|
The "where" of you being shot is irrelevent. You can be face to face with someone (most law enforcement gunfights occur within arms length to about 3 yards) and when the lead starts flying both participants are often doing the "funky-chciken", dodging, diving, dancing, running, etc.
Just as it took a few reaction intervals to get on the trigger and start yanking it, it also takes a few reaction intervals to perceive the negation of the threat, formulate a response, telegraph that response to your muscles and actually stop the yanking of the trigger; your adversary could very well have turned and be ruinning in that time frame. You CANNOT, nor is it required, instantaneously process the negation of the threat and immediately stop and recall all sent bullets.
For people to categorically state that if "one is shot in the back it is a bad shoot", simply lends credence to the fact that the individual has: 1) never been in a gunfight; or, 2) doesn't know what they are talking about.
You can be in a legitimate, straight-up gunfight and when the dust clears your adversary may have some holes in his back you don't recall putting there. Doesn't mean a thing.
Unless you are one of the cops in the hallway on THAT day and in THAT moment - it would be prudent to take a deep breath, step back and support the guy on the ground.
We are the profession of arms - we owe our kids and our law enforcement professionals better analysis and understanding than some of the posts here.
If WE have these issues.....is it so hard to understand why libs and the media have some of the whacky misperceptions THEY have??
|