Shoot to stop the attacker

THE EDITOR: The suggestion by Acting Inspector Christopher Holder to police officers that they should shoot to kill, demonstrate the lack of training in the use of deadly force by our police officers. As a certified instructor in the use of deadly force, I feel obliged to inform police officers, armed security guards and legally armed civilians that when you use a firearm to protect yourself from death or grievous bodily harm, you must shoot to stop the attacker from hurting you or carrying out his threat.

You do not shoot to kill. To purposely aim for a vital part of the body in order to kill an attacker, will take up valuable time, and since most gunfights are over in five seconds, with three shots being fired at a distance of three to ten feet, the chances of being hurt by the attacker is much greater. It is in this context that it would make sense to shoot at an attacker in the largest part of the body, that is the torso, and continue shooting until the threat is over. Remember it is not your intention to kill, but to merely to stop an attacker from hurting you.

If the attacker dies, that is his problem, he started it. The proper training in the use of deadly force is what police officers, armed security guards and legally armed citizens have not gone through, and this is reflected in their attitude, loss of firearms and lives. It is therefore essential that anyone who carries a firearm for defensive purposes, should avail themselves of such training in order to use a firearm in the safe, correct and proper manner. On the issue of allowing police officers to carry their firearms off duty, this is a very good idea, provided the proper training in alertness and awareness, defensive mindset, tactical use of a firearm, combat readiness, multiple target engagement and the proper use of deadly force is taught to them. Having the necessary training would be an asset to these officers when they are armed, off duty, and on the streets.

ARRUN MAHARAJ
Southern Firearm Training Centre