http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/05/29/police-confiscate-vets-rifle-charge-him-because-he-fired-warning-shot-at-wanted-felon-trying-to-break-into-his-home/

I've seen this floating around Facebook for a while now, and am kinda surprised no one has posted it yet (searched "warning shot" and nothing related to this incident came up).

Anyhow, most people are crying about how this veteran shouldn't be charged.  Am I the only one who thinks this idiot should've either held his fire until the intruder was an imminent danger, or put rounds through the door if he somehow ID'ed the intruder as such?

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/05/29/police-confiscate-vets-rifle-charge-him-because-he-fired-warning-shot-at-wanted-felon-trying-to-break-into-his-home/

I've seen this floating around Facebook for a while now, and am kinda surprised no one has posted it yet (searched "warning shot" and nothing related to this incident came up).

Anyhow, most people are crying about how this veteran shouldn't be charged.  Am I the only one who thinks this idiot should've either held his fire until the intruder was an imminent danger, or put rounds through the door if he somehow ID'ed the intruder as such?

nope.  arent warning shots pretty much illegal everywhere?  that's one reason everyone was giving Uncle Joe such a hard time for his excellent self defense advice.

I suspect it was more of a hurry-up-you-stupid-muckworm shot, not a warning shot.

I'm not signing this one so nobody will know who posted it.

This story got me thinking that it would be worthwhile to legally define "warning shot" and make exceptions for it.

I mean the laws are already stupidly complex, why not add something else? It ~is~ possible to fire a weapon in a safe way even in a fairly densely populated area. Most warning shots are illegal because discharging a firearm in that place is just blanket illegal. If a warning shot was legally defined and exempted from negligent discharge laws then there is a legal pathway to defending yourself without having to shoot to kill.

While that may not be the best idea to start with, I'm more and more of the mind that if gun owners don't start legally defining and defending what their rights are they will continue to be defined by the anti-gunners and chipped away as they have been nearly 100 years.

clshade, I think the reason that warning shots are not legal is that there actually is no "always safe" way to discharge a firearm. You always have the possibility of ricochets and opening the doors to warning shots can lead to recklessness. Being the armchair commando I am, the only time I would discharge a firearm (while not shooting at the range) would be to stop an attacker.

I know. This kind of thing just irritates the bajeezes out of me. 

No one was hurt and the home owner is still being dragged through the muck. That is not really what the laws are for, in my opinion. Or at least they shouldn't be.

Well, I'll fess up to it.  Late evening, guy was in  my car messing around with the ignition, I told him to freeze, he didn't, and as he was running down the street in his Cowboy boots, I fired one from my M1917 revolver into the soft grassy earth next to me.

"Click clack click clack click clack" went his boots on the pavement as he jogged away.

"BANG" went my gun.

"Clicketyclackitystumbleclicketyclackityclicketystumbleclackity"  went his boots really really fast.. with the sound gradually fading into the distance.

I called the cops because I saw him get out of an accomplice's car, so I thought they could track the vehicle, and the officer got the plate number and car description and asked where I had fired the gun. So I pointed to the grass and said, "Right there, if you want to dig down about a foot to get the bullet."

He laughed, wished me a quiet night and went back to his car and drove off.

Yes, that was in the city limits.

Sometimes I'm just dumb lucky.  You couldn't call it smart lucky.

Of course, that was 1965 or so, when Colorado was Colorado and cops were cops and Terry was young and foolish.

As opposed to now, when I'm old and...

Terry

See what happens when you follow Joe Bidens advice?

My plan is to fire my warning shots COM.

This story got me thinking that it would be worthwhile to legally define "warning shot" and make exceptions for it.

I mean the laws are already stupidly complex, why not add something else? It ~is~ possible to fire a weapon in a safe way even in a fairly densely populated area. Most warning shots are illegal because discharging a firearm in that place is just blanket illegal. If a warning shot was legally defined and exempted from negligent discharge laws then there is a legal pathway to defending yourself without having to shoot to kill.

While that may not be the best idea to start with, I'm more and more of the mind that if gun owners don't start legally defining and defending what their rights are they will continue to be defined by the anti-gunners and chipped away as they have been nearly 100 years.

Besides the safety issue, warning shots are not a good idea in self-defense situations for 2 reasons:

First, any shot not put into a threat is one less for that purpose.

Second, in court you are going to claim that you were in fear of your life, that's why you fired. The prosecutor will say something like:

P: So, you were in fear of your life?
U: yes
P: and you have been trained to shoot to stop a threat when you are in fear of your life, correct?
U: yes
P: So, if you were in fear of your life, and your training was to shoot to stop the threat, why did you fire a warning shot?
U: Ummmm........
P: So, Mr. Jones, you weren't really in fear of your life, right? Otherwise you would have just shot Mr. Bad Guy, Right? Weren't you really just trying to scare Mr. Bad Guy and you really weren't afraid for your life, correct?
U: Hmmmmmmm......
P: Admit it Mr. Jones, you were the aggressor weren't you? You tried to use your big, scary gun to intimidate and scare Mr. Bad Guy, who, in reality, was minding his own business and heading off to his church to teach Sunday school.
U: Ahhhhhhhh......

See what happens when you follow Joe Bidens advice?

My plan is to fire my warning shots COM.

He only fired one shot, Joe recommends two 

Besides the safety issue, warning shots are not a good idea in self-defense situations for 2 reasons:

I'm not disagreeing, that's all true.

And... the warning shot stopped the crime and no one was hurt. There are plenty of stories like that.

Who was it that defined that the only acceptable use of a firearm is when your life is certainly in danger and you MUST shoot to stop the threat. ONLY.

Is that really a tactical truth or is it a tactical truth in consideration of laws about any shot being considered a deadly use of force even if it is into the grass 3 feet in front of you?

Warning shots and a rotwieller gets rid of Jehovah's Witness's and other bible thumpers. We'd just walk out on the porch and put some rounds in the yard before they'd get out of the holy roller van.Also, works for crackheads and trespassers. But this of course is in Mississippi.

I'm not disagreeing, that's all true.

And... the warning shot stopped the crime and no one was hurt. There are plenty of stories like that.

Who was it that defined that the only acceptable use of a firearm is when your life is certainly in danger and you MUST shoot to stop the threat. ONLY.

Is that really a tactical truth or is it a tactical truth in consideration of laws about any shot being considered a deadly use of force even if it is into the grass 3 feet in front of you?

In a perfect world, I could see the utility of a warning shot. It isn't unlike drawing your gun for a legitimate threat and having that threat halt and turn around and leave. As a matter of fact, most defensive gun uses are instances where no shot is fired. Additionally, I don't think you should train to that old adage that "if you pull it from your holster, you better shoot it..." As I just mentioned, most DGUs don't involve firing a shot.

So, I think you have it right...it's a tactical truth in consideration of certain laws.....

What if you used a blank firing gun?

What if you used a blank firing gun?

There is always "Terroristic Threatening." 

What if you used a blank firing gun?

There is always "Terroristic Threatening." 

Exactly what I was thinking

What if you used a blank firing gun?

Then you better hope the threat isn't armed as well!  If you assess the threat and feel deadly force is necessary, you should use deadly force. If the threat is not at that level, pretending with a blank gun, air soft, or any other scare tactic is a judgement call.  Just be damned sure you aren't bringing a replica to a real gun fight!

Too bad this guy didn't have a 12ga/shotgun for his HD piece!

If he did he could've just racked it once to let the "bad guy" know he was armed. Would've saved him a lot of trouble and headache.

Edit to remove thread hijackery.  My bad.