From TheKansasCityChannel.com:
KANSAS CITY, Mo. — An Army veteran who believed he was being carjacked shot a man late Tuesday night, police said.
It happened at about 11 p.m. near 40th Street and Warwick Boulevard. The veteran said he drove to the area to help a friend move.Police said the veteran and a friend were in a car when another man walked up and offered to sell them drugs.When they refused, the drug dealer punched one of the men in the mouth and then reached for what they believed was a gun, the veteran said.“Pulling up shirt as if he had something underneath, and with the other hand he socked me in the face,” said the veteran, who didn’t want to be identified.The veteran pulled his own gun and shot the man in the stomach, according to investigators. The veteran said he was trying to disable the man long enough so he and his friend could escape.“I decided to go ahead and shoot him in the lower left and try to avoid any major organs,” the veteran said.The 29-year-old shooting victim was taken to a hospital for treatment. He is expected to recover.”This is nothing to be proud up, having shot a person,” the veteran told KMBC’s Maria Antonia.The 49-year-old disabled Army veteran said he can’t protect himself with his fists, so he got a concealed weapons permit six months ago. Police said he had a license for the gun.The veteran said last night was the first time he pulled out his .40-caliber gun.“I feel disgusted that I had to use it on a human being, but I’m not going to be the victim who can’t defend himself anymore,” the veteran said.So far, no charges have been filed.
If you ask me, the perp was very fortunate that the man he was attempting to assault was an experienced Army veteran. I pray it doesn’t come back to haunt him (the veteran) by way of a law suit.
H/T once again to Clayton Cramer
Sphere: Related Content
“decided to go ahead and shoot him in the lower left and try to avoid any major organs”
Sadly, a big mistake on his part. When and if you must shoot, shoot to kill. First of all, after your fire that bullet into another human being there is no knowing what it will do. A simple shot in the leg could hit a bone and end up in the heart.
Shooting with the intent to not hit anything important could easily mean an angry perpetrator still able to shoot back and kill you. If deadly force is justified (and anytime you fire a gun it had better be justified) it should be used.
I agree John. If I had to shoot someone, it would be to kill.
Sometimes when I’m frightened for my life, I tend to go into the overkill mode. Just ask the last spider I found in my house, well, you can’t because he is way dead. Please don’t refer me to Charlotte’s Web. I’ve read it, seen the movies, etc … and still smash the heck out of them.
I am glad he obtained a permit and was carrying. I agree with the shoot to kill comment.
… and Tammi, I am honored and am adding you as well!
Hi CavMom,
It is truly a pleasure. I’m always reading your comments at Doctor Bulldog’s place and am in wholehearted agreement with them. Then, the other day, something just clicked (in my brain) and I clicked onto your site! I thought to myself how stupid I was for taking so long. Anyway, I need to get you added to my reader too. Thanks for the link.
As a former military policeman, and staunch advocate of the armed citizen, I agree that if the use of deadly force is obvious(I feared for my life), then center mass is the aim point. You could shoot the guy in the leg, sever the femoral artery, and he could bleed out, anyway.
I’m not a murderous individual, but rather than have the criminal rolled into a court room in a wheelchair, and gain the sympathy of the jury, while he attempts to sue me for all I have, and ever will have, I have a simple rule about knowing if I’m shooting the criminal too many times.
I know I have shot him once too much, when the entry wound, the exit wound, and the hole in the floor are in perfect alignment.
I hear you no2liberals. I’ve heard of that happening too — criminals suing the victims. If I find a story, I’ll post it.
Danged straight, it has happened! Many times.
So are you familiar with the works of Prof. Gary Kleck or Prof. John Lott?
Do you know how many times, on a yearly average, a private citizen protects their person, family, or property?
Studies indicate that firearms are used more than 2 million times a year for personal protection, and that the presence of a firearm, without a shot being fired, prevents crime in many instances. Shooting usually can be justified only where crime constitutes an immediate, imminent threat to life, limb, or, in some cases, property.
Hi no2liberals,
I’m borrowing a book from a co-worker that I haven’t had the chance to read regarding the stats you link to. I’ll check over my lunch hour and see who it’s by, then return it to my coworker and try and get it from the library when I have time to read it.
Thanks for the link — I’ll be clicking it over lunch or tonight. My spam filter seems to be tolerating you better today!
Glad the spam tolerates me, cause I can’t stand it.
Do a search for Prof Gary Kleck, and Prof John Lott. Dr. Lott has a blog that is on nuke’s roll.
I just looked at the book on my computer desk and it’s More Guns, Less Crime by Dr. John Lott! I’m gonna link him to my blogroll too. Be back soon ….
Back. Here we go:
Dr. John Lott’s Blog and Professor Gary Kleck
That’s the one, and Dr. Lott has written another since.
His first one, analyzing all of the crime data from every county in the U.S., and the economic impact of crime, was ground breaking. So much so, that the anti-gun crowd was furious, and even issued death threats on he and his family. He had to go to about twenty other Phd’s to get anyone to peer review his work. It didn’t support their agenda.
no2liberals,
That would be correct/ It’s all about the agendas, nothing to do with the truth or facts unless of course they can be twisted to fit the agenda. Have a fantastic weekend.