World's Dumbest Crooks part 4,384

[DavidEBSmith]

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-muffler-robbery-webmar26,0,1050100.story

 

http://www.suntimes.com/news/metro/859356,CST-NWS-phoneweb25.article

 

The incident started about 8 a.m., when the masked, armed man came in to Velasquez Mufflers For Less ... and began demanding money ...

 

Employees told him they had little money and couldn't open the safe, so the man left two phone numbers for them to call when the owner returned with the combination ...

 

"He said, 'You guys better call me because otherwise I'm going to come back to shoot you,'".

 

Instead, an employee called Chicago police.

...

 

By noon, a plan had been mapped out to nab the suspect. He got the call he requested, but Grand Central District police tactical officers, who typically work in plainclothes, were waiting for his arrival.

 

When the man walked into the muffler shop ... wearing the same mask and black clothing ... and showed his gun, a tactical officer announced he was a police officer ...

 

[T]he suspect pointed a gun at the officer, and the officer fired twice, with one bullet hitting the suspect's leg. The suspect's gun did not discharge and no one else was injured.

 

"No one could make this up," said Grand Central District police Lt. Scott Schwieger.

[leikam]

As the poet said, The best laid schemes o' mice an' men gang aft a-gley

[ghaverkamp]

If the employees had been packing, they could have dealt with the imminent threat without bothering the police.

[steveknapp]

If the employees had been packing, they could have dealt with the imminent threat without bothering the police.

 

The money saved from the police needing to be involved could be used to bail out some banks with bad mortgages.

[Joe Frickin' Friday]

If the employees had been packing, they could have dealt with the imminent threat without bothering the police.

 

The money saved from the police needing to be involved could be used to bail out some banks with bad mortgages.

 

Or maybe it coulda gone toward some carbon offsets/credits.

[tallman]

Chances are they would've shot straighter too.

One miss and one in the leg?

Puhleeze.

Good thing the criminal didn't shoot the officer.

Almost soundds like someone tired of the cold weather who wanted roof, warm food, and a bed.

Maybe not so dumb after all.

[Lawman]

If the employees had been packing, they could have dealt with the imminent threat without bothering the police.

 

Unless you've actually been in a position of having a nutcase point a gun at you, at close range, you may not have a real appreciation for just what a "bother" it can be...

[tallman]

As a private citizen who has had a gun, knife, steel pipe, and ugly looks, aimed in my direction or actually used by the criminals, I must agree that it can be, at times, somewhat of a bother.

[Agent_Orange]

That is what 30-round clips are for.

[Dick_at_Lake_Tahoe_NV]

When seconds count, 9-1-1 is only minutes away. Gun Control is being able to hit your target--in the center-of-mass.

[steveknapp]

And another gun thread is born!

 

So seriously, how do people train for this. Bad situation, some is coming right for you. How do you either:

 

- Make a person a cardboard target and shoot.

- Not shoot when it's not needed (aka, get scared and become a murderer with good intentions)

 

It's not really something the average person gets to practice. Any thoughts?

[SageRider]

...So seriously, how do people train for this. Bad situation, some is coming right for you. ...

 

Stand in front of a mirror. Practice a woeful pitiful look and with a quavering voice say "Oh please badperson don't hurt me, don't rob me"

[Firefight911]

...So seriously, how do people train for this. Bad situation, some is coming right for you. ...

 

Stand in front of a mirror. Practice a woeful pitiful look and with a quavering voice say "Oh please badperson don't hurt me, don't rob me"

 

Oh, come on!!!!! It's easy!!!!!!

 

Just clicky on the linky to find out! LINKY

[steve.foote]

Chances are they would've shot straighter too.

One miss and one in the leg?

Puhleeze.

Good thing the criminal didn't shoot the officer.

 

 

"Someone give that man a roll of quarters."

[Mike]

Chances are they would've shot straighter too.

One miss and one in the leg?

Puhleeze.

 

That caught my attention, too. I'm not claiming I could do any better, though. It's one thing to qualify at the range, and quite a different thing to place the shots when some mope has drawn on you.

 

But, back to the point of the original post, all I can say is "Thank God there are so many dumb criminals out there."

[tallman]

...So seriously, how do people train for this. Bad situation, some is coming right for you. ...

