Viper
New Member
- Joined
- Mar 18, 2014
- Messages
- 1,812
- Reaction score
- 1
BIB - he shot to 'nullify' the threat and chose ammunition especially designed to cause maximum tissue damage. OP knew exactly what the bullets were capable of (watermelon, anyone?) therefore he sure as hell wasn't planning to gently graze the intruder into submission.
OP was fully aware of what could happen if he fired even one shot in that bathroom, he admitted that the reason he did not fire a warning shot in to the glass enclosed empty shower was because he was afraid the bullet would ricochet and come back and strike him. Yes, that is something he really did say.
OP did not aim at the doorknob or the lock, he said he would have if he had wanted to hit Mr. Intruder as he was coming out of the WC, but OP steadfastly denied wanting to actually put a bullet in to Mr. Intruder. The trouble is he did not aim obviously high or obviously low to warn, although even that would likely have hurt and possibly killed anyone in the WC because of the ricocheting bullets. No he aimed at about the midsection of an average person and fired four bullets in a good grouping; law enforcement and firearms instructors teach people to shoot at the midsection of their target because that will seriously injure or kill the target. That is intent to kill, although there is more separately.
If folks read the HOA this and much more is all in there.