I agree with you, and routinely practice snap shots to the brainbox...If killing your attacker is all you’re after...
But we carry and train to defend ourselves and stop the attacker...A controlled pair to the larger target of the human thoracic cavity MAY stop the attack (which is your desired outcome...Not to KILL the attacker...But defend yourself, save your own life, and to stop the attack)...Your attacker may or may not survive two body shots...If the controlled pair fail to stop, and the attack on your life continues, then a cranial shot is your remaining option...
Probably easier for your defense counsel to make your case for self defense to a jury (test of reasonableness) if you’re trying to stop than immediately kill...Prosecutors (aka Progressive Politicians With Further Political Aspirations) may/likely try to make a first shot to the brain into an execution...
In the end, you must do what you must do to survive...Inevitably, if you’ve made the first shot to the brain box, be prepared to answer the allegations you’ve “executed” your attacker...See question: “Why didn’t you shoot him in the leg?”
My suggestions were made with a civilian on-the-street self-defense situation in mind rather than against an enemy combatant adversary...
No right or wrong necessarily...Just my humble opinion...Whatever you’ve done to save your own life, be prepared to defend your actions in a criminal trial...Or civil case where the burden of proof is even less...
Good luck out there...
“which is your desired outcome...Not to KILL the attacker”
With all due respect, and I know the “stopping the attack” is the “self defense” aspect of shooting, but my objective is to kill the attacker. Kill. Dead. Then I KNOW the attacker cannot continue the attack.
I am not shooting because of some magical belief that a gunshot to the person will stop them somehow and maybe not even kill them. I am shooting, using lethal force, to kill to ensure the attack ceases. Lethal force, not “probable stoppage force”, lethal force.
I have killed more than once and have never stood trial much less charges. In fact, the only time I have ever faced charges was when I stupidly allowed my attacker to live and did not shoot the bastard. That was a major mistake. I got a little Kinder-and-Gentler in my less-than-youthful days and allowed my attacker to live. He then had a completely differing story than mine when the police showed up. I got arrested. No charges were ever filed, but him dead would have been a different story. Even the DA thought I was much too kind. I’ll never make that mistake again. Once the situation was over I knew I had screwed up. He easily could have overtaken me and killed me but he hesitated once he saw I had a split second before I would be shooting.
So, no. Don’t fall for the lawyering, yet inexperienced, line of logic that shooting to kill is different than shooting to end an attack. No one gets asked that question in court. If there is an attack, use lethal force when necessary, then prove it. Show the need to shoot. Period.
Philosophical questions of purpose never enter the legal argument. My view is that doing so under pressure will cause you to overthink the situation and question shooting when you really need to. Just have it solid in your head when and when not to shoot and go by that mental checklist. Yes or No. Nothing else matters. Use your State’s laws, federal laws, local laws, and, I suspect you have, get training that includes legal boundaries of shoot or no shoot. It really isn’t complicated if you skip the What-If nonsense. Get that checklist burned into your head and think of nothing else when the time comes.
Oh, and have a lawyer in your phone’s contact list or in your wallet. Lawyers really can help the situation more than you might imagine, and they don’t cost nearly as much as expected. Many lawyers have been prosecutors and know the magic words to say to get it all to go away.