 

Stand in front of a mirror. Practice a woeful pitiful look and with a quavering voice say "Oh please badperson don't hurt me, don't rob me"

Last time a gun was pulled on me, and I do hope it is the last time, I used a line I had rehearsed.

I pointed and said, "that cop saw the whole thing", he looked away where I pointed and took finger off the trigger.

I ran.

That is why, one of the whys , I believe in bringing a gun to a gun fight.

They will, so should you. That day, I didn't.

However, I do believe that discretion is the better part of valor and often is the better choice.

Best wishes.

[hANNAbONE]

If the employees had been packing, they could have dealt with the imminent threat without bothering the police.

 

 

...aND yET another good reason to have heat affixed to oneself..!...

[4wheeldog]

If the employees had been packing, they could have dealt with the imminent threat without bothering the police.

 

I know you are just chumming, but have you considered that they may have been packing?

I have a license to carry, and a fair amount of training. I would not be quick to pull a gun when other, less dangerous solutions are possible. Pulling and shooting are a last resort for the trained. That is why you don't read about incidents involving CCW permit holders on a daily basis.

[ghaverkamp]

...aND yET another good reason to have heat affixed to oneself..!...

 

It shouldn't surprise me that the gun-happy would fail to note that there was no imminence. Just shoot away. There's no need to worry about necessity as long as it makes you sound tough.

[Mike]

Just shoot away. There's no need to worry about necessity as long as it makes you sound tough.

 

Finally . . . something we can all agree on.

[ghaverkamp]

I know you are just chumming, but have you considered that they may have been packing?

I have a license to carry, and a fair amount of training. I would not be quick to pull a gun when other, less dangerous solutions are possible. Pulling and shooting are a last resort for the trained. That is why you don't read about incidents involving CCW permit holders on a daily basis.

 

I was "chumming" to the degree that I wanted to see the responses, which fell precisely where I expected. "Ask first, and ask questions later." Yours was the first to break that trend.

 

Contrary to common beliefs, I have no problem with people who have training to appropriately assess a situation carrying guns. However, suggesting intense, ongoing training is mostly shouted down as violative of the mythical Second Amendment.

[ghaverkamp]

Just shoot away. There's no need to worry about necessity as long as it makes you sound tough.

 

Finally . . . something we can all agree on.

 

I guess I should note that I am not a lawyer, I cannot give legal advice, and any statements I have written are not and should not be taken as legal advice.

[Dave McReynolds]

Quote:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Chances are they would've shot straighter too.

One miss and one in the leg?

Puhleeze.

 

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

 

 

That caught my attention, too. I'm not claiming I could do any better, though. It's one thing to qualify at the range, and quite a different thing to place the shots when some mope has drawn on you.

 

The first thing that occurred to me was that maybe the crook looked and acted as pathetic as he sounded in the news report, and the police may have been attempting to fire a non-lethal shot. I know everyone says firing a non-lethal shot is a bad idea, but I would be tempted to do it if I thought I could get away with it without making the situation worse. It always worked for Roy Rogers!

[ghaverkamp]

Unless you've actually been in a position of having a nutcase point a gun at you, at close range, you may not have a real appreciation for just what a "bother" it can be...

 

I'm sure you're right. I'm also pretty sure we employ a police force to deal with those bothers.

[steveknapp]

Contrary to common beliefs, I have no problem with people who have training to appropriately assess a situation carrying guns. However, suggesting intense, ongoing training is mostly shouted down as violative of the mythical Second Amendment.

 

Greg, Chicago faces issues that don't even allow ownership, much less any avenue for carry.

 

I'm in agreement on the need for training, I plan to take the Utah course. Not as much to be able to carry but to better understand the issues at hand.

 

I wasn't kidding when I questioned the ability for a person to make good decisions in those situations. And it does go both ways. One would be to shoot when not needed, the other to not shoot.

[4wheeldog]

Quote:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Chances are they would've shot straighter too.

One miss and one in the leg?

Puhleeze.

 

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

 

 

That caught my attention, too. I'm not claiming I could do any better, though. It's one thing to qualify at the range, and quite a different thing to place the shots when some mope has drawn on you.

 

The first thing that occurred to me was that maybe the crook looked and acted as pathetic as he sounded in the news report, and the police may have been attempting to fire a non-lethal shot. I know everyone says firing a non-lethal shot is a bad idea, but I would be tempted to do it if I thought I could get away with it without making the situation worse. It always worked for Roy Rogers!

