“Shoot Them in The Leg” and a New Euphemism

Key Point. When you work in US Senate for 40 years and then as Veep for 8 years you become really good at not leading anything or standing behind an issue with force. Your head’s in the beltway, or up something below your beltway.
Anyone having or contemplating owning or using a gun should have lessons and a lot of supervised practice. A car is deadly, so we give lessons so (a) everyone knows the rules (b) everyone knows what to expect in most situations (c) everyone gets training and experience so they have at least minimum competency. Similarly a gun.
I mean you hear about gun accidents all the time, but you don’t hear about police officers or soldiers having gun accidents even though proportionately they have more guns than anyone else. It would be too embarrassing – I mean, uh, they practice good gun etiquette and storage all the time.
Biden suggested that police should shoot assailants “in the leg instead of the heart” as a form of de-escalation on two occasions:
The first time was on June 1, 2020, when he spoke to African American community leaders at Bethel AME Church in Wilmington, Delaware12. The second time was on October 15, 2020, when he repeated the idea during an ABC News town hall3. His remarks sparked criticism and controversy from various sources, who argued that his proposal was unrealistic, dangerous, or ineffective4.
So let’s talk about that campaign rhetoric and apply it to something going on today.
First, gun mentors and users know a gun is deadly force and pretty much a last resort either as protection or to gain control of an otherwise hopeless situation. The dictum “’Don’t take out your gun unless you’re prepared to use it” is well known even to non-gun-owners. That means a gun is not a “threat” – it rises to the level of “or else this” – a strong deterrent because after that comes the proverbial end of the line.
Second, a gun is used for one thing, if indeed actually used: “a gun ain’t good for nothing but killing” so goes the song. It’s not a device with a sliding scale of use: it’s very simple and binary. You either did or did not kill something with it. That’s why it’s the ultimate protection device – everyone involved knows what was intended when a gun is fired. So police and military use the term “center of mass.” That means use the highest probability of the gun working as it’s supposed to and that’s hit something. Mostly training intends that hit to be in the center of the torso someplace, and if it’s not perfect it may be good enough to bring an end to the situation.
Third, someone who is totally inexperienced with gun use, who actually is totally inexperienced with directly leading something to get done, like a long time Senator or a Veep, just doesn’t think in the terms “Get it done-done.” This is a good skill in a way because collaboration capabilities are probably pretty good (more on this in another article), but a bad point because the individual just has not learned anything about execution, and I mean either type of execution. So, in Joe’s case, we’re dealing with someone who thinks an outcome can be gotten by “shooting them in the leg.”
So let’s apply this thinking.
There’s a party, Hamas, who starts a war in a very offensive way with Israel. To me, this would be like a party killing one of your children, and your spouse for good measure. I mean intolerable. So let’s switch so you’re now the policeman in the situation, and you have the gun. This is like Joe sending in two aircraft carrier groups to the area – the gun is now out there and then things are not supposed to escalate. But you’re not in full control of the situation because the two parties are still going to fight, and you have to keep the crowd, all of whom are carrying guns, covered so the situation doesn’t escalate. Someone in the crowd keeps shooting bullets off occasionally – these are the Houthis and other Iran-supported groups. And, unlike the usual copy or soldier, you are trained and permitted to use the gun. It’s unfortunate that behind those aircraft carriers is Joe, plus a cadre of people who will support him without critical evaluation,
What do you do? Shoot them in the leg? No, not even that, says Joe.
You “Shoot them in the bullets!”
That’s right. There are folks disrupting and damaging shipping and injuring and killing US soldiers in several MidEast countries and in the Red Sea. Many missiles and drones are targeting international shipping and even military ships and ground installations. Rough numbers there have been about 250 attacks and US military has been killed in the fray. US Navy is on the scene, more firepower likely than in all of Yemen plus + +. You have a great accurate set of guns that allows you to hit bullets in mid-flight, and so you don’t actually hurt your assailants, you use them to mess up the bullets after they are fired!
Joe! Do you think this is going to bring an end to this situation!?!? Can’t we even “shoot them in the leg” anymore?