Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: ziravan

“His mistake was firing warning shots.”

I think his real mistake was this:

“The detective says Rutter began to run and the son-in-law fired in his direction, striking him.”

I have no problem with shooting a fleeing felon in the back, but it might not sit well with a jury.


16 posted on 07/01/2013 5:46:41 AM PDT by PLMerite (Shut the Beyotch Down! Burn, baby, burn!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies ]


To: PLMerite

The perp began to run because he heard warning shots. If the first shot had been for effect, the perp would have still been facing forward, attempting to enter.

We are in agreement that the problem for the shooter is that the perp was running. Cause and Effect. Eliminate the warning shots and you eliminate that outcome.

My CCL instructor explained it this way: You should count on the fact that if you fire a shot, it will cost you about $50K in defending yourself from the fallout. Don’t waste a $50K round by firing it in the air. If the situation is dire enough to pull the trigger, it’s dire enough make it count.

Your chambered round is a $50K round. Use it appropriately.


18 posted on 07/01/2013 5:57:54 AM PDT by ziravan (Choose sides. You too, NSA snoop.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson