Too good at shooting, the court will convict you?

[K.Mooneyham]

So, there I was reading the ol' FB postings, and on an article about some UT anti-2A student trying to make CHL training look bad, I see the following reply:

One thing they don't understand is that if you are considered an expert shooter, they will hang you in court if you kill in self defense for not just shooting in the leg or hand to stop the threat. Law enforcement is taught "center mass" and it is pass/fail. I was top gun in my academy for most points, not expert shooting.

I asked the individual who posted that (NOT ME!) about any relevant cases he may know of, and we'll see what he has to say, if anything. But, this bunch is about as savvy a group as I know when it comes to this kind of thing, so I'll put the question to all of you. Do any of you know of a case where the defendant shot a "bad guy", killing said bad guy, but was convicted because the defendant was "too good" at shooting? The whole idea seems rather preposterous but then again, I learn something new every day, so I figured I'd run it by y'all.

[FastCarry]

Self defense shooting calls for shooting to stop a threat. Doesn't matter where it is, just don't hit an innocent. What matters more is, how many rounds and how long. Pump two in someone, he goes motionless.. Threat over, Job done. Stop, think, Pump a few more to make sure..that's murder.

As in the case of the pharmacist, he pumped a few into one perp, he fell. Pharmacist went after other perp, then came back and pumped more into guy that was down. Murder.

[K.Mooneyham]

Self defense shooting calls for shooting to stop a threat. Doesn't matter where it is, just don't hit an innocent. What matters more is, how many rounds and how long. Pump two in someone, he goes motionless.. Threat over, Job done. Stop, think, Pump a few more to make sure..that's murder.

As in the case of the pharmacist, he pumped a few into one perp, he fell. Pharmacist went after other perp, then came back and pumped more into guy that was down. Murder.

Not exactly what I'm talking about. I speaking about someone who may be considered an "expert shooter" defending themselves against a violent aggressor, and killing them in the process being convicted because they were "too good and should have shot the aggressor in the hand, leg, etc.".

[K.Mooneyham]

Do any of you know of a case where the defendant shot a "bad guy", killing said bad guy, but was convicted because the defendant was "too good" at shooting?

Total nonsense.

Prosecutors have tried before to imply that a defender should have shot someone in an extremity, and have been savaged by the defense in return.

I figured the person who posted that comment was full of hot air, AndyC. However, I also figured IF any such event had ever happened, someone on here might know of it.

[puma guy]

Well, yes - never mind the practical dangers of trying to do so, the major legal issue is that if a defender were to deliberately shoot an attacker in an extremity, it would be child's play to then show that the person wasn't in fear of their life, shooting wasn't a last resort, etc.

Not directed to you Andy: Any one here will tell you that you don't shoot to kill, you shoot to stop the threat with the most effective shot.

[The Annoyed Man]

I can't find a Youtube clip or other reference of it, but I was watching an episode of "Forever" once when the character Lt Joanna Reece (Lorraine Toussaint) reassures the main character that, instead of risking killing a bad guy, she said "I shot him in the leg like I was trained to do"......the implication being it would have been a bad thing to hurt a murderer too badly who was trying to evade arrest while shooting at the cops chasing him.

I lost interest in the show at that point. Hollywood is stupid, but people reward Hollywood's stupidity by continuing to watch their stupidity.......which doesn't say much about the American public.

[Breny414]

I remember from several years back that a guy was trying the suicide-by-cop ploy, and the SWAT fellas shot the revolver out of his hand. May not have been necessary but kudos for them.

[K.Mooneyham]

Two more posts from that person, as I pressed for some sort of proof of what he said:

Let me put it this way. If you are an expert shooter and carry, then are faced with the situation of having to kill in self defense, you better keep your mouth shut about your shooting proficiency or you'll be ripped apart by the grand jury and more likely to be indicted.

And:

Any shooting goes before a grand jury whether it is officer involved or citizen involved. It all depends on the circumstances of the shooting whether it results in an indictment or no bill. You're missing my point completely. If you're an expert shooter and kill someone, by all means tell them you're an expert if you want to. Let them decide your fate based on that. Or, you can keep your mouth shut and if they claim you're an expert, make them prove it! As far as case law, look it up. This is what I was taught by Harris County SO instructors at my academy. I didn't ask them for case law to prove it because that was the explanation of why we would never be ranked. To qualify for a CCL or for law enforcement, it is pass/fail only and that is why.

To me, this is part of the problem we face as people who carry firearms for self-defense, namely a lot of misinformation and people attempting to sow fear among those who do care for self-defense. Either something is a fact in this regard, or it is not a fact.

[Richbirdhunter]

When I qualified for my CHL the instructor told us not to save our targets or to take pictures of them. He said that it could be used against us in court if we were involved in a shooting

[The Wall]

Notice what the targets look like used to get your CHL/LTC? And also where most of your shots have to be placed on that target to get a passing score.

Even the law calls it lethal force. Hard to get lethal force without shooting to kill.

[ELB]

So, there I was reading the ol' FB postings,...

One thing they don't understand is that if you are considered an expert shooter, they will hang you in court if you kill in self defense for not just shooting in the leg or hand to stop the threat. Law enforcement is taught "center mass" and it is pass/fail. I was top gun in my academy for most points, not expert shooting.

...

Utter rubbish. I smell troll, and it stinks.

[K.Mooneyham]

So, there I was reading the ol' FB postings,...

One thing they don't understand is that if you are considered an expert shooter, they will hang you in court if you kill in self defense for not just shooting in the leg or hand to stop the threat. Law enforcement is taught "center mass" and it is pass/fail. I was top gun in my academy for most points, not expert shooting.

...

Utter rubbish. I smell troll, and it stinks.

Please, keep in mind that I was asking for the individual who posted that to provide some sort of proof to back up what he claimed. Looking at the guy's profile, it didn't seem like he was a troll, just someone who was very, very misinformed, and didn't want to admit he might be wrong, or at least overdoing it.