“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.
No disrespect taken...My intent is to stop the attack and survive...If the attacker dies, so be it...Just meant killing him is not my first objective...If he dies from my guhshots and I survive, that’s my desired outcome...
No “magical belief” in my reasoning...And I realize if I have to question to shoot or not shoot, then I probably should not...
I simply meant to convey that I will not likely make a first shot to the head unless I have no other choice, and my personal reason why...I refrain from telling others what to do; simply offering what I will do and why...
Certainly did not want to start an argument over tactics...Just offering my own humble opinion about the risks as I perceive them associated with a first shot to the head and aftermath I’m likely to face if I survive...
And the shoot to kill-shoot to end distinction is a valid one...Your point about “Show the need...Prove it!” is well taken and appreciated...
My attorney’s contact info is in my wallet and programmed into my phone...Wifey has same with her at all times, and a trusted third party also has my legal counsel’s contact info...