Thread: Warning shot to the leg in Kennewick, WA today.

SHOOTING: Man shot in thigh during argument in Kennewick - Breaking News | Tri-City Herald : Mid-Columbia news
Friday, Mar. 18, 2011

SHOOTING: Man shot in thigh during argument in Kennewick
By Paula Horton, Herald staff writer

Kennewick -- A 29-year-old Kennewick man suffered a “superficial” gunshot wound to his upper right thigh during an argument Thursday with a Richland man in a Kennewick parking lot, police said.

The 24-year-old Richland man, who has not been arrested, told police he fired “a warning shot” at the other man when he allegedly walked toward him with a gun, said Kennewick police Sgt. Mike Genack.

The incident occurred at 11 p.m. in the parking lot of the Breakplace, the convenience store at the Conoco gas station at the corner of Canal Drive and Edison Street.

Officers arrived within minutes, but both men involved in the shooting were gone. Officers then learned the victim was at a nearby residence.

The man did not need medical attention.

A short time later, the Richland man called police and reported he had fired a warning shot at a man during an argument, Genack said.

Detectives with the Criminal Apprehension Team and Richland police contacted the man at his Richland home and detained him, Genack said.

He was taken to the Kennewick police station for an interview and that’s when he said he had fired his gun in an attempt to scare the victim, Genack said.

The Kennewick man denied having a gun.

The shooting remains under investigation.

Anyone with information about the incident, should call the Criminal Apprehension Team detectives or Tri-Cities Crime Stoppers at 586-8477.

Calls to Crime Stoppers are confidential.

shoot to stop...otherwise leave it in your pants...nuff said...






thats what i meant to say...usually the side effects of a .45 to center mass are not too good

NEVER "shoot to kill"... you always shoot to STOP

HUGE difference. One makes you a person seeking death for your opponent and a jail sentence for you, the other makes you a person seeking safety and eventual escape. Warning shots means you did not truly fear for your life so you made a lesser shot.. not smart

Know the difference or stop posting nonsense and legally dangerous concepts, please

All I know on this subject is that I do not want to
have to spend the rest of my life checking
over my shoulder for the person I shot as a "warning"

Shoot to stop fires at the vital zones to drop and stop the attacker. Shoot to kill means you are legally trying to murder someone.. legal technicality that should not exist in a sane society, but it currently does in this one. Be smart here, folks

My take on this is you only shoot when you or someone else is in danger! Not to scare, but to stop the threat. Trainig says shoot for the larget target, the center of the body. Any other part of the body is hard to hit, you risk strays and increase the likelyhood of someone else becomming hurt. Guns are not for scaring people off. They are ment to be used to stop threat to your life or others whose lives are threatened.

Don't, or didn't, some states require a warning shot before taking lethal action?

Originally Posted by gunslinger1911

shoot to stop...otherwise leave it in your pants...nuff said...






thats what i meant to say...usually the side effects of a .45 to center mass are not too good

just to clairify things...dont want to upset people on an oversight of a "technicality"...i didn't say "shoot to murder", and to suggest so is absurd...

OK let me get this straight, a guy is walking toward you with a gun......and you fire a warning shot to the leg?? You are either: 1.) Stupid. 2.) Stupid AND a bad shot. 3.) A liar who is a bad shot.

4.) a stupid-liar who is a bad shot

Originally Posted by gunslinger1911

4.) a stupid-liar who is a bad shot

I stand corrected......#4 is the correct answer.

Would that also classify as "Shoot to neutralize threat?"


--- I'm not a well worded person, and a thesaurus is not my friend.

Originally Posted by Dyjital

Would that also classify as "Shoot to neutralize threat?"


--- I'm not a well worded person, and a thesaurus is not my friend.

You know a Viet Nam vet friend of mine told me about a "bouncing betty"
They pop up and explode at thigh height,severing both femoral arteries.
(I know I don't have to say this on here,but please interject with better facts on Betty)

Anyway,the upper thigh isn't exactly the best place to shoot someone you don't want to kill.

But I also agree it was stupid to pull the gun for this reason.
Sounds like he got away with it since there wasn't more witnesses.

Shoot to stop the threat.If the attacker is still moving(twitching) he is a threat.

If an attacker is down and/or drops their weapon, you shoot again you will likely face at least manslaughter charges and will certainly lose in civil court. Forensics are pretty sophisticated these days

As said above, shoot to neutralize the threat. Anything more than that is, (legally) excessive force

Originally Posted by mjbskwim

You know a Viet Nam vet friend of mine told me about a "bouncing betty"
They pop up and explode at thigh height,severing both femoral arteries.
(I know I don't have to say this on here,but please interject with better facts on Betty)

Anyway,the upper thigh isn't exactly the best place to shoot someone you don't want to kill.

But I also agree it was stupid to pull the gun for this reason.
Sounds like he got away with it since there wasn't more witnesses.

Shoot to stop the threat.If the attacker is still moving(twitching) he is a threat.

Yep, if a bullet hits your femoral artery, the artery sucks back up into your hip. Cant put pressure on it, thus cant stop the bleeding. You'll die in as little as 10 minutes.

Originally Posted by akula

Yep, if a bullet hits your femoral artery, the artery sucks back up into your hip. Cant put pressure on it, thus cant stop the bleeding. You'll die in as little as 10 minutes.

The guy telling the story about the bouncing bettys said his friend blead out inside of 2 minutes.But that was both legs.

Originally Posted by akula

Yep, if a bullet hits your femoral artery, the artery sucks back up into your hip. Cant put pressure on it, thus cant stop the bleeding. You'll die in as little as 10 minutes.

Tourniquet?

Originally Posted by Blitzkrieg

Tourniquet?

The only way a tourniquet will work is if the femoral artery is hit at its lowest point, at the knee, or if its not completely severed. A single gunshot is the worst case scenario. Arteries are elastic so if you cut it, it will retract like a rubber band up into your hip, since it’s now surrounded by your hip bone you won’t be able to apply pressure to it thus the tourniquet is a no go. The only way to stop the bleeding is to go in and clamp it, however with a small entrance would (gunshot) you would have perform surgery.

Originally Posted by akula

The only way a tourniquet will work is if the femoral artery is hit at its lowest point, at the knee, or if its not completely severed. A single gunshot is the worst case scenario. Arteries are elastic so if you cut it, it will retract like a rubber band up into your hip, since it’s now surrounded by your hip bone you won’t be able to apply pressure to it thus the tourniquet is a no go. The only way to stop the bleeding is to go in and clamp it, however with a small entrance would (gunshot) you would have perform surgery.

10/4, just wanted to clarify the issue. I'm no surgeon but have taken college and professional first aid courses and have a nice piece of rubber hose in all my med kits. It's worth a try to save a life. The artery may just be nicked, too