Minneapolis makes it onto Active Self Protection

[Jackpine Savage]

I hadn't heard about this one but I don't pay much attention to what goes on in the Cities these days.

Legal Warning Shot Used In Self Defense Encounter

Run time is 5:35

[Holland&Holland]

I doubt "warning shots" are actual legal in Minneapolis. I suspect the shooting was ruled self defense so that is what negated them from being an issue.

[Sorcerer]

By the video it looks to be on the edge of being a good shoot. The down side is live rounds were sent out into the neighborhood. I’m not sure how to put this but, it looks like they “helped “the shot by pushing the gun out then firing the shot.

[Holland&Holland]

By the video it looks to be on the edge of being a good shoot. The down side is live rounds were sent out into the neighborhood. I’m not sure how to put this but, it looks like they “helped “the shot by pushing the gun out then firing the shot.

Follow through is key

[jdege]

I doubt "warning shots" are actual legal in Minneapolis. I suspect the shooting was ruled self defense so that is what negated them from being an issue.

IANAL, but as I understand it it's not so much that warning shots are illegal but that any use of a firearm is considered deadly force. Meaning that use of warning shots is justified only in situations in which deadly force is justified.

There are situations in which use of less than deadly force in self defense is justified but use of deadly force is not - against threats less than deadly force, for example. In situations like that, warning shots are not considered less than deadly force.

Ditto with brandishing. While there's no specific "brandishing" law in Minnesota, displaying a weapon with the intent of causing fear is an assault. And drawing your gun in self defense is justified only in situations in which shooting the bastard is justified. It's not some lesser use of force. If a gun is involved, it's deadly force, and it's justified in self defense only against an immediate threat of death or grave injury.

[Holland&Holland]

I doubt "warning shots" are actual legal in Minneapolis. I suspect the shooting was ruled self defense so that is what negated them from being an issue.

IANAL, but as I understand it it's not so much that warning shots are illegal but that any use of a firearm is considered deadly force. Meaning that use of warning shots is justified only in situations in which deadly force is justified.

There are situations in which use of less than deadly force in self defense is justified but use of deadly force is not - against threats less than deadly force, for example. In situations like that, warning shots are not considered less than deadly force.

Ditto with brandishing. While there's no specific "brandishing" law in Minnesota, displaying a weapon with the intent of causing fear is an assault. And drawing your gun in self defense is justified only in situations in which shooting the bastard is justified. It's not some lesser use of force. If a gun is involved, it's deadly force, and it's justified in self defense only against an immediate threat of death or grave injury.

I think that is what I said in not so many words.

[jdege]

I think that is what I said in not so many words.

What you said was too terse to be properly confusing...

[Holland&Holland]

I think that is what I said in not so many words.

What you said was too terse to be properly confusing...

I specialize in that!