, with the teeth causing damage to the inner lips during blows to the mouth.

Ever watched boxing, where a guy gets a cut around his eye, or a split lip? Those are all lacerations, and there's certainly no knife involved.

Lacerations can also be caused by the environment during a weaponless scuffle, such as tackling a guy into the corner of a table, etc.

Just because one party ended up with a laceration doesn't mean there was necessarily a knife involved.

quote:

Originally posted by dsiets:
I believe this is why you always shoot to stop someone.
There is no such thing as using a deadly weapon for non-deadly purposes.
He'll have to explain why he shot him if he didn't feel his life was in danger.

The speaker at a CCW lecture I attended last month finished with these nuggets to stay with you if you remembered none of the rest of the lecture:

1. Never be the Aggressor ...or instigator. If you can do so safely, withdraw.

2. Life over Property You can't justify using deadly force over property. Only human life. (BTW, pets are property).

3. FEAR Your defense is you were in fear for your own or another human's life. Never "I was mad". Never "I wanted to get even".

quote:

Originally posted by bubbatime:
Looks like a shit police investigation. The shooter had his ass beat, and still got arrested?

Need more details.

Realy ? ? ? I didn't see any mention anywhere in the linked article about the shooter being struck even once. What I did see was an indication that the shooter was "yelling" as he left his house, nearly 1/4 mile from the accident scene. Based on that I suspect that the Shooter INITIATED the "confrontation" and then escalated it to a Shooting. If true the Shooter has been charged CORRECTLY. Because if he had done what any sensible person would do he would have called 911 and reported a possible injury accident and let the Police handle it.

BTW, I have done exactly this when I witnessed several different accidents. Fact is I'm not a Doctor so about the only assistance I can provide is to inform someone with an injury that help is coming and they should not move around because they may do more damage.

The real question is "WHY?".
This was so stupid, the guy (shooter) deserves whatever he gets.

quote:

Originally posted by Blackmore:
2. Life over Property You can't justify using deadly force over property. Only human life. (BTW, pets are property).

Whether this is true in a legal sense depends on the state you are in.

In a number of states, use of deadly force is legally justified to protect property.

Whether it's true in an ethical sense depends on your personal moral code.

quote:

Originally posted by Scooter123:
Realy ? ? ? I didn't see any mention anywhere in the linked article about the shooter being struck even once. What I did see was an indication that the shooter was "yelling" as he left his house, nearly 1/4 mile from the accident scene.

Suggest you re-read the original article.

“According to a Knox County Sheriff’s Department media release, Love heard the crash and yelling and left his home armed with a 9mm semiautomatic Ruger handgun to investigate.”

I may be misreading this, but to me this says Love heard the crash and yelling and went to investigate armed with a 9mm semi. Frankly, I’d have done the same thing. If I’m wearing clothes, I’m wearing the P228, and if I hear a crash and yelling I am going to investigate. Somebody might need help and I might be able to either help, or at least get a better idea of what help is needed before calling it in. I’d hope that I could avoid a confrontation and/or disengage without having to shoot someone, but I wasn’t there and I don’t know what happened.

Maybe Love got all judgemental, provoked the kid, then shot the kid when he could have just backed away. Maybe Love was being totally reasonable and helpful and the kid just went psycho. Who knows? I don’t think there is enough information in the article to hang anyone. Even if there were, I’ve seen enough articles make a complete hash of the facts that I’m a lot more comfortable withholding judgement.

quote:

Originally posted by RogueJSK:

quote:

Originally posted by Expert308:
Yeah, for sure. I'd like to know how the guy comes out of a "confrontation" with a laceration if the other guy didn't have a knife.

Fists and feet cause lacerations all the time. Strikes to certain areas cause tissue to be compressed against the edges of bones, causing lacerations from the inside out.

Lacerations on the inside of the mouth are also extremely common in fistfights, with the teeth causing damage to the inner lips during blows to the mouth.

Ever watched boxing, where a guy gets a cut around his eye, or a split lip? Those are all lacerations, and there's certainly no knife involved.

Lacerations can also be caused by the environment during a weaponless scuffle, such as tackling a guy into the corner of a table, etc.

Just because one party ended up with a laceration doesn't mean there was necessarily a knife involved.

Yeah, you're right, I didn't think about that. I read "laceration" and thought "stab wound". Thanks.

Shooting someone in the leg is almost always stupid.

Had this argument a few days ago with someone. Often the person your shooting to moving. Legs are f'ing hard to hit even when moving. Try and shoot a leg and some innocent person may get hit.

If the person is worth shooting center mass is the best option unless you can only see a leg. I don't want to be a bystander, on the street, when someone decides to try a shot someone's leg. To easy for rounds to go places they shouldn't. Comes down to play stupid games win stupid prizes.

we had a OIS here last year. The guy who was literally the WORST shot on the dept had to shoot a guy who was trying to stab him. It was a femoral artery shot. The young copper used his own tourniquet, but the wound was too high. Bad guy died. Cop felt absolutely terrible.

yeah ,killing another person would almost always ruin your week

quote:

Originally posted by LtJL:
we had a OIS here last year. The guy who was literally the WORST shot on the dept had to shoot a guy who was trying to stab him. It was a femoral artery shot. The young copper used his own tourniquet, but the wound was too high. Bad guy died. Cop felt absolutely terrible.

Hopefully the youngster can mentally move beyond this and be an effective officer moving forward. I just have a hard time understanding officers who get in this line of work and maybe don't fully grasp the job. I see this same potential stuff at work in the jails sometimes, but even my own POV, how you can't mentally justify "they get what's coming to them." This young officer did what was necessary and the assailant ended up dying. It's not the officer's fault, the shitbag brought it upon himself attempting to stab him.