Question to "gunners" about gun rights in the United States

With due consideration to the second amendment, morality and liberty in general, I want to know what people believe regarding the right to fire a "warning shot" from your legally owned gun.

Is this your right?
Should it be a right?
When should this right be exercised?

BTW, Save your trite response, "why waste a bullet, just shoot to kill."

and --Everyone who replies will get put on a list ..............................(of those presumed not to be paranoid

Never, ever, EVER fire a warning shot.

That's the epitome of reckless behavior.

If you arent going to shoot the threat to neutralize then your hand shouldnt even be on your gun.

why need a warning shot? once you pull the gun out that should be all the warning you should need.

Warning shots are reckless, just as thisguyrighthere said.

If you pull your weapon, there should be ample reason to use it.
If you have your finger on the trigger, your should have a target in the sights.

The above replies are essentially true. No concealed carry, police training, or military course I have ever participated in or been told about ever says anything about a "warning shot". I think that is more an invention of hollywood.

A gun should not be in hand unless use of deadly force to defend life and limb is deemed to be a serious possibility. And the weapon shouldn't be up in a fire position and finger on the trigger unless we are executing that choice.

Warning shots have to land somewhere, this could be hundreds of yards away if fired upwards. If fired at the ground could cause injury or death by ricochet to any number of people including yourself.

Not a good idea.

reply to post by InverseLookingGlass


Never pull the trigger if you aren't prepared to shot whatever or whomever caused you to draw in the first place.

If it's quiet, chambering a round is all the warning someone needs.

A RESPONSIBLE gun owner should know that you only pull out a gun as a last resort. Warning shots, as "Shotgun" Biden says to do, are a reckless endangerment. Even birdshot from a shotgun can be a danger to an innocent person close by.

www.nssf.org...

reply to post by InverseLookingGlass


Every shot has to land somewhere . . . if you are unsure of where that shot will land, you should never pull the trigger. So the direct answer to your silliness is, and disregarding what you propose is illegal anyway, "No".

Never cover anything you are not willing to destroy.

Never let your finger touch the trigger until you are sure of your target (and everything around it).

Never fire unless you are sure there is no chance of hitting anything but your target (as most people miss frequently, even LEO's and Military) and the threat to your life is in imminent.

reply to post by InverseLookingGlass


If we are to believe our Vice President, a pair of warning shots is the best way to defend yourself.

What everybody else said....no warning shot. If anyone else that you care about is in the house and you fire a shot inside the house you would be very surprised to know just how many walls that shot will go through before stopping...I have done a few sheetrock and stud penetration tests and I will tell you that a missed target is very dangerous inside your home...NEVER fire a warning shot.

reply to post by InverseLookingGlass


A gun is a tool.
And it's use is to protect yourself from others.

You don't pull it out unless your life or someone elses life is in danger.

reply to post by thisguyrighthere

I disagree....If you live in a rural area and you catch a prowler or thief on your property (outside not inside your home and he is not threatening you with a weapon) and he starts to run I can see firing a warning shot into the ground on your own property with the command "That is a warning! Stop or I will shoot at you!" to persuade the criminal to stop: you cant shoot to kill or maim him and if you dont fire the "warning shot" then he will surely get away. In the situation outlined above if he does not respond to the warning shot then you have to let him go...unless he pulls out a gun and starts firing at you.

Originally posted by GMan420
reply to post by InverseLookingGlass

 

If we are to believe our Vice President, a pair of warning shots is the best way to defend yourself.

If we are to believe our Vice president.....
We are in sad shape.

reply to post by CosmicCitizen

The concept of "warning shot" was often used in naval warfare and especially by pirates who would fire a "warning shot" across the bow of a ship that they are seeking to board so that the opposing crew would often surrender without a fight.

If you have time to fire a warning shot the police and courts will question whether you were in immediate danger and put you in the wrong! I also agree that it is wreckless as the others have said!

reply to post by CosmicCitizen


There are a number of rural New Hampshire folks sitting in prison who would disagree.

Feel free to confront a prowler gun in hand but if you fire a "warning shot" and the cops find out you're up # creek.

If you can fire a shot and chase the prowler off and not call the cops and are confident they wont find out then by all means for it.

The lawful scenario is you confront the prowler, the prowler turns toward you, you shoot the prowler believing he was coming at you.

Anything else is a surefire jury trial and violation of any number of negligence, endangerment, recklessness laws.

Warning shots are irresponsible as hell.

reply to post by InverseLookingGlass


Q1. Warning shots are not a right, the right is to keep and bare arms. Making one capable of firing to defend their life or others.
Q2. NO
Q3. NEVER, if you must fire or even display, you had better make it count.
By firing a warning shot, you are placing others in danger at the expense of making sure you miss said scumbag who made you pull a weapon in the first place. In short, "why waste a bullet, just shoot to kill."
I will assume you wanted the long way around.

reply to post by InverseLookingGlass


A "warning shot" is pretty dumb for several reasons. Not the least of which is physics.

What goes up must come down.
Every object in a state of uniform motion tends to remain in that state of motion unless an external force is applied to it.

This means that if you shoot a bullet into the air with the intent of warning someone, where is that bullet going to hit on it's way down?

If you shoot passed the perpetrator where is that bullet going to hit behind him?

It is foolish and reckless to fire something going 1200 - 3000 FPS without an intended target. You are begging for collateral damage and as such are not responsible enough to own a gun.

What is a warning shot seeing a gun pointed in your direction isn't god enough? How about a verbal warning "stop or I'll shoot". Anyone who feels a warning shot is good practice knows little about guns and the proper control one should maintain.

Well let me start by saying, there is no such thing as a right to fire a warning shot.

Now regarding "warning shots" they are foolish. Firing any projectile weapon in a random direction is dangerous. In teh case of a bullet, it is going to go some where. If you fire it straight up in the air, it will come down some where. Maybe you will hit some poor guy out walking his dog. This is a problem in America, especially around New Years. People do fire guns into the air, and those bullets come down some place else and kill innocent people.

If you fire it straight out in front, to the side, or behind you, it is going to go some where. Could be a house up the street. Could be a school bus or car driving down some road. You never know, and this kills innocent people.

One of the very first things you will learn about a fire arm from ANY training class is that when you shoot, you shoot to kill and hit your target. You NEVER fire randomly in any direction.