Shotgun Forum banner
1 - 20 of 33 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
3 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
i mean has anyone ever had to eliminate a threat? what were the repercusions of you actions if any? post trauma? if this is a subject that you guys don't want to discuss i understand just the same.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2 Posts
derekj,I think that this a subject best left alone,but I will tell a story of a local man who did and got nailed by the judge.he and his father where building a house for him and his family to live in.They had the basement and part of the first story finished,so he moved into the lower leavel so he would not have to go as far to work on it.one night while he slept(by him self because his wife worked 2nd. shift),he heard some noice upstairs,well he grabbed his trusty rabbit gun,12gauge pump loaded with "00" buck shot ,according to the local paper.He found 2 guys tring to steal his air compressor and other tools.He fired one shot and missed,according to the local rummor mill he just wanted to scare the off.when they left the house,he folowed in hopes to get the licence plate # to give to the cops when he called them,that was his 1st. mistake of the night.when he got outside,he went to the back of the car,one of the would-be-thievesspotted him in the rearview mirror,and in stead of leaving,the driver tried to run him over.The poor guy tring to deffend his proporty jumped onto the hood of the car and fire one shot into the drivers side winshield,scorring a direct hit to the head of the driver,that was the 2nd. mistake ,and the one that got him into trouble with the law,as you see the driver did not die.He(the owner of the house) called the sherriffs dept. ,but when he looked out the window,he watched as the car spedoff.even though he was deffending his proporty and later his his life,he did it out side his house and was arrested for it and charged with attempted murder.He was latter convicted of assaltwith a deadly wepon.The very liberal county judge told him as he was sentancing him he used poor judgment in following tthe 2 men out of his house and made a very "irresopsible decision" by taking a shot at them.Now I know that he was wronge and in violation of the state law by doing this,but if I where in this guys shoes,I would have shot the s.o.b.too.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
96 Posts
I hat to say it, but the man who was "the assaulted" did in fact become "the assaulter". There is a line between defense and offense, and this guy crossed it.I recommend to anyone who ever-so-slightly in the back of their mind suspects they will have to use a firearm for self defense to read the NRA Guide to Personal Protection. I also recommend that they prepare their minds for what may transpire in such a situation. This book covers what to do, how to do it, what not to do, what to do afterwards, what to expect legally, psychologically, etc.The number one rule to personal protection is to vacate the area if possible - remove yourself from the situation. The person you speak of apparently had no such intention.The second rule is to never pursue your attackers - doing so makes "you" the assailant. This guy went after them like he was Rambo.Some other notes: Did the "defender" shout to the alledged thieves notifying them that he was armed? Did he give them the option of surrendering or retreat, or did he jump in with the barrel blazing? If he just wanted to "scare them off" why did he pursue? To get a license plate number? That is the duty of the local Law Enforcement - not his. He killed the guy that was trying to run him over, but the guy would not have done so if he had not been pursued.I hate to say it, but the judge ruled correctly, and that man did not have the right frame of mind to be using a deadly weapon to "defend his property". Sounds like he paid a big price for an air compressor and a few tools. These are the guys that give responsible owners a very bad image to the public, both anti-gun AND neutral. Mike RossThe Cartridge GuysLife Member, North American Hunting ClubMember, National Rifle AssociationMember, Meeker Co. Historical Society
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6 Posts
in the service, got an article 15. we could shoot, we just were supposed to shoot high.if your state requires you to warn thieves and/or retreat on your own property, does 'secure in person and property' mean anything? perhaps you should consider moving.if protecting my property and attempting to help law enforcement means that i am not a good citizen, then i must be a sh**y subject.don't get me wrong, one shouldn't get in a care chase, but to tell me i don't have the right to be in my front yard?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
182 Posts
The main thing to remember about a Home Defense scenario is that you are defending the lives of those in your home. More than likely, if anything occurs outside of your home, you will turn into the assaulter.The basic understanding in Ohio is:If the body falls 100% in the house, it's self defense. If 1% falls outside, it's murder.Everyone I have talked to has given me the same advice"If you can safely get your entire family out of harms way then do so, because lethal force is not justified. If you cannot, or the intruder continues to advance after you inform them that you are armed, then lethal force is now justified."More or less, if you can safely get out of your house, or by announcing that you have:A. Called the PoliceB. Announced that you are armedyou can get the intruder to retreat, you really should not fire, because you WILL BE turned into the criminal. If you have to shoot, never shoot to get their attention. You are in a life or death battle, they may be armed, you won't know. By "Getting their attention" you are now opening yourself up to being killed. It's not worth the risk. If you cannot retreat, and the attacker doesn't leave when you state that you have called the police and are armed, then most likely they are armed, and have to assume they are. Warning shots only waste ammunition, and slant jury persons. "If guns cause crime, all of mine are defective"--Ted Nugent
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
182 Posts
I would if it were 60 years ago, I would say "Yes". In todays society, you would be turned into the vigilanty hunter, looking for criminals to kill. Best to announce that you are armed, and that if the intruder does not surrender or leave that he may be killed. That's the best warning shot. They now know what there choices are, and the consequences for staying. You can't turn a verbal warning into assault with a deadly weapon. Not easily at least.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
21 Posts
The basic understanding in Ohio is:
If the body falls 100% in the house, it's self defense. If 1% falls outside, it's murder.
If we follow this same logic than if I'm attacked at the mall and have to use deadly force on my attacker I have to drag his corpse back to my house?

