i'd go further -- deciding to act with aggression and force against one that is threatening it upon you cannot be malicious.
-
If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership The benefits pay for the membership many times over.
-
Be sure to enter the NES/MFS May Giveaway ***Canik METE SFX***
Someone breaks in - Do you yell that you're armed or not?
- Thread starter Rockrivr1
- Start date
Grendizer138
NES Member
No one is saying that though. Some of us just live in reality.
The John Wick types here are more likely to shoot senile Grandpa coming in the wrong door, or a cop doing a wellness check, than kill some team of ninja assassins.
But no one here’s mind is going to be changed. So carry on. Just don’t ask me for donations to your legal fund.
That's still not malicious intent. You're pushing back against me on a perspective that I don't hold.
I don't get this thread.
My own initial response was clearly misinterpreted by some as a sort of John Wick vs Navy Seals scenario because I would rather have eyes on the person before announcing I have a gun, maintaining some element of surprise. Maybe I'll catch them trying to steal something valuable. If I simply yell, they might have time to leave with my property. If I catch them off guard, I can retain my property and can possibly have them arrested. Maybe they'll be scared enough to flee in a hurry without anything. Maybe yelling I have a gun will work to acare them off. Maybe it won't. I'd rather be looking at them when I tell them so I can see what their reaction is.
Wanting to maintain the element of surprise doesn't mean I want to or expect to kill the person. I just want as much advantage--in every benign sense of that word--in the situation as possible.
Is that so wrong?
TayNinh_66
NES Member
The cases cited addressed "reasonable" under the circumstances and would still be used as precedent. MA Supreme Court gave specific examples of what would be reasonable such as giving a verbal warning. What is reasonable is still a matter of fact for a jury to decide. 8A did moot prior case law holding that "a defendant must use every reasonable avenue of escape available to him."
Grendizer138
NES Member
Yeah, see you lost me on the “retaining your property” part.
I think that’s a mindset issue. There is nothing in my house that costs more to replace than the legal fees of shooting someone.
Steal what you want. Leave the Conan comics though please!
I said nothing about shooting them.
I own valuable stuff that isn't really replaceable and has sentimental value as well.
Not taking issue with what you're saying here; I think it's wise, in many ways. But in sitting here, thinking about my house? If I'm at the top of my stairs waiting for a target, "eyes on" isn't really an issue. "Ears on" would do. I know my home well enough that I'd feel comfortable tracking an intruder on the ground floor just by the sounds the rooms make as people walk through them.
I don't feel I'd need to wait to shout at them. Indeed, if they're in the dining room and I know they're there, there's zero line of sight between me and them. And they've presumably never been in the house before, so it's not like they know exactly where they're going. If they hear a loud voice from upstairs, they have no mental map for precisely where that voice is coming from.
It doesn't really give up an element of surprise, is what I'm saying. As I posted before, they're 90% sure you're upstairs even before they break in.
Different living situations might affect how one would respond. Imagine if you were in a loft or studio apartment.
Anyway, I guess the right way to think of things would be "potentially maximizing the element of surprise." Maybe they'll hear me coming before I yell. Maybe they won't. Maybe they'll think I am asleep. Maybe I'll sneak outside and surprise them when they try to exit after I've called the police. There are a lot of variables, and this is assuming it is nighttime.
I know in my current place, I wouldn't want it known I am awake and aware without being armed.
Regardless, we don't truly know exactly how we'll react unless it happens. And hopefully, it never does to any of us. One attempt was more than enough for me.
oldguy68
NES Member
Just like my opinion of open carry in public.
I don't want you knowing what my level of protection is.
You will see it only when it is too late for you to do anything about it.
Now open carry in the woods where allowed is one thing or on my private property.
Why show your cards when you don't have to?
I don't want you knowing what my level of protection is.
You will see it only when it is too late for you to do anything about it.
Now open carry in the woods where allowed is one thing or on my private property.
Why show your cards when you don't have to?
Grendizer138
NES Member
Please see posts #s 1-250.
you and i are aligned.
Devils Paintbrush
NES Member
I don't have to say anything, my garand does my talking.
And how will they know you did this?
Did you really call the cops before shooting the dude? ... or did you shoot him and call the cops 5 seconds after?
NES has some wild fantasies of how things actually play out.
oldguy68
NES Member
Let's be real, just call 911.
No one is going to break into your house.
If in a one and twenty million chance someone mistakenly does. You have no right to protect yourself anyways.
Let them steal every and anything they want and simply flee your residence.
No need or reason to tell them anything, but that you called 911.
There now you can close this thread...
No one is going to break into your house.
If in a one and twenty million chance someone mistakenly does. You have no right to protect yourself anyways.
Let them steal every and anything they want and simply flee your residence.
No need or reason to tell them anything, but that you called 911.
There now you can close this thread...
they'll know if he called after because most people would be half deaf and shouting into the phone after shooting in an enclosed space for the first time
you do you. it's not my stuff I'm worried about, it's my family. my wife will be calling 911, but remember how well that worked out in uvalde. violent criminals deserve violent ends.
While the main reason for suppressing my nightstand gun is to preserve night vision, hearing also weighs in the decision.
That, and because i moved here to have the choice.
I'm considering adding night vision on top of my motion-activated lighting. Do you do goggles or is it on your scope?
alternatively "bans on normal capacity magazines"
By "preserve night vision", I meant not blinding myself with muzzle flash rather than not blinding light-intensifying optics.
Because of the event-triggered lighting, I haven't considered night vision as an indoor application. Any alarm in "Armed-Home" mode, the entirety of the non-bedroom space (including landscape lighting) goes to full brightness. And specific to CO/smoke alarms, all the lights (bedroom included) come on, and the furnace turns off.
Every year I tell myself I will take advantage of "night coyote season" to figure out what night vision setup (goggle or scope, visual or thermal) works best for me, then January 1st comes, I look at the thermometer, decide it can wait.
Last edited:
I have my setup so entry areas go to full brightness and the bedrooms, hallway where I have a good position stay dark.
I haven't been hunting at night. If you decide to go this winter let me know and I'll bring the coffee and ammo.
I do respect your confidence but you’re way off on this topic.
There are 2.5 million burglaries annually in the United States. 66% of these are home invasions. (US Department of Justice)
Key insights + statistics
• In 2017, the FBI reported 1,401,840 burglaries with 57.5% of all burglaries involving forcible entry. (Criminal Justice Information Services Division)
• There are 2.5 million burglaries annually in the United States. (FBI)
• Every 15 seconds a home burglary occurs in the United States. (Crimepreventiontips.com)
• A break-in occurs every 26 seconds in the US. (FBI)
• Homes without a security system are 300% more likely to be broken into and burglarized. (Alarms.org)
• 46.9% of people don’t have a home security system installed in their home. (The Zebra)
• 83% of would-be burglars check for the presence of an alarm system before attempting a break-in. (FBI)
• 34% of burglars use the front door when breaking into a home. (Bureau of Justice)
• There are 2.5 million burglaries annually in the United States. 66% of these are home invasions. (US Department of Justice)
• Police solve only 13% of reported burglary cases. (Pew Research Center)
Asaltweapon
NES Member
What great odds huh?
It’s 2.5M. Spread them out however you like but I’d guess the burbs get hit a lot more than the cities. Single family homes in quiet neighborhoods are a much softer and more productive target than the 3rd floor of an apt building in the ghetto.
Similar threads
