There is plenty of places which will lead to a death. Hit any artery, and the target will bleed to death (that's why shooting the legs is a pretty terrible and stupid idea). What you want to target is a location which will sufficiently disrupt an attacker to stop the threat. The brain would be perfect, but it is relatively a relatively small target which is relatively well protected (bullet can bounce off the skull). So you also want a target will present a wide enough area to ensure at least one shot will work, thus the center-of-mass lung / heart area. However, given the bone structure in this area, multiple shot are pretty much mandatory, though, fortunately, LEO can use hollow-point ammo.
AFAIK, science and the scientific community backs climate-change. So your point is acting against you. Science is good when it's about the US paying money to the rest of the world, but it's not good when it's proving that a black man was actually a criminal.
do you realize that even people with non-survivable flesh wound can still fight for minutes and cause havoc, cf the 1986 Miami FBI shootout ? Real life is not a Hollywood movie.
It's funny how SJW seems to have more knowledge than any other people on every single world problem (and non-problem) from seeing nothing of it beside their mom's basemen...
Unfortunately, there is evidence of Mike Brown's blood inside the cruiser, as well as powder residue on his hand / arm. Now, I guess you're gonna say that the blood splashed from 50 feet into the cruiser, and as did the powder residue on Mike's arm.
No, I merely dissociate the intend from the mean, which does all the difference in front of a jury. Shooting to kill is murder. Shooting to stop a threat is self-defense.
In this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?... if the officers were trying to kill the perp, they would have finished him while he was on the ground. They didn't because they didn't *had to*, the threat was diffused.
Glock might not even consistently fire. I've had some bad limp-wrist problem leading to FTE & stove pipe shooting Glocks, while I never had any issue using CZ-75 or 1911. I hate top-heavy polymer framed firearms...
But, think of the criminals, he's probably, and at foremost, a victim of CAPITALISM (if white men), or PATRIARCHY (if women), or RACISM (if non-white), or HOMOPHOBIA (if LGBTQOEHUSAHTUEC). Poor lad. Can't you let them rob and assault other people in peace (they probably deserved it no matter what) ?
Those have probably fired more rounds than you ever will. I have no respect for police, but I have even less respect for people using violence against them.
When a guy pulls a gun while you are escorting him outside of a restaurent, , you don't have the luxury to think, you stop the threat **immediately**. https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
How do you plan to disarm criminals ? The gun, ammo, and knowledge to build them is out there. If an Afghan can build an AK in a cave with nothing but hand-tools, what do you think someone in the US can do with access to milling machine, lathe, and 3D printer ?
If you are in a situation you have to shoot, you react on instinct, act on muscle memory, and keep shooting until the threat stopped. It's very unlikely to be done on the first shot. Real life is not a Hollywood movie, as you don't aim for a head shot but aim center of mass. Damn, even head shot might be non-fatal.
Slashdot Mirror
There is plenty of places which will lead to a death. Hit any artery, and the target will bleed to death (that's why shooting the legs is a pretty terrible and stupid idea). What you want to target is a location which will sufficiently disrupt an attacker to stop the threat. The brain would be perfect, but it is relatively a relatively small target which is relatively well protected (bullet can bounce off the skull). So you also want a target will present a wide enough area to ensure at least one shot will work, thus the center-of-mass lung / heart area. However, given the bone structure in this area, multiple shot are pretty much mandatory, though, fortunately, LEO can use hollow-point ammo.
Really ?
AFAIK, science and the scientific community backs climate-change. So your point is acting against you. Science is good when it's about the US paying money to the rest of the world, but it's not good when it's proving that a black man was actually a criminal.
right after I'm done with your mom's pussy, I'll try not to make her scream too much not to wake you up.
do you realize that even people with non-survivable flesh wound can still fight for minutes and cause havoc, cf the 1986 Miami FBI shootout ? Real life is not a Hollywood movie.
It's funny how SJW seems to have more knowledge than any other people on every single world problem (and non-problem) from seeing nothing of it beside their mom's basemen...
Unfortunately, there is evidence of Mike Brown's blood inside the cruiser, as well as powder residue on his hand / arm. Now, I guess you're gonna say that the blood splashed from 50 feet into the cruiser, and as did the powder residue on Mike's arm.
How do they know you are not a bad guy either ?
No, I merely dissociate the intend from the mean, which does all the difference in front of a jury. Shooting to kill is murder. Shooting to stop a threat is self-defense.
In this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?... if the officers were trying to kill the perp, they would have finished him while he was on the ground. They didn't because they didn't *had to*, the threat was diffused.
Glock might not even consistently fire. I've had some bad limp-wrist problem leading to FTE & stove pipe shooting Glocks, while I never had any issue using CZ-75 or 1911. I hate top-heavy polymer framed firearms...
If the 12 years old wield a gun in front of you, then what call would you take. Leave him the chance to use it, or diffuse the threat ?
actually, I'm wrong. The criminals will be a victim of CAPITALISM if poor. White christian straight men can die, nobody gives a shit about them.
But, think of the criminals, he's probably, and at foremost, a victim of CAPITALISM (if white men), or PATRIARCHY (if women), or RACISM (if non-white), or HOMOPHOBIA (if LGBTQOEHUSAHTUEC). Poor lad. Can't you let them rob and assault other people in peace (they probably deserved it no matter what) ?
Did you forgot the part where he also tried to kill a LEO using his service pistol ?
How about violent criminals stop committing violent crimes as well ?
No, you shoot to stop the threat, not to kill.
FWIW, Mike Brown was a petty, and a would-be cop-killer. he deserved to be shot.
LEO haven't been using "clip" for ages, if they ever did. It's called a magazine. http://i70.photobucket.com/alb...
No, they are taught to shoot until the threat is stopped.
Those have probably fired more rounds than you ever will. I have no respect for police, but I have even less respect for people using violence against them.
When a guy pulls a gun while you are escorting him outside of a restaurent, , you don't have the luxury to think, you stop the threat **immediately**. https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
you obviously have no freaking what you are talking about... https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
you shouldn't try to educate someone without any firearms knowledge, it's a lost cause.
How do you plan to disarm criminals ? The gun, ammo, and knowledge to build them is out there. If an Afghan can build an AK in a cave with nothing but hand-tools, what do you think someone in the US can do with access to milling machine, lathe, and 3D printer ?
If you are in a situation you have to shoot, you react on instinct, act on muscle memory, and keep shooting until the threat stopped. It's very unlikely to be done on the first shot. Real life is not a Hollywood movie, as you don't aim for a head shot but aim center of mass. Damn, even head shot might be non-fatal.