• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

What Would You Do? A Gun Is Held To Your Infant's Head.

"Shoot."

Depending on the range. If a short range I'd say, "Wait just a few seconds while I get my rifle out of the trunk. It's probably better than your's. Then we'll both fire at the count 3."

Then also I could shoot the SOB 3 more times too just to make a point about this.
 
Last edited:
Your baby has a gun to it's head, and you want to psycho-analyze the perp? No, you eliminate the threat to your child.

Then who will catch the falling baby as most likely in a case like this the perp will be holding the baby or is brain damage an okay risk?
 
Then who will catch the falling baby as most likely in a case like this the perp will be holding the baby or is brain damage an okay risk?

What has a higher chance of causing brain damage, a bullet to the head or a fall? Either way, it's not a good scenario.
 
Mmmmmmaaaaaaaybe.

I hate you, I'm friggin' sick. :(

Have 2 or 10 fer me willya? :cry:

At least my appetite is good, and I just found a good pork ribs and sauerkraut recipe. Got a fridge full of Sierra Nevada Pale Ale and I can't even have any.
 
Pop quiz, hotshot. There's a bomb on a bus. Once the bus goes 50 miles an hour, the bomb is armed. If it drops below 50, it blows up. What do you do? What do you do?

Some one should make a movie about that. :2razz:
 
I would have already informed him to take the shot when it arose. And I would be ready to sprint in as soon as he fired.
 
Your baby has a gun to it's head, and you want to psycho-analyze the perp? No, you eliminate the threat to your child.
I've worked crisis response for going on seven years now. I have dealt with people with guns to their babies head. I want to know if I can resolve the situation safely without putting the child at greater risk. Theres a reason I asked the questions.
 
A nut case has kidnapped your infant child and is holding a cocked gun to the child's head. A police sniper has him sighted for a head shot but is not authorized to shoot without the parent (s) permission. What do you do? Take the shot or continue to negotiate?

If he's an expert marksman, I'd say shoot to kill, and with extreme prejudice.
 
Of course being 51 I may be thinking that I really don't want to be raising a kid of till I am 69 years old.

lol. I'm 53 and my kids are both just about out of the house. Change diapers again? Not on your life.
 
Crash the bus into an orphanage for the blind & deaf. Proceed to masturbate violently with Icyhot. Celebrate with pizza.

Edit: I did not see this part.



New plan of action: Hijack bus via helicopter. Crash the bus into an orphanage for the blind & deaf. Proceed to masturbate violently with Icyhot. Celebrate with pizza.

The Icyhot part is pretty sick ya know.
 
I hate you, I'm friggin' sick. :(

Have 2 or 10 fer me willya? :cry:

At least my appetite is good, and I just found a good pork ribs and sauerkraut recipe. Got a fridge full of Sierra Nevada Pale Ale and I can't even have any.

I'll have a couple for you too.


Oh the OP. If the cop doesn't take the shot I will. Hell I'm probably a better shot anyway.
 
If he's an expert marksman, I'd say shoot to kill, and with extreme prejudice.

Not to get all technical and morbid, but there are some basic realities to consider here that go beyond shoot to kill. 1, only about 50% of headshots are fatal. 2, even in instances of single shot fatality, the brains electrical responses elecit a variety of possible responses, one of which involves and immediate spasm and clenching of muscles. In the cited example, if the perpetrator has a gun literally to the babies head, there is a real possibility that the child dies as well.

It is presumed that as the number of gunshot wounds (GSWs) increases, so do the Injury Severity Score (ISS) and mortality risk. We hypothesized that the number of bullet wounds relates to ISS and death; however, a single GSW to the head is ominous. We reviewed the charts of all GSW patients admitted to a trauma center from 2004 to 2006 (n = 531). We analyzed patient demographics, ISS, and mortality. There was no correlation with the number of GSWs with either ISS or mortality. There was only a 0.3 per cent increased risk of death for each additional GSW (r2 = 0.12). Patients with a single GSW versus multiple GSWs had no difference in mortality (9.1 vs 8.4%, P = 0.8). A single GSW to the head carried a 50 per cent mortality risk. For those who sustained both head and body GSWs, each additional GSW did not increase mortality (r2 = 0.007). Our study shows that the number of GSWs has no affect on mortality or ISS. Internal triage and management of gunshot victims should not be affected by the categorization of patients as having a single versus multiple GSWs.
The number of gunshot wounds does not predict injury severity and m... - PubMed - NCBI
 