PS: this is not a flame... I promise
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
36 Posts
The whole "inside-outside" has been run to death, and I'm tired of it to tell the truth, but to get back to the point of the original post.....I really don't mind talking about my experience, even though I didn't kill anyone.

After a rodeo/fair one night, I was packing up to leave, the brothers of a senorita I had just finished a bad break up with and a few of their buddies stopped me as I started my truck, I told them I meant to leave, and noticed four pistols shining in the yard lamps, all I had in the truck was a single shot .410 with 6shot, I drew it out from behind the seat, and told them again I meant to leave, I drew the hammer under my hand so I'd be ready without giving it away...then one of them raised their pistol, and I blew it out of his hand, shot peppered the would be shooter and the two guys on his flanks, the others scattered, the would be shooter fell at first, then got up and ran-sort of, I jumped in the truck and drove off, never did involve the police, just in case some "stupid law" would have put me in jail instead of the bad guys, and I'm sure they knew better than to try to bring charges against me, as their family, the brothers at least, were all in country illegally...no one was killed, I think the shooter lost the tip of his pinky finger, and the three got stitches. The gal called me later and apologized for her brothers and said I wouldn't have to worry about them.

Even if I would have killed the shooter, I wouldn't feel any different about what I did. Truth be told, I figured at that range, the .410 WOULD have killed him...I just figure, I'd rather have to live knowing I killed someone who would have killed me instead of being dead, so I don't have any guilt on my conscience. On two other occasions I've drawn pistols in my own defense, in both cases simply brandishing a weapon ended the confrontation, but had those situations or any future situation warrant it, I'd never feel bad about killing to defend my own life or that of my family...one thing to keep in mind, however, shoot to kill, and if you shoot, be sure they die--which I got from advice from two sheriffs, a Police chief, and four state troopers (always good to befriend your local LEO's)--just be sure it won't look psychotic, i.e. DON'T EMPTY YOUR GUN AND DON'T RELOAD UNLESS YOU HAVE TO.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
104 Posts
down here in alabama... if they fall outside your house... ur screwed. that even goes as far as saying, as they are coming into your house through the front door, you shoot them at close range, and they fall back out the door.... be prepared to go to court. oh, and pray you don't get an ethnic cop. in my city... they tend to take everything very personally/racially.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
698 Posts
I'm amased at what fellow law enforcement officers will tell the public. Years ago I personally heard one state that if you shoot him make sure that you drag him inside. You know in all my years this comment has haunted me in relaying that kind of BS to the general public. Most laws state that you have the right to defend yourself including the use of deadly force to prevent IMMINENT serious bodily injury. IMMINENT serious bodily injury means that the resulting injuries could and most likely result in death. Just remember that when you pull the trigger that a group of your peers and not necessary friendly ones will be deciding your fate in whether you are justified in your actions or not.
I have no problem with defending your self in a emergency situation but a majority of situations could be avoided by using common sense. Courts have ruled that the person does have the obligation to retreat if at all possible before deadly force is used.
I once encountered a man who was upset that someone was throwing rocks at the side of his home so he stepped outside and fired a 12 gauge round into some bushes at which time a 7 year old child fell to the ground.
The man stated that he did not care and that the kid asked for it.
We as a society should remember that property can be replaced but life can't, make sure that you have no way out except to defend yourself and then stop the threat. If you ever say that you shot to kill, then the defense lawyer or prosecutor will make you look like a total fool.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3 Posts
I know our laws here in the Philippines might be different from yours but let me share to you a leading case on the rmatter.

One morining in the rice paddies of central luzon (an island group in the Philiipines) A farmer (about 60 yrs of age ) saw his Carabao (beast of burden used by farmers to till the land and cary things..... comparable to your John Deerie tractors) being stolen by a thief. The thief was riding the carabao and was obviousely on a haste to put some distance from the aging farmer. With no hope to catch the thief by foot, he instinctively got his old Garand Rifle (30-06) inside his hut and from a distance of about 200-250 yards released a shot hoping that it would find its mark......the thief. In the process, he killed the thief but got his Carabao. While the carabao is everything to the old farmer, the Supreme court ruled that "defence to property is not sufficient to take a life". Thus, old farmer went to jail. Note that a Filipino farmer without a carabao will not be able to attend to his rice fields and will most likely lose his land.

Well, As a lawyer, I believe that the people who passed the laws as well as those who interpret, implement and execute them are but mortals not otherwise perfect.

