Shooting To Wound
Can we agree on one thing about the Kyle Rittenhouse case? Can we at least put to rest once and for all the idea of “shooting to wound” as an acceptable tactic for police or armed citizens? Despite the tiny hole and patch of blood often depicted in Hollywood, the real consequences of shooting to wound are usually much more serious.
Though specific language may differ state-to-state, a common precept of deadly force is that it is either intended or likely to cause death or serious physical injury. What that means is that in the eyes of the law, you cannot shoot someone “just a little bit.” Any time you shoot at a person with a firearm, the law says that you are in fact using deadly force. Also remember that deadly force may only legally be used when the defender reasonably believes they themselves are in imminent danger of death or serious physical injury.
And if you believe that shooting someone in a limb does not count as serious physical injury, I invite you to look at the photo of Gaige Grosskreutz's arm below. WARNING: Graphic content.
Keep that image in mind the next time you feel tempted to suggest that either police or armed citizens should simply shoot a suspect in the arm or leg. The damage you see above is the damage you are advocating be inflicted on a criminal suspect. You might argue, “but Dave…serious physical injury is still better than death!” First of all, that is your subjective judgement, and second of all…that is not what the law says. The law says there is no difference!
This agency is training officers to “Kyle” criminal suspects.
Another consideration is that in the Kenosha incident, Gaige Grosskreutz may have been seriously injured, but he was not incapacitated and could certainly have switched his Glock pistol to his left hand and finished Kyle Rittenhouse. So even after having a large part of one arm removed, Gaige Grosskreutz was still capable of attack, and stopped his attack on Kyle Rittenhouse only because he was “disinclined to continue.” Against a determined opponent, shooting to wound cannot be relied upon to stop an attack. I’m not even going to get into the issues of the practical marksmanship required to make a shot on the extremities of a moving attacker, or the implications of missing such a target in the real world, where every shot carries a lawsuit with it.
Shooting to wound might look good in the movies, but in the real world, it's a terrible idea. The legal standards are no different than shooting center mass, and it is an unsafe and unreliable defensive tactic. The Kenosha incident should serve as a perpetual reminder of the folly of the concept of shooting to wound.
