Police Should Just Shoot for the Leg!

Police Should Just Shoot for the Leg!

After a high profile political figure recently made a comment about how police officers should shoot for the leg rather than “shoot to kill” I have noticed a remarkable number of people on social media buying into this idea. Given the recent attention I have decided to explain several reasons why that is not how police or private citizens should train to use a firearm.

Is it Legally Justifiable?

First, let’s look at the legal aspect of shooting someone with the intent to wound them. In the state of Indiana the use of force is regulated under IC 35-41-3-2. In that statute deadly force is relegated to situations where a person reasonably believes that force is necessary to prevent serious bodily injury to themselves or a third person, to prevent the commission of a forcible felony, or to prevent the unlawful entry of or attack on their dwelling. This is relevant because if you look at the definition of “deadly force” in IC 35-31.5-2-85 you will find that deadly force is any force that creates a substantial risk of serious bodily injury. Further, serious bodily injury is defined in IC 35-31.5-2-292 as bodily injury that creates a substantial risk of death, serious permanent disfigurement, unconsciousness, extreme pain, permanent or protracted loss or impairment of the function of a bodily member or organ, or loss of a fetus.

To sum that up, a gunshot wound to the leg always qualifies as serious bodily injury. That means you can only shoot someone in the leg if you are legally justified in using deadly force. From a legal perspective shooting someone in the face and shooting someone in the leg is the same level of force. If you aren’t legally allowed to shoot them in the face, you aren’t legally allowed to shoot them in the leg.

Regardless, isn’t it Better to Wound Them Instead of Killing Them?

First, defensive shooters aren’t shooting to kill. They are shooting to stop a threat. The goal is not to kill, the goal is to stop the danger with the least amount of risk. Their opponent dying is a possible outcome but it isn’t the goal. In fact, death is a likely outcome if you shoot someone in the leg. The femoral artery runs down the leg and, if struck, will cause someone to bleed to death in very short order. This is one reason why shooting someone in the leg is still legally considered deadly force. Death is a very real possibility.

Ok, But They are Still Less Likely to Die, Right?

Assuming for a moment that an attacker is truly less likely to die from a leg shot, I can tell you that it makes the defender and/or innocent bystanders more likely to die. A leg shot may kill but it is less likely to incapacitate quickly, meaning the opponent can continue their attack even though they may die in 30-60 seconds. If the femoral artery and/or bone is missed the hit amounts to only muscle damage, which may not incapacitate them at all. To put it plainly, it is not reasonable to tell anyone that is legally defending themselves that they have to accept more risk to their life to reduce the risk to the person putting them in harms way.

The reason officers and private citizens are trained to shoot aggressors in the chest is because it presents a much higher probability of stopping an aggressor quickly. Understand that even direct hits in the heart or no guarantee, this is just a matter of stacking the odds in the favor of the defender as much as possible.

It is worth mentioning here that the highest probability of stopping an attacker is a hit to the central nervous system (CNS). Hits in the chest rely on internal bleeding to create incapacitation while CNS hits interrupt the actual nervous system, guaranteeing a stop regardless of how determined or drugged an attacker is. The obvious follow up question is, why not shoot for the CNS? The simple answer is the CNS presents too small of a target in circumstances where making hits is extremely difficult. Shootings don’t occur on a static one-way range. Stress levels are as high as they get and it has been clearly established that human performance degrades under extreme stress. Most people struggle to get center mass hits so trying to strike a target as small as the CNS isn’t practical in real world environments.

It turns out, this is yet another reason we don’t train people to shoot for the leg. A leg represents a much smaller target than center mass does. People often pontificate about how officers need more training, and for what it’s worth I agree with that sentiment, but it isn’t because I think it would allow officers to hit a leg during a gunfight. It’s because even shooting at the largest available target hit rates tend to be in the 25% to 50% range. To be clear, that’s 25% to 50% for hits anywhere on the body. Many of those “hits” are in appendages or peripheral body hits that don’t actually stop the aggressor. I advocate for more training because I think those numbers should be higher, but more training wouldn’t allow officers to make fast hits on small targets under life or death stress. Again, that simply isn’t reasonable, especially considering the level of training provided to the average officer.

To drive this point home, when I worked as a police officer my department purchased 30,000 rounds of handgun ammunition a year for approximately 130 officers. Fifteen of those officers were on SWAT, and received 15,000 of those rounds, leaving only 15,000 rounds for the remaining 115 officers. That boils down to 130 rounds per year of training ammunition for the average street officer. For comparison, I personally shot 30,000 rounds of 9mm handgun ammunition in 2019 between practice, training, and competitions. Yes, I shot as much 9mm ammo in 2019 as my department purchased for 130 people. And that’s just one caliber, I shoot several other calibers along with 9mm. Despite this level of practice and training, I can’t guarantee a hit on a reduced size target during a gunfight. If I could, I would much rather shoot for the CNS for that guaranteed stop rather than the low probability of success offered by a leg hit. I have zero interest in gambling unnecessarily with my life. Expecting a street cop that shoots less than 200 rounds a year to be able to hit a reduced size target under the stress of a gunfight is beyond absurd.

To summarize:

Shooting someone in the leg is legally deadly force, is still likely to kill them if they are hit, is less likely to stop the behavior that justifies the use of deadly force, and is more likely to result in a complete miss. It has a high probability for failure in a situation that is serious enough that it requires the highest probability for success. There is no reason to shoot for the leg and it is extremely disappointing that anyone in a high profile position would hold such a reckless attitude toward something this important.

About the Author

Aaron coaches the Purdue University Pistol Team, is a former officer of the Lafayette Police Department, holds an Indiana Law Enforcement Academy certification as a firearms instructor, holds a Rangemaster Advanced Instructor certification, and is a court recognized expert witness that has testified in multiple cases and courts in Indiana regarding firearms. Aaron is the General Manager at Applied Ballistics and competes in multiple shooting disciplines including USPSA, IDPA, Steel Challenge, Rimfire Falling Steel, Indiana Multigun, and NRL22. Aaron is a USPSA Grand Master, a Steel Challenge Grand Master, and an IDPA Master class shooter. He has a National Championship title in Rimfire Falling Steel as well as several State Championship titles in IDPA and Steel Challenge. Aaron is the Match Director for USPSA at Applied Ballistics and for Steel Challenge and Rimfire Falling Steel at Wildcat Valley Rifle & Pistol Club.