A nut case has kidnapped your infant child and is holding a cocked gun to the child's head. A police sniper has him sighted for a head shot but is not authorized to shoot without the parent (s) permission. What do you do? Take the shot or continue to negotiate?

not a tough decision-i'd shoot the hostage taker myself
 
Pop quiz, hotshot. There's a bomb on a bus. Once the bus goes 50 miles an hour, the bomb is armed. If it drops below 50, it blows up. What do you do? What do you do?

re-write the movie script
 
Not to get all technical and morbid, but there are some basic realities to consider here that go beyond shoot to kill. 1, only about 50% of headshots are fatal. 2, even in instances of single shot fatality, the brains electrical responses elecit a variety of possible responses, one of which involves and immediate spasm and clenching of muscles. In the cited example, if the perpetrator has a gun literally to the babies head, there is a real possibility that the child dies as well.

It is presumed that as the number of gunshot wounds (GSWs) increases, so do the Injury Severity Score (ISS) and mortality risk. We hypothesized that the number of bullet wounds relates to ISS and death; however, a single GSW to the head is ominous. We reviewed the charts of all GSW patients admitted to a trauma center from 2004 to 2006 (n = 531). We analyzed patient demographics, ISS, and mortality. There was no correlation with the number of GSWs with either ISS or mortality. There was only a 0.3 per cent increased risk of death for each additional GSW (r2 = 0.12). Patients with a single GSW versus multiple GSWs had no difference in mortality (9.1 vs 8.4%, P = 0.8). A single GSW to the head carried a 50 per cent mortality risk. For those who sustained both head and body GSWs, each additional GSW did not increase mortality (r2 = 0.007). Our study shows that the number of GSWs has no affect on mortality or ISS. Internal triage and management of gunshot victims should not be affected by the categorization of patients as having a single versus multiple GSWs.
The number of gunshot wounds does not predict injury severity and m... - PubMed - NCBI

50 cal through the eye socket

100% termination with extreme prejudice
 
Shoot!



Imagine if Dirty Harry had dropped the gun. That would have sucked. The State should consider this. And a State should never allow a parent to decide these types of things. The State should never ever negotiate with a terrorist, even if they do have hostages. Even if it is ten new born babies.

Also, 16 hours is far too long for a siege. Imagine if it was a movie. Who would watch that? The State should not mess around. Nobody wants to watch a siege for 16 hours. It is boring. And why does a State want a "peaceful solution"? That is idiotic. The terrorist should be killed if they are threatening citizens. Pretty much right away.

edit- does the public want a "peaceful solution" in a terrorist siege/hostage situation? Of course not. We want the terrorist dead. Australian leader Tony Abbott was weak to want the recent Sydney hostage siege thing to end "peacefully". It is a ridiculous thing to say. Hostage situations should end in the hostage taker being dead. Potential hostage takers should know that too.
 
Last edited:
50 cal through the eye socket

100% termination with extreme prejudice
At the precise moment the snipers trigger finger contracts, the perp moves ever so slightly to the left (as unstable people are want to do). Bullet misses the MO. An autonomic response causes muscles to contract, pulling the trigger of the weapon held at infants head. Dead perp. Dead infant. 2 with 1 shot.

I'd like to at least know just how unstable the 'nut case' is before I make that call. If he or she hasnt killed yet, theres no reason to automatically assume they will. Even crazy people 'want' something. Not saying the shot doesnt need to be taken at some point.

(BTW...I just reread your post. Most police snipers arent taking positions armed with a Barrett!) ;)
 
A nut case has kidnapped your infant child and is holding a cocked gun to the child's head. A police sniper has him sighted for a head shot but is not authorized to shoot without the parent (s) permission. What do you do? Take the shot or continue to negotiate?
Shoot the piece of ****.
 
Back
Top Bottom