And as far as how to tell if a threat has ended, that’s not an easy thing to do and I can’t answer the question. But if you’re ever in a shooting, you may have to defend how you decided the threat was over, so it’s definitely something everyone should consider and seek training/education on. Thankfully, in Oklahoma the standard is primarily the reasonable belief of a threat, not whether there objectively was a threat (which is impossible to know in the moment, despite how easy it seems to armchair quarterbacks with the benefit of hindsight).
And as far as how to tell if a threat has ended, that’s not an easy thing to do and I can’t answer the question. But if you’re ever in a shooting, you may have to defend how you decided the threat was over, so it’s definitely something everyone should consider and seek training/education on. Thankfully, in Oklahoma the standard is primarily the reasonable belief of a threat, not whether there objectively was a threat (which is impossible to know in the moment, despite how easy it seems to armchair quarterbacks with the benefit of hindsight).
Oh I’m not saying you should not use the most effective means to end a threat. Certainly, going out of your way to try to only injure an attacker is not an effective way to stop their attack. Defending yourself with a weapon in a way that’s likely to stop an attack unfortunately requires causing wounds that are likely to result in death. But death is not the goal. It’s just sometimes the outcome. When the threat stops, your use of force must also stop, even if (or especially if) the attacker is still breathing.*
In my last post I was referring to people who go around talking about “shooting to kill” in a way that really says “if someone attacks me, I’m going to make sure they pay for it with their life.” That’s what we call “murder.” We’ve all heard those guys talk. They’re more interested in being badass than understanding the concept (and limits) of legally justified use of force. But sometimes some of us who aren’t so ignorant and do actually have a good grasp of justified force will use the phrase “shoot to kill” as a sort of shorthand for shooting in such a way as to physically incapacitate an attacker, likely resulting in their death. The problem with that is when the general public, a DA, or possibly a jury, hear “shoot to kill,” they will hear “make sure he’s dead,” not “make sure he’s stopped.” They will hear “murder,” not “self-defense.” So it’s wise to choose your words carefully to avoid any misunderstanding about your intent. Perception is reality to many people, unfortunately.
I am certainly willing to cause injuries that may result in death when that’s necessary and legally justified to stop an attack, but like I said in my last post, I don’t ever want or intend to kill someone. All I would ever set out to do is stop an attack.
* I’m not suggesting a victim should check for signs of life after defending against an attack.
I think you are required to render first aid to an incapacitated threat if you can do so safely.
If nothing else it would be favorable for the jury to know this was performed.
Oh I’m not saying you should not use the most effective means to end a threat. Certainly, going out of your way to try to only injure an attacker is not an effective way to stop their attack. Defending yourself with a weapon in a way that’s likely to stop an attack unfortunately requires causing wounds that are likely to result in death. But death is not the goal. It’s just sometimes the outcome. When the threat stops, your use of force must also stop, even if (or especially if) the attacker is still breathing.*
In my last post I was referring to people who go around talking about “shooting to kill” in a way that really says “if someone attacks me, I’m going to make sure they pay for it with their life.” That’s what we call “murder.” We’ve all heard those guys talk. They’re more interested in being badass than understanding the concept (and limits) of legally justified use of force. But sometimes some of us who aren’t so ignorant and do actually have a good grasp of justified force will use the phrase “shoot to kill” as a sort of shorthand for shooting in such a way as to physically incapacitate an attacker, likely resulting in their death. The problem with that is when the general public, a DA, or possibly a jury, hear “shoot to kill,” they will hear “make sure he’s dead,” not “make sure he’s stopped.” They will hear “murder,” not “self-defense.” So it’s wise to choose your words carefully to avoid any misunderstanding about your intent. Perception is reality to many people, unfortunately.
I am certainly willing to cause injuries that may result in death when that’s necessary and legally justified to stop an attack, but like I said in my last post, I don’t ever want or intend to kill someone. All I would ever set out to do is stop an attack.
* I’m not suggesting a victim should check for signs of life after defending against an attack.
This I can agree with. The problem is that some DA's, no matter what, will try to pin the victim with a murder charge regardless. You could use a .22 lr pistol with ball ammo and they would be like "This guy just wanted to kill someone!". Thankfully we don't live in a state that has too many of those types and (so far) most times I've seen someone shoot in self defense nothing happens. Circling around to the original discussion, this is why I am not too worried about my choice of dust cover. Hell, I see many houses that have the "Nothing in this house is worth dying for" warnings on their door. That could float around the same thing we were discussing and so far I've not heard of that brought up once in the news (though I'm surprised Tulsa World hasn't).
In other news, I get to pick up my lower on Tuesday. Revisiting my list of parts and changing things. The hardest part is finding a PSA stripped upper to match my lower, they are constantly out of stock of them. I can get a complete upper with barrel, but so far have not found a combo that I like. Going to Wanenmachers and hopefully I'll find one and a few other parts I'm looking for.
I like sneks too.
So, build question: I was wanting to match my snek with a PSA stripped upper, but it looks like those are as rare as hens teeth right now. I was looking at some of the lower furniture being cerakoted red (you know, for the best college football team in Oklahoma 
). Nothing too garish, just the trigger guard, mag release and mag lever. I found an Anderson stripped upper that is cerakoted red as well (all by the same company, so they should match). There shouldn't be any issues with mating an Anderson upper with a PSA lower, correct? Both are milspec.
). Nothing too garish, just the trigger guard, mag release and mag lever. I found an Anderson stripped upper that is cerakoted red as well (all by the same company, so they should match). There shouldn't be any issues with mating an Anderson upper with a PSA lower, correct? Both are milspec.
No issue whatsoever. I've built several frankenstein guns with products from different manufactures.Thats the beauty of the AR platform. The parts aren't "fitted", they are universal except for Colt. Don't try to marry parts to a Colt.So, build question: I was wanting to match my snek with a PSA stripped upper, but it looks like those are as rare as hens teeth right now. I was looking at some of the lower furniture being cerakoted red (you know, for the best college football team in Oklahoma
Most(99%) of all AR parts are interchangeable. Really the only comm/mil spec component’s that you hear about is the buffer tube. Either tube will thread into the lower, the threads are the same.
The diehard guys will tell you its Colt or nothing since them and FN have the US contract. I have had issues before mixing and matching. So be warned it can happen. You can do it just know sometimes they can be loose or really tight depending on who makes the upper and lower.
Colt has the big pins in the lower. I'll put my franken guns against any colt at the range. I know there is a cult out there, but it's for the name and not the performance.
There is also milspec and commercial when adding a buffer tube. Stay with milspec.
Be careful! Not all Colts are large pin. My 10 year old 6920 and my ~35 year old SP1 are both std pin. I think only from the early 90s to somewhere in the late 2000s did we see large pins.
And as far as reliability. In the mid 90s, I took two Colts to a 6 day LE Tactical Rifle course. A primary and a backup. Within 1 hour after the class started I loaned my backup to a fellow officer after his Franken build failed. These were the only two Colts in the entire class and the only two that did not encounter some sort of failure all week long. One officer went through 3 from his department.
Similar threads
