That's like pushing your finger against the inside of your sweatshirt and telling the BG that it's a gun. It works great until he calls your bluff---then you're really fucked.
-
Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?
Go here:
Edit Account Details and Profile
Self Defense stories
- Thread starter feddoc
- Start date
That's like pushing your finger against the inside of your sweatshirt and telling the BG that it's a gun. It works great until he calls your bluff---then you're really fucked.
I second a guard dog.
Since when is a ~$1,000.00 Taser considered cheap?
When it's about $300
http://www.personalsecurityandsurve...?target=product&product_id=344&category_id=11
Though replacement cartridges can be a bit pricey...
TwosBlind
New Member
The gun itself is not deadly force. The hot lead that mushrooms into the intruder's upper chest cavity is. In my opinion, using non-lethal ammo is akin to not using "deadly force" period.
That said. Fuck non-lethal.
GroundPounder
Well-Known Member
Lethal force is that force that can be reasonably expected to cause death or great bodily harm.*
If I were to shoot someone in the head with a " less lethal " bean bag round from a 12 guage from 3 ft away that would be deadly force. Hitting someone in the head with an ASP baton or riot stick like you were swinging a baseball bat, again deadly force.
As to less than lethal force, I am dead set against it when I or someone that I observe is the subject of an attack that could kill them. I forsee a time that less lethal methods will be what is expected, rather than using deadly force to protect myself or another person. This would mean that a thug can attempt to kill me and if he does not succeed, rather than being ventilated, he gets shocked. Kinda stacks the deck in their favor.
* Could be worded slightly differently from state to state.
A more appropriate term is "Less than lethal" or "Less Lethal".... Rubber bullets have a very good chance of killing someone if they hit in the wrong (or right whichever way you look at it) spot.
Your personal constitution
If you are a military member with the correct mentality knowing that sometime, somewhere you wrote a blank check to the US Government that said you would defend your country and possibly they might cash that check with your life, then I don't quite understand the toil and discussion on whether or not to own a gun and whether or not to use deadly force. If a person enters your home under any circumstance where they were not invited, then your only ascertainment is that they assumed the risk that they may be making the very same sacrifice you are willing to make to your country but they are simply making it for personal gain by taking from you. That same calculation can lead you to believe that since they entered your home with this knowledge, then they are fully prepared to do what they have to in order to preserve their life and have no reserve for yours. That makes it very easy for me to act in order to protect my life, my family and my sense of security in my own private home. And when articulated as such, assuming I have executed this severe act of engagement only to accomplish the protection of my home, rights and property, there is not a court in the land of the free that will take that right away from you. Every law in every state is different, but when it all comes down the primitive nature of what the person was doing in someone else's home or your home, it is rare, if ever, that a person's right to defend themself is ever denied, almost as written in the rules of engagement, "the right to self defense is never denied." The more knowledge you have the better, you must seek continued knowledge and education but understand that the root concept is simple.
There are countless factors involved with protecting yourself, family and home with any kind of weapon. Do you blindly shoot? Do you use escalation of force through verbal commands and try to de-escalate the situation once you have their attention? How many of them are there? What time of day is it? Can you positively identify the person you shot? How many did you shoot? Why did you shoot them 7 times? Why did you shoot them 12 times? Why did you shoot them 15 times? Why did you reload and shoot them 5 more times? Did you feel your life was in danger? Were they armed? Why didn't you shoot? Why didn't you call 911? Did you call 911? What is the average response time to your home? What is the frequency of violent crime in your immediate home area? What is the frequency of violent crime in areas similar to yours? What is the perception of known criminals that view your areas and people like you? What did they break into your house for? Are they homeless? Are they drug addicts? Are they rich people looking for a thrill?
Who cares? The bottom line is this: Someone taught them or tried to teach them right from wrong. Somewhere, sometime they decided that making an honest living wasn't for them and they were going to gamble with the fact that they could possibly lose their life by violating another life. They are willing to accept the risk, I think it is only fair that you produce that risk by arming yourself and being prepared to protect yourself, family, property, an honest way of life, and prevent someone at the root, instead of feeling violated and wondering what could you have done better in that instance. If they are lucky enough to live through an encounter as such, maybe they will learn that it is not right to invade someone's home and so easily acquire wants and toys and money for themselves and maybe point them toward an honest living filled with reward and a feeling of good in their heart. That is, if they are lucky enough to live. If someone breaks into my home, they will be shot if I or my wife are home. When I have children and they are old enough and responsible enough, they will shoot home invaders too.
I fully understand that not everyone is comfortable with the use of deadly force and/or guns. If that is the case, by all means, take the other appropriate steps necessary to protect your home, yourself and family. That is the absolute best that the righteous can ask in order to teach those, who willfully and wrongfully take, a lesson.
