Warning shots?

Discussion in 'Second Amendment & Legal' started by RockoutwithmyGlockout, Apr 14, 2012.

  1. RockoutwithmyGlockout

    RockoutwithmyGlockout New Member

    I've been wondering how many states actually allow the use of warning shots? Michigan we do not allow warning shots, tasers, or stun guns. I guess my warning is the fact that I pulled my firearm out of the holster! Haha
    Are warning shots typically the "norm" in other states? Or is it just a random few?
    The way I see it, warning shots are unnecessary. If that level of being threatened is there then you should fire at the threat. jJust my opinion.
  2. bhale187

    bhale187 New Member Supporter

    IL has no cc license, but for police officers the use of a warning shot is the same as the use of deadly force, and most PDs forbid the use of warning shots in policy.

  3. SHOOTER13

    SHOOTER13 RETIRED MODERATOR Sponsor Lifetime Supporting Member

    The "warning shot" is not necessary in Pennsylvania...there is a castle doctrine in effect.

    Besides, a warning shot would endanger the public at large...
  4. sgtglock

    sgtglock New Member

    Like we're alwaus told, " every round has a lawyer attached". Or something to that effect. Warning shots, IMO, are a lawsuit waitng to happen!
  5. It's a waste of a perfectly good bullet.
  6. RockoutwithmyGlockout

    RockoutwithmyGlockout New Member

    Michigan also has the stand your ground law and the castle doctrine. Firing a warning shot is a waste of a good round.
    Illinois, I was unaware that law enforcement were allowed to do that? Pretty much any firearm related anything is illegal there lol.
    If an officer feels the need to fire is weapon it better be AT someone.
    Maybe the warning shots are for states that do not have a castle doctrine or a stand your ground clause perhaps?
  7. jonm61

    jonm61 New Member

    You are responsible for where every round you fire ends up. If your "warning shot" kills someone, you're going to jail for, at best, manslaughter. End of story. Firing a round into the air can kill someone a mile or so away, depending on the caliber and the elevation of the barrel. It's happended many times, including a few years ago here in Atlanta, where a little boy was killed by a rifle round that came down through the roof of their church during midnight mass on NYE. He was killed, because some idiot was "celebrating" New Years by shooting into the air.

    Anywhere a warning shot isn't illegal, it should be. Any warning shot that's fired is being fired by an idiot.
  8. SquadCapt4

    SquadCapt4 New Member

    I don't know about being required, or illegal in any states, but I do know warning shots are frowned upon in most self defense teachings. For exactly the reason jonm stated. We are responsible for where our rounds end up. And a warning shot is nothing more than a stray round just waiting to end up in some innocent child's head. If the threat is that great, I don't feel any warning (other than a very loud "STOP OR I WILL SHOOT) is necessary.
  9. Happysniper1

    Happysniper1 New Member

    In the entire state of Nevada, warning shots are forbidden, by civilians or LEOs alike.

    The reasoning is that the weapon is a tool of last resort, and should never come into play when other options are still available....note that we have no SYG law, nor do we have a Duty To Retreat Law, and while we do not have a stated Castle Law, we follow Castle Doctrine nonetheless.

    A warning shot is by definition an unaimed shot, and is therefore classed as a negligent discharge, and the charge for issuing a warning shot would be "unlawful discharge of a firearm" or "unlawful discharge of a firearm in a congested area".

    There have been some cases where in a legitimate self defense or defense of the home situation, the shooter issued a warning shot then later claimed it was an accidental discharge (it'd be pretty obvious it was a warning shot if it want upwards, like to the ceiling, eh?) and to which no charges were eventually filed.

    I teach my students that warning shots are not only illegal, they are dangerous, being unaimed shots that could pose a greater hazard (deadly force, right?) to innocent bystanders, and that the flash and the report could actually affect the shooter's ability to see or think clearly in a split-second situation. I tell them, the gun comes out only when there is a clear and unambiguous legal right to shoot someone dead in his tracks. Even if there are no witnesses, during the investigation it is much easier to stick to the truth, and makes a no-charges-filed decision much simpler for law enforcement.

    My thoughts....
  10. 40-cal-cowboy

    40-cal-cowboy New Member

    warning shot ???

    let me look that phrase up in my mind..........oh here it is Warning shot (verb) the first shot fired at the first threat who is now on the ground loosing large amounts of much needed fluids as the light in his eye from what looked like an easy score goes dim :eek:
  11. Burrito

    Burrito New Member

    I thought warning shots only happened in the movies
  12. RockoutwithmyGlockout

    RockoutwithmyGlockout New Member

    Well said happysniper1. I agree with what everyone stated about being responsible for any rounds that can cause damage. In our self defense class the same thing was stated, stop or I'll shoot is THE warning. I was just wondering more along the lines of any states that it's considered legal/acceptable to fire a warning shot.
    Again thanks to all who shared their thoughts and opinions. This forum is great! So glad I joined.
  13. Donn

    Donn Active Member

    Precisely, along with "shoot to wound."
  14. SHOOTER13

    SHOOTER13 RETIRED MODERATOR Sponsor Lifetime Supporting Member

    Welcome to the Glock Forum 40-cal-cowboy !

    BLCKWLF GrassHopper

    Discharging a firearm in any type of manner is considered lethal force, wether or not you actually kill or injure anyone. That being said, warning shots are still lethal force, you are responsible for that bullet. As far as "shooting to wound", it's called lethal force for a reason. If you are going to discharge a firearm in defense, make the bullet count, don't let the attacker continue to attack you or anyone else. If a shot to the leg ends the encounter, so be it, but center body mass is a one stop shop. Incapacitate is the idea. No you don't have to kill the guy, but it is called lethal force for a reason.
  16. series11

    series11 Hail Commifornia Lifetime Supporting Member

    Yeah I think CA has the same policy of no warning shots. I perfer my shots to change the heart and mind of my attacker if I absolutely need to use them. (Two to the heart, one to the mind)
  17. brannon67

    brannon67 New Member

    The way I look at it, is If I feel theatened enough to pull my gun, then Im going to pull the trigger and aim to kill. Hell with a warning shot. Thats wasting a good bullet anyway. Why would you want to do that? Ammo is not cheap nowadays.
  18. SquadCapt4

    SquadCapt4 New Member

    Current trend on warning shots.

    Attached Files:

  19. PeacefulWarrior

    PeacefulWarrior New Member

    Somewhere recently (wish I could site it), an older man had an invader on his property. He fired a warning shot into the ground... perp ran away - old man was arrested.

    If I pull out my mace (mostly for dogs), knife, or Glock - it is because I have made a decision it's not possible do deescalate a situation and I am in eminent danger. No warning - life is all about learning right & wrong & at this point, I am not going to try to educate somebody with a warning, I am going to do everything I can to ensure I live.