Can you shoot someone in the back that turns there back to y

[Charles L. Cotton]

As others have mentioned, Texas law does not address which part of the body can be shot, only when you can shoot. In your scenario, there are two questions that must be answered; 1) has the threat ceased; and 2) in defending yourself, did you do something that will be viewed as "unacceptable" by those who get to evaluate your action (police, prosecutor, grand jury, judge, and jury)?

"Has the threat ceased" can be an incredibly difficult question to answer, especially under these circumstances. Merely turning their back on someone does not mean the threat has ceased. However, as a general statement, society does not approve of shooting people in the back so you better be able to explain your actions in a way that make the people who are evaluating your actions change their mind about what is acceptable and what is not.

The same analysis would hold true if we’re talking about shooting someone multiple times, shooting someone who is 25 or 30 feet away and who is armed only with an edged weapon or an impact weapon (Tueller Principal), or taking any other action that society would not expect to see in a self-defense situation. Obviously, LEO’s and prosecutors will have much more information and knowledge about such events than will the general public. Their testimony to a grand jury will be influential and will help educate these laymen issues that are beyond the common knowledge of the general population. But if it does not go well for the defendant to this point and he or she has been unable to convince more knowledgeable people that their actions were justified, then convincing people on the jury will likely be even more difficult.

Chas.

[WildBill]

But if it does not go well for the defendant to this point and he or she has been unable to convince more knowledgeable people that their actions were justified, then convincing people on the jury will likely be even more difficult.

Most people on a jury believe that the defendant is guilty; otherwise they wouldn't have been arrested and put on trial.

[puma guy]

The 71 year old man who used his CCW in the Florida Internet Cafe shooting was moving toward the actors as they retreated and shot one in the hip and buttocks. I read he most likely won't be charged but I've seen no official ruling. It will be interesting to see what happens in this case. Florida's law may of course be different than Texas' law.

[WildBill]

The 71 year old man who used his CCW in the Florida Internet Cafe shooting was moving toward the actors as they retreated and shot one in the hip and buttocks. I read he most likely won't be charged but I've seen no official ruling. It will be interesting to see what happens in this case. Florida's law may of course be different than Texas' law.

Sometimes 71 year old people get breaks that younger people don't.

[recaffeination]

Can I shoot someone in the back? Can I shoot someone who steals something out of my car?

These are great questions to ask in your CHL class.

[barstoolguru]

But if it does not go well for the defendant to this point and he or she has been unable to convince more knowledgeable people that their actions were justified, then convincing people on the jury will likely be even more difficult.

Most people on a jury believe that the defendant is guilty; otherwise they wouldn't have been arrested and put on trial.

IFMost people on a grand jury believe that the defendant is guilty; otherwise they wouldn't have been arrested and put on trial (people get arrested every day just to have the charges dropped ; been there got a tee shirt)

[Oldgringo]

The 71 year old man who used his CCW in the Florida Internet Cafe shooting was moving toward the actors as they retreated and shot one in the hip and buttocks. I read he most likely won't be charged but I've seen no official ruling. It will be interesting to see what happens in this case. Florida's law may of course be different than Texas' law.

Sometimes 71 year old people get breaks that younger people don't.

It takes more than luck to get to be 71. Not everyone makes it.

[Skiprr]

Just a quick note about common terminology that, from the standpoint of defensive tactics, has troubled me for a lot of years...and I'm not gonna make a peep about legality or not.

Personally, I think we should get in the habit of thinking "create position," not "create distance."

Early on in fundamental defensive shooting instruction, you're taught to shoot on the move...but that movement is often either directly toward the target, or directly away from it. This is partly due to realistic restrictions of the square range: moving directly forward or backward keeps the muzzle of your gun oriented straight downrange, so there's no problem with angles of fire in relation to the berm.

Shooting while walking backward is even one of the standards in the IDPA classifier. However, I think it's in there primarily because Ken Hackathorne designed most of the classifier in conjunction with Bill Wilson, and the toe-to-heel backward walk is something that Hackathorne has taught for decades.

With utmost respect to Ken, moving directly backward from a point of confrontation is probably the very last tactic you want to employ.

The human body was masterfully engineered with 80% of its lower-body capability designed to move it forward. Try comparing your time running backward to your straight-ahead sprint speed over the same distance. Won't be favorable. In other words--even if you don't bump into something--you can't cover distance quickly enough to be effective. Too, the likelihood of tripping is much greater moving directly backward than moving laterally or diagonally...both because of the nature of the footwork and the fact that your peripheral vision can aid you as you step anywhere but backward.

TAM mentioned the OODA Loop. If the BG has turned around and taken his eyes off you, and then abruptly turns back, the fact that you're now 10 feet farther away than you were when he last saw you doesn't change anything: you are still oriented in exactly the same plane as he last observed you to be (we're assuming firearms are in play here on both sides, not contact weapons).

One of the principle reasons cited for creating distance is the supposition that, because you practice shooting, you will be more accurate in a confrontation at distance than will the BG. I say that's a specious argument for at least two reasons.

1. Few of us have conditioned experience reacting under the stress of a real-time life-and-death defensive scenario; simply look at the "hit" stats for LEO-involved shootings. If you can pop-out the X-ring on a static paper target at 25 yards at the range, it doesn't mean you'll be able to hit minute-of-barn-door at the same distance when someone is shooting back at you.