If you are a military member with the correct mentality knowing that sometime, somewhere you wrote a blank check to the US Government that said you would defend your country and possibly they might cash that check with your life, then I don't quite understand the toil and discussion on whether or not to own a gun and whether or not to use deadly force. If a person enters your home under any circumstance where they were not invited, then your only ascertainment is that they assumed the risk that they may be making the very same sacrifice you are willing to make to your country but they are simply making it for personal gain by taking from you. That same calculation can lead you to believe that since they entered your home with this knowledge, then they are fully prepared to do what they have to in order to preserve their life and have no reserve for yours. That makes it very easy for me to act in order to protect my life, my family and my sense of security in my own private home. And when articulated as such, assuming I have executed this severe act of engagement only to accomplish the protection of my home, rights and property, there is not a court in the land of the free that will take that right away from you. Every law in every state is different, but when it all comes down the primitive nature of what the person was doing in someone else's home or your home, it is rare, if ever, that a person's right to defend themself is ever denied, almost as written in the rules of engagement, "the right to self defense is never denied." The more knowledge you have the better, you must seek continued knowledge and education but understand that the root concept is simple.
There are countless factors involved with protecting yourself, family and home with any kind of weapon. Do you blindly shoot? Do you use escalation of force through verbal commands and try to de-escalate the situation once you have their attention? How many of them are there? What time of day is it? Can you positively identify the person you shot? How many did you shoot? Why did you shoot them 7 times? Why did you shoot them 12 times? Why did you shoot them 15 times? Why did you reload and shoot them 5 more times? Did you feel your life was in danger? Were they armed? Why didn't you shoot? Why didn't you call 911? Did you call 911? What is the average response time to your home? What is the frequency of violent crime in your immediate home area? What is the frequency of violent crime in areas similar to yours? What is the perception of known criminals that view your areas and people like you? What did they break into your house for? Are they homeless? Are they drug addicts? Are they rich people looking for a thrill?
Who cares? The bottom line is this: Someone taught them or tried to teach them right from wrong. Somewhere, sometime they decided that making an honest living wasn't for them and they were going to gamble with the fact that they could possibly lose their life by violating another life. They are willing to accept the risk, I think it is only fair that you produce that risk by arming yourself and being prepared to protect yourself, family, property, an honest way of life, and prevent someone at the root, instead of feeling violated and wondering what could you have done better in that instance. If they are lucky enough to live through an encounter as such, maybe they will learn that it is not right to invade someone's home and so easily acquire wants and toys and money for themselves and maybe point them toward an honest living filled with reward and a feeling of good in their heart. That is, if they are lucky enough to live. If someone breaks into my home, they will be shot if I or my wife are home. When I have children and they are old enough and responsible enough, they will shoot home invaders too.
I fully understand that not everyone is comfortable with the use of deadly force and/or guns. If that is the case, by all means, take the other appropriate steps necessary to protect your home, yourself and family. That is the absolute best that the righteous can ask in order to teach those, who willfully and wrongfully take, a lesson.
I dont think anyone here would disagree with that... but I assure you there are state courts who would convict you for the use of deadly force. And if not state criminal courts then surely there are state civil courts that would find you liable.
Cook County comes to mind.
Cook County comes to mind.
Any fool that lives in that place deserves what they get.
callsignecho
Clock Spider
Uh...If someone has never fired a pistol before, I don't recommend trying to William Tell a bad guy past his loved ones head. Especially not at 25 yards.
I recommend the Mossberg 500 "Persuader" and an Australian Shepherd.
The Persuader has an interchangeable stock and pistol grip. The pistol grip puts a hurting on your wrist, but it's more maneuverable. Since you aren't taking this skeet shooting, I don't think the reduced accuracy is a big deal. Protective services use 00 buck shot (pronounced double-aught) for it's stopping power, which is good if your intruder is some geeked out crack head. Small ammo may not stop someone who is under the influence of certain drugs.
Really any cattle dog or shepherd makes a good guard dog because they eagerly alert on intruders and will attack without fear. Australian Shepherds are vigilant guardians of the property of their master. They do so with such faith and energy that they are often unsuitable as house dogs, because they tend to be energetic and suspicious of strangers. A German Shepherd would also be a good choice. They are a little less energetic (easier to train) but marginally less alert. My favorite is the Australian Cattle Dog, but they are energetic to the point of being hyperactive, often hard to train and rarely can you socialize them to the point that they will relax around strangers. But they are DAMN good guard dogs.
You'll be doing your fellow Buckeyes a huge favor if you blast one of those thieves with a shotgun. Or a pistol. Or a rifle. Or if you poke him with a bayonet. So many choices!
I bought a pistol at Vance's in Columbus as a personal graduation present. They had a lot of good deals at the time but that was a few years ago so I don't know what it's like now. Their selection is large which provides you with a good opportunity to educate yourself even if you aren't going to buy there. The purchase process in Ohio is quick and painless for non-convicts.
I chose a pistol because I decided that it was the one I would get to enjoy using the most, but if I was looking purely for home defense, I would have purchased a shotgun.