 

My CCW trainer is a retired cop. He does a lot of continued training with active police from several agencies. His opinion is that, by and large, civilians that seek training are better shots than cops. It is like anything else......When you do something as a hobby or sport, you tend to put a fair effort into it. Most cops never have to draw for their entire careers, so it is easy to get complacent.

 

Shooting a "Disabling" shot on purpose should be grounds for discipline.......If a center of mass shot is not called for, you shouldn't shoot at all. A perp with a gun in his hand and a bullet in a non fatal area is more dangerous than one that is free of extra holes.

[Mike]

Quote:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Chances are they would've shot straighter too.

One miss and one in the leg?

Puhleeze.

 

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

 

 

That caught my attention, too. I'm not claiming I could do any better, though. It's one thing to qualify at the range, and quite a different thing to place the shots when some mope has drawn on you.

 

The first thing that occurred to me was that maybe the crook looked and acted as pathetic as he sounded in the news report, and the police may have been attempting to fire a non-lethal shot. I know everyone says firing a non-lethal shot is a bad idea, but I would be tempted to do it if I thought I could get away with it without making the situation worse. It always worked for Roy Rogers!

 

On a good day Roy Rogers would just shoot the gun out of the bad guy's hand. It stung--you could tell that because the ne'er-do-well would always shake his hand afterwards--but there was no blood. Darned good shootin'.

[Dave McReynolds]

Shooting a "Disabling" shot on purpose should be grounds for discipline.......If a center of mass shot is not called for, you shouldn't shoot at all. A perp with a gun in his hand and a bullet in a non fatal area is more dangerous than one that is free of extra holes.

 

I know that is the mantra.

 

However, take the film clip from the Dirty Harry movie posted earlier. If I had been Dirty Harry, and had been armed with a shotgun rather than a .44, I'm reasonably certain from my years of duck-hunting that I could have taken his hand out as he reached for the gun. And I don't believe he would have been a problem after that.

 

Not that I'm trying to second-guess Dirty Harry; that guy just plain needed killing, if I remember the movie.

 

But replace Dirty Harry's crook with someone with mental problems who might be as likely to turn the gun on himself as me. I would go for the wingshot, if I had the shotgun. I might do that in my house, where I do have a shotgun.

 

Now you're thinking, what an idiot Dave is, comparing wingshooting ducks with a life threatening situation. But I've been there, done that, and I know the feelings.

[4wheeldog]

Shooting a "Disabling" shot on purpose should be grounds for discipline.......If a center of mass shot is not called for, you shouldn't shoot at all. A perp with a gun in his hand and a bullet in a non fatal area is more dangerous than one that is free of extra holes.

 

I know that is the mantra.

 

However, take the film clip from the Dirty Harry movie posted earlier. If I had been Dirty Harry, and had been armed with a shotgun rather than a .44, I'm reasonably certain from my years of duck-hunting that I could have taken his hand out as he reached for the gun. And I don't believe he would have been a problem after that.

 

Not that I'm trying to second-guess Dirty Harry; that guy just plain needed killing, if I remember the movie.

 

But replace Dirty Harry's crook with someone with mental problems who might be as likely to turn the gun on himself as me. I would go for the wingshot, if I had the shotgun. I might do that in my house, where I do have a shotgun.

 

Now you're thinking, what an idiot Dave is, comparing wingshooting ducks with a life threatening situation. But I've been there, done that, and I know the feelings.

 

There is nothing more dangerous than a wounded animal, especially a human one. If you are going to "Wing" someone, why not go a step further and give them a "Warning" shot..........And let us know how that works out for you.

 

The fact is that even if you deliver a fatal shot, it may not knock the perp down. Contrary to the movies, the force delivered is only equal to the recoil you feel in your hand. Adrenalin can keep someone moving forward for way too long before they are actually stopped by the shot.

 

In one of my classes, the instructor has actual security footage of one of his students shooting a man that is stabbing the perp's wife. He shot him twice through the chest, and the guy just keeps plunging away with the knife, 7 more stab wounds, before the shooter put one in his head. That did stop the attack.

