Warning Shot Bill
I’m going to say this is not a good idea. A bill that makes it lawful to threaten, brandish or fire warning shots. Seems like a not good idea to me. Well, the warning shot part. There are plenty of situations where presenting a firearm ends it. But the warning shot thing I can see being a problem. You’ll have the warning shot defense of “I didn’t mean to hit him”. Thoughts?
December 17th, 2013 at 7:57 pm
I agree, but I will go further and state that I disagree with the entire bill. How do you make it lawful to threaten? Brandishing should be done only when the intent to use force is imminent, and warning shots are ridiculous as firing a round into the air to warn others only gives your position in the event you are concealed, and might justify the perp to use deadly force first, knowing you are a deadly threat. I think rules should remain keeping firearm holstered until you feel the need to protect. the firearm should only be discharged to stop the threat protecting yourself or loved ones from bodily harm, and for no other reason. That’s just me, the crazy constitutionalist who does believe in common sense legislation (by the state of course).
December 17th, 2013 at 8:52 pm
Never ever fire a warning shot, you feared death or serious injury fired and missed with the first round and the treat ran away.
December 17th, 2013 at 8:53 pm
“Threat” damn iPad
December 17th, 2013 at 10:18 pm
This could be potentially hilarious. You could literally make people dance like on the old west movies.
December 17th, 2013 at 10:37 pm
FYI, Tennessee law on self defense and defense of others already says a person is justified in threatening or in using force. I think its worded that way so if one draws on a bad guy and gains compliance, there is a built in defense to an assault charge.
December 17th, 2013 at 11:00 pm
I believe this is a response to a couple of pretty obscene prosecutions, by Angela Cory the prosecutor who tried to railroad Zimmerman. This one especially egregious. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angela_Corey#Ronald_Thompson_case
As to the rationality of the law … not everybody can shoot another person even when they know they have to. There are documented stories of soldiers in combat who fired to miss. If a warning shot is all they can bring themselves to make, ok, as long as they observe Rule Four.
December 18th, 2013 at 10:01 am
Utah already has a statute that allows a person to “Threaten the use of force intended or likely to cause death or serious bodily injury” if it is to prevent unlawful force. The threat may be verbal, visual, or implied. Unlawful force is something as simple as assault (not aggravated assault). This means you can grab your gun and say “I have a firearm and I am willing to use it to defend myself, so get out of here.”
Personally, I see no issues with it as long as they are “aware of their target and what’s beyond.”
December 18th, 2013 at 12:30 pm
So if you pull your weapon, you must center mass your target? That’s rediculous. A warning shot (into the ground, or into a tree, NOT into the air) is the next logical step after shouting stop. Maybe the B.G. can’t see your weapon. Maybe he doesn’t understand American. Then if you must, two or three to center mass. Per Texas law, the idea is to stop the threat, not kill the B.G. Hey, if you can’t (time, room, emminent threat), you can’t, but IF you can, why not?
December 18th, 2013 at 1:07 pm
I am responsible for every bullet that leaves my Firearm. The Four Rules imply that in a Self-Defense Scenario, if I draw my weapon, I have to be ready to Kill.
Now, if a Goblin breaks into my Home, and I draw my weapon, I do give them one last chance to leave. I use Clint Smiths phrase “STOP! Drop the Weapon!” If they do, then it’s a different Scene. But Covering the Goblin until the Police arrives in NOT “Brandishment”.
Trust me. Have been in front of the Judge for a “Rightous” Shooting, one does learn what is appropriate. The Hard Way.
But sending a Warning Shot should be relegated to the Dust Bin of History.
December 18th, 2013 at 1:35 pm
don’t shoot until you really really have to, period. nothing will help your cause if you miss, if your bullet overpenetrates, etc if you can honest to God swear that the perp was out to hurt or kill you or someone else.
if you have any human sympathies, i’d imagine that it’ll make living with yourself easier, too.
December 18th, 2013 at 4:08 pm
We don’t have a ‘brandishing’ law exactly… but we do have a statute that makes it illegal to “Display or present a firearm in an angry or threatening manner.”
December 18th, 2013 at 11:53 pm
A warning short implies that you would not be aiming at the attacker. If you are not aiming at the attacker, what are you aiming at. In other words, you have no idea where the bullet will go.
What would you do, aim at the ground (what if you are in a second story apartment). Warning shot bad idea.
December 19th, 2013 at 4:49 am
#6 nk
I bet you are right. This bill is a reaction to some Florida gun-defense cases.