2. You have to know and consider the limitations of your carry gun. There were very few small carry pistols available when the CHL first became law in 1996; nowadays, it seems that at least 75% of the population that carries uses a small form-factor, short-barreled gun (don't quote me on numbers; I'm just guessing). But if the BG is packin' a Glock 19--and may be experiencing a more manageable adrenaline dump than me because he's done this before--and I have an LCP, my ability simply to get an extra 10 or 15 yards farther away may not do me one whit of good in that particular fight.

Situational awareness doesn't simply mean being alert to possible danger: it means constantly being aware of all of your situation. To create positioning, you have to be aware of your environment and how best to use it.

If we've already let ourselves get caught and robbed, and now we want to take reactive measures in case the BG turns around and starts firing, the number one consideration is: "Get the heck off the X." And not in a straight line from the point of contact. If he turns around, don't be at the angle where he expects you to be. If you aren't there anymore, he has to reset his OODA Loop; start back over with Observe and Orient. Given the choice of being 5 yards farther away along the same line of fire, or being 5 yards off to the side, take the angle every single time.

The number two consideration, and it can even trump number one depending on the circumstance, is: "Get behind cover." If he takes off running and you have a big, steel dumpster diagonal to you but in the same direction down the alley, it may seem counterintuitive but your best bet is not to worry about creating distance, but to take off running behind the BG in order to get behind that dumpster.

Use of available concealment is also an important consideration, but depends on the circumstance. If that same alley has a galvanized 55-gallon trash can sitting in place of the big steel dumpster, you do yourself no favors diving behind the trash can; you'll just hear the rounds more clearly as they punch through the thin metal on their way to you.

Cover and concealment are two very different things. The first can protect you, the latter can only hide you.

Positional awareness also relates to IDPA Rule #4: "Always be sure of your target and what is behind it." If that alley you're in has no cover available and your decision is to move laterally up against one of the walls while you draw your gun, the side you choose to move to may be dictated by what you see at the end of the alley. If moving one way would put any rounds you fire into a brick wall across the adjacent street, while moving to the other side would put your point-of-aim in the direction of pedestrian traffic crossing at a light, do yourself a big favor and opt for the brick wall.

Longwinded. Sorry. Been months since I went off on a hefty word-count tirade. But like I said, one of my soapbox issues. "Distance is your friend" is, I think, a misleading self-defense mantra. It certainly can be true, given a particular set of circumstances, but it isn't necessarily true. Good positioning--making the best use of available geometry and cover--will always be your best friend.

Back to your regularly scheduled programming...

[barstoolguru]

great post ... is it alright to pass it along?

[JeepGuy79]

You say real loud something like "thank god he didn't get my money clip, or rolex, or something" then when he turns around...

I am j/k of course but I would feel sick if a bad guy new where I lived. Lets assume you have a wad of cash in the wallet and he thinks you are wealthy he may try to break in for more. Or he may come to kill you because of you being a witness. Not likely someone stealing wallets would think that far ahead, but still troubling.

[gigag04]

I can - but I like to think I would've acted prior to getting in that position.

[RAM4171]

I can - but I like to think I would've acted prior to getting in that position.

[The Annoyed Man]

What skiprr said. I took his seminar on this subject at the PSC forum day. When I wrote "create distance" in my previous post, I was actually visualizing and thinking of what he taught us that day, which primarily consisted of moving forward at about a 45º angle, getting the gun deployed while doing so, firing from retention if necessary. I should have stated that part about getting the angle. And the movement doesn't have to be forward. A backward angle may not be as desirable, but if that is the allotted space you have to work with, then that's what you use. Either way, it gets you off of X where the BG last saw you.

This type of movement by the way came absolutely naturally to me as it was entirely consistent with everything I ever learned in several years of martial arts classes. It even puts you in a better position to strike a blow with your hands, elbows, knees or feet. And it does interrupt his OODA loop because you are no longer where he expects to find you.

Thanks skiprr for the cognitive reminder.

The best possible outcome is to not have to shoot someone. Until he fires back at you, or turns back and resumes the attack, shooting him is a judgement call on your part, but it may be poor judgement. Carrying a gun doesn't license you to take people out just because they are bad and they are a potential threat to you. I just think that it would be difficult to convince a GJ or judge or jury that the criminal who robbed you and is now retreating away from you presents anything more than a potential threat. I'm not saying he's NOT more than a potential threat, but it isn't your opinion or mine that counts. It's the opinion of the finders of fact that counts.

[Oldgringo]

If y'all are thinkin' of shootin' somebody in the back, you might ought to aim for the head. Dead men tell no tales.

[srothstein]

If y'all are thinkin' of shootin' somebody in the back, you might ought to aim for the head. Dead men tell no tales.

Never watched Quincey, huh? Dead men tell all kinds of tales, but few lies.

I would suggest anyone with questions about shooting people in the back should do some research. The Force Science Institute in Minneapolis has done some very interesting time-motion studies on things like this. One study showed that a person can be facing you and start to turn as you decide to shoot. Before you could recognize the change and decide to not shoot, the person would have their back to you and you would be shooting them in the back. They have some other studies on what a person can do in a shooting that are also very thought provoking.