[Dave McReynolds]

Contrary to the movies, the force delivered is only equal to the recoil you feel in your hand. Adrenalin can keep someone moving forward for way too long before they are actually stopped by the shot.

 

I don't really have anything more to say on the subject of wounding vs. killing, but I do have a question about your statement.

 

I've seen people shot with military rifles, and you're right, there's not a whole lot of movement of the body.

 

However, I've also seen film clips of snipers in Afganistan shooting people with .50 caliber rifles, at 1,000 yard distances. The clips I've seen make it appear as though the recipient was hit by a tank shell. They are blown away from wherever they are and land somewhere else. Are .50 caliber shells explosive or is that just the impact of a solid bullet? A sniper is firing the weapon and I'd hate to see his shoulder if the recoil is anything like the impact!

[Boffin]

Newton's third law is what counts here. The energy put into the bullet is the same as the energy put into the recoil. Without a mount to adsorb it, the firer gets the whole recoil. I would question the veracity of the clips.

 

Andy

[4wheeldog]

Contrary to the movies, the force delivered is only equal to the recoil you feel in your hand. Adrenalin can keep someone moving forward for way too long before they are actually stopped by the shot.

 

I don't really have anything more to say on the subject of wounding vs. killing, but I do have a question about your statement.

 

I've seen people shot with military rifles, and you're right, there's not a whole lot of movement of the body.

 

However, I've also seen film clips of snipers in Afganistan shooting people with .50 caliber rifles, at 1,000 yard distances. The clips I've seen make it appear as though the recipient was hit by a tank shell. They are blown away from wherever they are and land somewhere else. Are .50 caliber shells explosive or is that just the impact of a solid bullet? A sniper is firing the weapon and I'd hate to see his shoulder if the recoil is anything like the impact!

 

Let us know if you decide to use one of those sniper rifles in your house......I had one of those rounds in my hand this morning. The bullet is solid, not explosive. All I can say is the weapon must have an anti recoil function to spread the load.....the force from one of those (Cannon) shells would be way beyond what I would be willing to put into my shoulder. The shell casing is more than double the diameter of the projectile, whole cartridge is about 6" long.

Apparently, the record for a sniper with that weapon is something on the order of 1.25 MILES. The calculated drop for that distance was about 65 FEET. Quite a skill to hit someone with a trajectory like that.

[ShovelStrokeEd]

There are a couple of other factors in terminal ballistics that don't take place at the front end.

 

Hydrostatic shock as the bullet hits, particularly if it goes into an area with a lot of meat.

 

Contraction of muscles in response to that shock can cause the recipient to actually jump to another position.

 

Even a heart shot will not always just drop someone. The brain doesn't know yet and can keep firing neurons for quite some time. Humans are more fragile than deer but I have seen deer run 100 or more yards when hit hard by a large caliper round and on butchering, almost all the heart is gone and most of a lung.

 

That said, 2 in the center of mass is what I practice. Sometimes, just for fun, 2 in the pelvis followed by one in the head. I'm not gonna be thinking about anything but stopping the proximate threat to my life or those I am trying to protect.

[Matts_12GS]

Now you're thinking, what an idiot Dave is, comparing wingshooting ducks with a life threatening situation. But I've been there, done that, and I know the feelings.

 

reminds me of why I used to suggest we put a torniquet on the next of victims in shipboard mass casualty drills. It stops the bleeding forever and you don't have to write on their forheads!

 

I got quite a kick out of G's responses, my favorite one about the "mythical" second amendment...

 

I wonder if it's as mythical as that part about abortion...

 

No, wait, I got it We tell people that the electric chair isn't capital punishment, it's retroactive abortion! That way the left will need it and the right won't touch it!!!!

Brilliant!

[ghaverkamp]

I got quite a kick out of G's responses, my favorite one about the "mythical" second amendment...

 

I wonder if it's as mythical as that part about abortion...

 

There are plenty of myths for everyone.

[Matts_12GS]

that was just too mean...

 

Those who saw it will agree it was funny though...

[lawnchairboy]

If the employees had been packing, they could have dealt with the imminent threat without bothering the police.

 

The money saved from the police needing to be involved could be used to bail out some banks with bad mortgages.

 

Or maybe it coulda gone toward some carbon offsets/credits.

 

[DavidEBSmith]

I wasn't kidding when I questioned the ability for a person to make good decisions in those situations. And it does go both ways. One would be to shoot when not needed, the other to not shoot.

