I was listening to the radio during my daily commute, the disc jockey reading the news. He stopped after relating a tale about the latest demonstration organized to protest a police officer shooting a crazed violent criminal, and uttered the words that form the title to this essay.
I am willing to put down good folding money on an even odds bet that every person involved with the shooting sports reacted the same way when they read that last paragraph.
“How the hell can anyone be so freakin’ stupid that they even asked that question???”
My own reaction was similar. Lots of eye rolling and head shaking. But, stupid though it might appear at first, this sort of question is also fairly common. Even a small measure of experience would show how utterly absurd such a notion might be, but it doesn’t seem to be very clear to those who have never fired a gun before.
So, if you have ever pondered why someone does not aim for the legs during a violent and terrifying criminal attack, please allow me to briefly explain …
SHOOTING SOMEONE IS RESERVED FOR THE GRAVEST EXTREME
What in the world is that supposed to mean? “In the gravest extreme?”
It just means that you have no other options. The only way to save innocent lives is to resort to lethal force.
Shooting someone in the extremities might not stop them in time. They have to break off their murderous attack right now! Otherwise innocent people may pay a cost that is too terrible to contemplate.