Thus when forced to shoot a
**** sapien, be sure that it is a defense against person and not only property.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
17 Posts
In NC it is mandatory that you attend training to receive your carry permit. During that training the instructor drilled into us that you must be able to say "I was in fear for my life or the life of my family" and mean it. If this is true AND you had no way out, then you SHOULD be justified in your shooting.

I think the first rule that is sometimes forgotten is that you/we need to use good common sense and if at all possible avoid places and situations that one my put their self into a bad situation. Known and expected places of trouble and violence, why even bother going? Fun, adventure? You may end up in an adventure that last a lifetime and you meet your new best friend, Bubba who has been lonely.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
573 Posts
I have been talking to a lot of police in my area lately. I was a vicitim of an attempted armed robbery (by knife) earlier this week. They told me the same thing that many people have said here. You can shoot them if you personally feel that your life is in danger. It is best to warn them that the police are on the way and that your are armed. You can not shoot a criminal who is on the run, so do not shoot them in the back. If you shoot someone in your house and they manage to run, eject your shell at the location that you fired ( and don't touch it. The criminal will most likely leave a blood trail as they run. If they die on the side of the road or manage to get to a hospital, you will have proof that it was for your protection.

The way my house is designed, you have to come up a flight of stairs to get to the main living area. Our bedroom is on a side of the stairs that has no exit from the house. If someone breaks into my home, I will consider them a threat because I will not let my wife or myself pass in front of the stair case to reach the back door. I will give them a warning that the police are on the way and that I am armed. After that, they are fair game.

A friend of mine is a retired police officer. He said that anyone who kills a person intruding in their home will spend a night in jail. The district attorny will review the case and will almost always release you without charges. They figure that a dead thief is one less person that they have to worry about.

This hits pretty close to me right now. I was a victim of an attempted robbery Sunday morning. A man entered my house with a knife. I did not have a gun at the time. I grabbed a pocket knife and a survival knife and confronted him. He was strung out on drugs and took a very slow swing at me with his knife. I easily blocked it and stabed him in the shoulder with my pocket knife. I then kicked him down the stairs and out the door. He has not been found. I purchased my shotgun the next day since my other rifles are at my parents house and are not appropriate for home defense.

Andrew
 
G

·
I live in Illinois near Chicago. There was a case here last year(forgive me if i get some details wrong) about a man who shot and killed an intruder in his daughters bed room. The intruder turned out to be his extremely, extremely drunk next door neighbor who broke in through the window and (they speculate) thought it was his apartment. Anyway the father was sitting in jail for 1 or 2 years and then it started to recieve some media coverage. Im not sure but i think he might still be in jail? In Chicago if you defend yourself or your family with a gun you will be made an example of by the democrats (Chicago is still pretty much run mafia style). It scares the *$#% out of me to think of what would happen if i ever had to defend my family here.
 
G

·
Im the same guy who posted above about Chicago. This really doesnt have to do with guns, but this story has more with the judicial system, and how insane its become. It relates a little to guns in that you would need to go through the same insanity. This is a 100% true and i remember it pretty vividly from radio and newspaper articles. Pretty much the only thing i dont remember if it was in Chicago or another city.

This thief is on the roof (i cant remeber if it was a single or two story) of this families suburban home. Instead of entering like a skilled proffesional like in the movies, he manages to fall through the sky light. The father wakes up from the noise and finds a broken up thief lying on the floor of this home. So like a good citizen he calls the police and paramedics, etc. Anyways the thief gets better and sues the familiy because the roof was "unsafe to walk on". Before you start laffing, he wins the lawsuit and is awarded a gigantic amount of money (if i remember correctly it was even more than the middle income families financial net worth.) So the lesson of the story is that if you have a skylight, put bars undernieth it so that if a thief steps on it he wont fall to the floor before, but then again he might get cut on the broken glass if its to thin and sue you, so you need to replace it with a sky light that can can support a 300 lb man, then again your roof might be to slippery and.... AGHHHHHHHHH!!!!! See? And to all of you out there who write at the bottom of your stuff "id rather be tried by jury blah blah blah" you are out of your minds. The way the system works now you would be lucky if the jury was even allowed to hear facts that proved you where acting within the law. And if the criminal trying to kill you has living familiy, you most likely will have a nice heafty lawsuit to deal with even if you acted 100% accordingly (youll be paying lawyer fees for a long time even if you win).

So the real moral of the story is dont shoot anyone unless nothing, and i mean NOTHING else can be done. And if you do have to shoot, be ready to fork out the dough. And if you live in a highly democratic city, man your toast.
 
G

·
Me again. Oops i see the saying was "better to be tried by 10 then 6 feet under" yah i guess being tried by a jury is better than being dead. heheh Sorry if i insulted anyone :) Still, being tried by a jury nowadays you might spend the rest of your life in jail for killing a man who was trying to hack up your son or daughter with a butcher knife. Its insane out there...
 
1 - 20 of 33 Posts
Top