** Shooting a "Home Invader"?? **
#41
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 498
Likes: 0
From: Calais Maine
I have a feeling after being hit 2 or 3 times with rubber buckshot from my 12 ga. they wont be much of a problem. But the forth shot is a 3" 00buck.
If anynone can get up from that they still have a verry p/o'ed me to deal with and I have boxed quite a few guys bigger than me and im 6' 3" 225lbs. so ill take my chances that way and if im gettin wooped ive still got a mini-14 with a 30rd. clip close by.
If anynone can get up from that they still have a verry p/o'ed me to deal with and I have boxed quite a few guys bigger than me and im 6' 3" 225lbs. so ill take my chances that way and if im gettin wooped ive still got a mini-14 with a 30rd. clip close by.
#42
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 1,146
Likes: 0
From: The socialist state of Massachusetts
I certainly wouldn't want to face such a situation. However, I have thought about it. People walk into stores and commit robbery every day. They get as little as 10-20 dollars and shoot the clerk on their way out. I purchased a Winchester Defender some time ago. It is a police riot gun with a cylinder bore and holds 8 rounds. It is always loaded with #1 buckshot. My wife and I sleep downstairs. Our doors and windows are always locked at night. My children are all adults who no longer live at home. None of our children has a key. The only way in is to break in. I have the advantage of knowing the layout of my home. Upon hearing a breakin, I will warn an intruder verbally once. If he does not hastily retreat, may God have mercy on his soul.
Clint
Clint
#44
Well, the test that will be applied in court is "did you do what a sane, reasonable person would have done under the circumstances"?? Since this is a very subjective question, it is very difficult to answer!
Since you were awakened out of a sound sleep, have no idea who this person is, cannot determine if he is or is not armed with some kind of a weapon, and the person refuses to obey your command to "freeze", I believe NO COURT would find that you had some kind of a duty to try to subdue the perp with less than lethal force.
However, even if you are not held criminally responsible for shooting this dude, you are not protected from civil action by his relatives. As cold as this may sound, you're probably better off killing the guy. At least then, HE won't be suing you!
Since you were awakened out of a sound sleep, have no idea who this person is, cannot determine if he is or is not armed with some kind of a weapon, and the person refuses to obey your command to "freeze", I believe NO COURT would find that you had some kind of a duty to try to subdue the perp with less than lethal force.
However, even if you are not held criminally responsible for shooting this dude, you are not protected from civil action by his relatives. As cold as this may sound, you're probably better off killing the guy. At least then, HE won't be suing you!
#45
ORIGINAL: BigBore1895 You know what? Any law that says you have to RETREAT from your own PRIVATE PROPERTY from an intruder is crap. I will run from my house because of some drug-addicted scumbag the same day that Bill Clinton comes to the range with me. I have NO DESIRE TO KILL ANYONE! However, if there was a remote chance that my family or loved ones would be harmed, the law does not cross my mind. In the words of John Locke, the governments sole job is to protect life, liberty, and estate. How are the protecting either by making you flee from your own home because of an invader? Screw that, not worth it to me. BANG!
Yes, under English Common Law, a man's house is his castle! Unfortunately, that no longer appears to be the case in Tony Blair's UK, and there are unfortunately some states in our Union where it is no longer true either. These include New Jersey, Massachusetts, and others in the "Yankee Liberal Corridor" of the North Eastern US! The people of these states have obviously forgotten what liberty means, and have passed their responsibilities off to the Government, which uses this fact as an excuse to trample freedom underfoot on pretext of "protecting" society!
#46
Typical Buck
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 982
Likes: 0
From: Central Michigan
If you are going to shoot, shoot to kill. You don't want to wound him so he can sue you for the loss of his leg. You could get stuck paying for it for the rest of your life.
#47
Dominant Buck
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 26,274
Likes: 0
From: land of the Lilliputians, In the state of insanity
First off, if someone breaks in my house at that hour they get what is comming to them. They are there for a reason, and not a one of them is good. Im a fond believer that you say "I got a gun", then shoot. Like my old man always told us as kids (he was a cop),"never shot a person you do not intend to kill". I think that sums it up. If you shot to injure the law suits will be double. If they are dead, it simply an investigation. If the decision is made to shot, you shot to kill. I use to travel a lot. I have always told my wife to shot to kill. I fear she might start picking shots and piss a druged up intruder off and get her and the kids killed in the process.
You mentioned that if the person was small, should that effect your choice. I say no. Im 6'4, over 200lbs and was an NCAA all American athlete, if they are small and keep coming, I wouldnt risk injury or the chance of losing my gun. He would have to die.
You mentioned that if the person was small, should that effect your choice. I say no. Im 6'4, over 200lbs and was an NCAA all American athlete, if they are small and keep coming, I wouldnt risk injury or the chance of losing my gun. He would have to die.
#48
I understand everyone's points of view....I read them all and they all make sense in their own right.
My biggest fear is not what I would or would not do if faced with a situation like that, it is what could happen or be taken from me if I made an UNLAWFUL choice. It is messed up to think that you could lose everything by using deadly force, and I know it's better than what COULD happen..........but it's not exactly a fun 2nd place either.
Here's a thought for all of you shoot first guys........Same situation, but:
What if the intruder was an unarmed WOMAN?
Something to think about........
My biggest fear is not what I would or would not do if faced with a situation like that, it is what could happen or be taken from me if I made an UNLAWFUL choice. It is messed up to think that you could lose everything by using deadly force, and I know it's better than what COULD happen..........but it's not exactly a fun 2nd place either.
Here's a thought for all of you shoot first guys........Same situation, but:
What if the intruder was an unarmed WOMAN?
Something to think about........