 

I'm not as convinced as some posters who weren't there that the best response to a man with a gun in his hand would have been for some civilians who probably wouldn't regularly practice shooting to quick draw their shootin irons and start blazing away. You hate to point it out to the aficionados of armed violence, but in this case, it worked out pretty well to BS the bad guy and call the police.

 

As I said before, pro-gunners tend to have a Rambo-esque vision of their own offensive effectiveness, that all they have to do in a risky situation is pull the hogleg, pop a cap in the bad guy and the world is well. Here, you had a trained police officer who was expecting the bad guy, and he barely managed to get a bullet into the offender. I'm not as confident that a bunch of untrained muffler shop guys who are surprised by a man with a mask and a gun would be effective using a gun in self-defense as some people imagine they would be.

[ShovelStrokeEd]

Nor is it very likely that the armed robber has bothered to go to the range and set up a little Korean lady in a convenience store scenario and then practiced it for a couple of weeks before embarking on his career of crime.

 

Could be that the guy working in the muffler shop did IPSIC competition on the weekends and was capable of hitting 5 pie plates in as many seconds at 10 yards from a holster.

 

There is always a scenario where surrender would be a better choice but it doesn't guarantee survival for the victim. I do think that if you are not certain you can take a life, should the situation require it, you shouldn't own a gun for self defense. That decision should be made long before the purchase is made though.

[Matts_12GS]

There is always a scenario where surrender would be a better choice but it doesn't guarantee survival for the victim

 

Well done Ed.

[steveknapp]

Ed,

 

I shoot IPSC/USPSA.

 

You see the stages before you shoot. The no-shoots are cardboard, not family members. It's not the middle of the night, and it's not in my own house.

 

I just was curious if there was any training known for shooting people, getting over that mental barrier. I know the military has training for other areas of mental toughness.

 

The other question would be when is it legal and prudent to use lethal force, which varies from state to state.

[4wheeldog]

I wasn't kidding when I questioned the ability for a person to make good decisions in those situations. And it does go both ways. One would be to shoot when not needed, the other to not shoot.

 

I'm not as convinced as some posters who weren't there that the best response to a man with a gun in his hand would have been for some civilians who probably wouldn't regularly practice shooting to quick draw their shootin irons and start blazing away. You hate to point it out to the aficionados of armed violence, but in this case, it worked out pretty well to BS the bad guy and call the police.

 

As I said before, pro-gunners tend to have a Rambo-esque vision of their own offensive effectiveness, that all they have to do in a risky situation is pull the hogleg, pop a cap in the bad guy and the world is well. Here, you had a trained police officer who was expecting the bad guy, and he barely managed to get a bullet into the offender. I'm not as confident that a bunch of untrained muffler shop guys who are surprised by a man with a mask and a gun would be effective using a gun in self-defense as some people imagine they would be.

 

I think you may be taking a minority tendency to over state the case as the opinion of a majority of gun owners. Most folks keep their opinion to themselves, and you don't even know they carry.

 

I cannot speak to the training others have had, but in the training I received, using the gun is a last resort. Most folks that I know who legally carry do so to maintain an edge when their lives (Or their loved ones) are truly at risk. If you can negotiate, leave or distract the person doing the victimizing, that is what they will do. If that all fails, or it is clear from the start that someone is going to get hurt, having a weapon gives you an edge, or at least evens the odds. Finding someone that doesn't belong in your house forces the assumption they intend to hurt you. In public places, there can not be a clear assumption.

 

You don't read a lot of stories about people legally carrying weapons using them. When you do, it is most often fully justified. I lot of situations are defused because the gun carrier has the extra bit of confidence while working throught the scenario........Perps worry about confident people. They pick victims by their apparent lack of confidence.

 

One last thing......Anyone with half a brain that trains in the use of guns understands that the odds of everyone getting hurt soar when the gun comes out.....It is just the odds of who gets hurt and how bad change dramatically.

[Dave McReynolds]

I just was curious if there was any training known for shooting people, getting over that mental barrier. I know the military has training for other areas of mental toughness.

