Originally Posted by M Richardson

A firearms instructor told you that? That really goes against what is usually taught. Two rounds to the center of the chest, quickly (double tap). Regain the front sight and put one in the head. Check for more targets.
Empty the magazine in an opponent - what do you do about his buddy who was outside your tunnel vision when you fixed on the first threat? And you will fix on the first threat and have tunnel vision. "Two in the chest, one in the head. They go down quick and stay down dead."
I don't know about Indiana, but Masaad Ayoob, who is just about the leading authority on self defense, gives one piece of really good advice. If you have to use deadly force to defend yourself, when the police get there, repeat, over and over again, "I thought he was going to kill me (my wife, my kids, whoever is appropriate). I was in fear for my life. I thought he was going to kill me." That is the only thing you say until you have an opportunity to talk to your lawyer. Don't explain why you shot, what the guy was doing, ANYTHING, until you have talked to your lawyer.

Originally Posted by skipster

I wonder if anyone looking to commit a crime would be deterred if he knew his potential victim carried a gun? That would certainly deter me from committing a crime, but then again, I suppose I'm not the run-of-the-mill gun-toting criminal, either. To me, it just stands to reason that a robber would pass up your house if he knew a gun lived there.

Like Payton in Indiana, I have seen other states that have a duty to retreat before using force. In Michigan, a person had to exhaust every method of escape before using force, but I believe that has since changed. I think running out the back door while the robber is coming in the front door is a pretty good method of escape, but that's not always possible.

I don't think I have ever felt the need to carry a gun outside of employment, but we are all different and I think the deterrent and protection provided by guns is too important to ban.

Originally Posted by ban basketball

I've never been in favor of gun bans, yet I've never interpreted the 2nd to mean an individual right to bear arms, only militias. You have to wonder why that term "militia" was put in there then.

With that as only an aside, I wonder which weapons will now be legal to own. Nuclear? Tanks? I know that my questions sound unreasonable but based on this ruling you have to wonder.

Originally Posted by r.payton@att.net

the training course instructor I had was former Special Forces and he recommended emptying the clip into your target , reloading and then check for a pulse ...

This kind of Paramilitary mentality wasn't for me -I've fired a weapon in anger twice in my life and was fortunately lucky enough to not kill anyone -the last I checked in INDIANA the law states you must retreat to the furthest safe point in your home before firing-and then you can count on getting sued for eveything you own -luckily I own very little and the moment my door gets kicked in I'm blasting at whatever moves --

Remember the line from Lonesome Dove ?-Better to have it and not need it than need it and not have it

Originally Posted by M Richardson

As long as we are sharing shooting aphorisms:

The loudest sound in the world is "click" when you expect "bang".
The second loudest sound in the world is "bang" when you expect "click".