No problem, Joel. I just figured we should stick with one thread on the topic, and that one has been ongoing for a few days. As far as I know, the law hasn't changed on the subject. There may have been a case on it, but none of folks here have gotten word of it.Joel wrote:Mithras61,
Thanks for pointing me to the topic discussion in the Instructor's Corner. As you can tell from my post count, exactly 1, I am new here and still feeling my way around. Great site and glad I found it.
Liberty,
I didn't take it seriously when my friend e-mailed, but just wanted to be sure.
Thanks all,
Joel
I suspect it was a misunderstanding of the way things work (you must stop shooting when the threat is no longer presented) and the explaination of that. The thing is, if every BG that was shot at was hit in the central nervous system, one shot would be plenty, but the reality of it is that most are NOT hit in the CNS, and then we have the question "At what point did the BG no longer represent a threat?" which is what the letter appears to be referencing.
I think most folks here will say that as long as the BG represents a deadly threat, keep shooting. The BG can keep functioning for up to a minute even after a fatal wound has been received.