 

I think most young 19-20 year olds who end up in the Marines or Army fighting units don't have much of a problem shooting people. I think the problem tends to go the other direction: to keep them from shooting people at the wrong time. I remember when I was in Vietnam, worrying about shooting people was far down on my list, further down than whether that itch on my leg was incipient jungle rot or whether we would get our warm beer ration that day. Worrying about getting shot or blown up was higher up on the list, of course.

 

I think that same mentality followed me for about the next 30 years or so, until life's natural processes started reducing my testosterone levels and increasing my estrogen levels, at which time I actually began entertaining thoughts of wounding people rather than killing them. My 20 year-old self would have disowned me!

 

Or, as William Munny said in The Unforgiven , "I'm not like that no more." Just before he goes off and wipes out half the town.

[Joe Frickin' Friday]

I just was curious if there was any training known for shooting people, getting over that mental barrier. I know the military has training for other areas of mental toughness.

 

I think most young 19-20 year olds who end up in the Marines or Army fighting units don't have much of a problem shooting people.

 

They may think they can kill, but my understanding is that when actually placed in a situation where they are required to take a human life, most people balk.

 

A natural killer is a person who has a predisposition to kill—he enjoys combat and feels little or no remorse about killing the enemy. These men have existed throughout the history of warfare, and their feats have often been hailed as heroic. They constitute less than 4 percent of the force, yet some studies show that they do almost half of the killing.

 

Clicky

[Dave McReynolds]

They may think they can kill, but my understanding is that when actually placed in a situation where they are required to take a human life, most people balk.

 

A natural killer is a person who has a predisposition to kill—he enjoys combat and feels little or no remorse about killing the enemy. These men have existed throughout the history of warfare, and their feats have often been hailed as heroic. They constitute less than 4 percent of the force, yet some studies show that they do almost half of the killing.

 

Certainly your source has impressive credentials, and has to be respected.

 

My experience in the Marines was different than he described, perhaps because it is an all volunteer force. I do agree that there aren't too many Marines or soldiers who are of the mentality to rally the forces and charge the bunkers. However, my impression was that most of us would kill, as Marines, in a businesslike fashion, without worrying about it too much. I don't remember anyone during my year in Vietnam who "balked." I would go further and say that the feelings we experienced from killing and being in a fire-fight were not altogether negative, and were somewhat of a release from the tedium and discomfort of everyday life in a war zone, somewhat like taking a curve on a motorcycle near the edge.

[lawnchairboy]

very interesting, especially the Myers-Briggs personality type and birth order angles...

[ShovelStrokeEd]

Steve,

I don't have an answer for that. I'm more of a bowling pin killer than a people killer. If I have time to assess the situation, I probably would elect not to shoot unless my assessment lead me to believe that my life, or someone else's was in proximate danger. I would say that, if the gun is already in my hand (burglary or home invasion) someone is likely to be shot soon unless they retreat immediately. Out on the street is another world. Too many possibilities, too many scenarios.

 

I said it earlier, if you have not, in your own mind, already made the decision to take a human life, if necessary, you probably shouldn't have the gun for defense purposes. Having them for sporting purposes complicates things. Although, when the decision to shoot does come up, your training and practice will certainly go a long way towards insuring that the shot is effective and appropriate.

 

Kinda like that thing in MIB where Will Smith takes out the little girl on the range. "She was up to sompin'"

[RFW]

If the employees had been packing, they could have dealt with the imminent threat without bothering the police.

....and then gotten sued by the prospective holdup guy for his injuries.

[steveknapp]

"I said it earlier, if you have not, in your own mind, already made the decision to take a human life, if necessary"

 

I've got no issue taking life to defend life. Here calmly typing at a keyboard. I was more questioning it under pressure.

 

I don't see it as too much unlike cornering on a motorcycle. Your instincts are trying to kill you. You must train NOT to follow them, but to act and react in the ways that will keep you alive.

 

Maybe paintball? I always turned that down as a team building exercise at work claiming "I'd bring the wrong gun, think I had red paint, kill everyone, and go home thinking I did nothing wrong.. I don't need to go there!"

[g_frey]

When the .50 BMG round was first being experimentally put into rifles I accepted a chance to shoot one based on a Mauser action weighing about 13 lbs. I guess. 3 weeks later my shoulder still hurt. It did not quite put me on the ground but I had fast feet back then and ended up about 10 feet from where I fired. Now they have various recoil control mechanisms. I will never shoot one again however.