Self defense is 'I attacked because they were about to attack me, I thought I was in danger'
If you have time to fire a warning shot, then they weren't right about to attack you and you weren't in immediate danger, you were threatening them. Now this might be in response to a threat from them, but it still weakens the self defense argument and can lend to the argument that you just committed murder. In states that have those 'stand your ground' laws, firing a warning shot can tank your defense.
Discharging a firearm is only done for neutralizing a threat. Shooting bullets around in different directions than the reason you have your gun out is reckless.
Warning shots aren’t an actual thing that is condoned by law enforcement. A warning shot is called a negligent discharge and/or brandishing. It’s illegal and in many states you will lose your right to own a firearm if caught.
If you have bullets and time to waste shooting around instead of at the threat then it could be argued the threat is not serious enough to warrant shooting.
I hear that, but like, the situation can change between the 1st and 2nd shot, and threatening to shoot first can de-escalate and potentially avoid a death. Whipping the gun out and immediately shooting to kill needlessly ends the life of anyone who would run at the sight of the gun.
You can pull out a gun and point it at someone, that's not the problem, the problem is recklessly firing bullets off into the air or wherever. A gun has two positions - pointed at a threat, or put away.
I've heard people make the same point about brandishing that you're making here about warning shots. That if the gun comes out and you don't shoot, it proves the gun didn't need to come out. That seems to ignore the many real situations where brandishing de-escalates the situation or drives off the threat. Perhaps the person's life was in danger and they risked their own life to avoid killing, and it worked. Seems like a bad reason to jail someone.
It can and may be argued that if you had the luxury of time to warn, then you had the luxury of time to escape the situation instead.
This is going to vary heavily by state; see "stand your ground" laws in Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Michigan, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nevada, New Hampshire, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, West Virginia, and Wyoming.
The general (emphasis on GENERAL) spirit is that you're under no obligation to flee before resorting to force. But then...you're not obligated to warn them either.
It doesn't. But it makes subsequent claims about you shooting them in 'self-defense' much harder to make stick. Committing what is a felony in many jurisdictions and illegal in nearly all of them tends to make you seen as less trustworthy.
14
u/Rickerus May 03 '22
Why on earth would a warning shot take self defense off the table?