I wholeheartedly agree hokieav8r on the use of deadly force. You're only going to live once, so don't die because you were worried about the legal ramifications of shooting a criminal. Your burglar knows that even if he goes to jail for murder, he's still alive, while you are dead and gone. So yeah, he's probably armed.
I bought a pistol at Vance's in Columbus as a personal graduation present. They had a lot of good deals at the time but that was a few years ago so I don't know what it's like now. Their selection is large which provides you with a good opportunity to educate yourself even if you aren't going to buy there. The purchase process in Ohio is quick and painless for non-convicts.
I chose a pistol because I decided that it was the one I would get to enjoy using the most, but if I was looking purely for home defense, I would have purchased a shotgun.
I wholeheartedly agree hokieav8r on the use of deadly force. You're only going to live once, so don't die because you were worried about the legal ramifications of shooting a criminal. Your burglar knows that even if he goes to jail for murder, he's still alive, while you are dead and gone. So yeah, he's probably armed.
nzachman
Yeah, well. The Dude abides.
Options I cannot do:
1) Dog: cannot take care of one while in flight school and I only have 1.5 months left here
2) Shotgun: I just do not feel comfortable with that big of a weapon. I know it may be good for home defense but it's just not for me.....not yet.
I am glad so many of you have replied, I appreciate it.
I just do not feel comfortable with that big of a weapon...that's what she said
1) Dog: cannot take care of one while in flight school and I only have 1.5 months left here
2) Shotgun: I just do not feel comfortable with that big of a weapon. I know it may be good for home defense but it's just not for me.....not yet.
I am glad so many of you have replied, I appreciate it.
I just do not feel comfortable with that big of a weapon...that's what she said
It's not that one such as myself is uncomfortable with deadly force. My chosen profession and my H&K would indicate otherwise. However, I've lovingly maintained and practiced with that firearm for 5 years in low light, quick draw, off hand shooting, etc. The OP has not, and is new to self defense tools. My advocating less than lethal options stems from people's tendencies to overlook them. He can only make the best choice for himself when he has examined all his options for what might be best suited. This a lecture I myself was given by family relations in FBI and local PD. They weren't advocating against lethal force options, they just wanted me to be aware that they existed, so that I could make the best informed choice when I purchased my first firearm.
In the example I gave earlier, there is a very strong instinctual reaction against harming certain types of people, namely females and children. Encountering a 14 year old at night might cause one to pause. Or low light might cause a similar hesitancy. Also, whereas the intruder knows how many people he brought with him and therefore has a more accurate assessment of hostiles, you have to think it might your friend/girl/sibling. If you've never owned or trained with a firearm, how confident are you of making that snap judgement that WILL cost someone's life? As my relative pointed out, that pause might allow the assailant to regain lost initiative and draw/aim/fire a weapon of his own. It's possible that a less lethal option will remove some of your doubt and allow you to act in a more timely manner. Remember, milliseconds are all either of you need to fire first.
Therefore, I feel that the forum should make the OP aware of all options that might reasonably apply, so that the OP can make the best informed decision to fit himself and his living situation. That said, I would personally still recommend a shotgun, as that is more easy to become acustumed to quickly than a pistol, and at a reasonable price as well. I find that they are easier to use in low light, and fine aim matters alot less with a scatter gun than with a large caliber pistol. The shotgun filled with shot is much less likely to overpenetrate and cause casualties behind the intended target. It is counter intuitive to assume that the shotgun is safer, but, in my opinion concerning home defense, it is most likely the effective solution.
gaijin6423
Ask me about ninjas!
My question was not regarding the legal issue of using deadly force, but rather, how that issue is clouded by less-lethal ammunition, such as rock salt, bean bags, etc. The use of deadly force is defined by your specific locale, and what is kosher in one place is NOT always acceptable elsewhere. The use of deadly force does not, for example, always mean that you have to fire a weapon at someone. Along the same lines, you can use deadly force (in the appropriate situation) to prevent someone from illegally entering your residence in NC, but if they're already in your house, you must attempt to flee.
Rest assured, if someone seeks to do harm to my family or home, there's no question about my reaction. But to take that action while not knowing the applicable laws is, at best, a very quick way to inconvenience yourself. At worst, it's a method to find some serious legal trouble.
Which brings me back to my original question: Do any of the more experienced members on the board (perhaps some LE types?) have any specific experience with less-lethal ammunition being used in a personal defense situations any additional repercussions resulting from them?
(And statesman's 100% right to mention that it's properly referred to as less-lethal, vice non-.)
Rest assured, if someone seeks to do harm to my family or home, there's no question about my reaction. But to take that action while not knowing the applicable laws is, at best, a very quick way to inconvenience yourself. At worst, it's a method to find some serious legal trouble.
Which brings me back to my original question: Do any of the more experienced members on the board (perhaps some LE types?) have any specific experience with less-lethal ammunition being used in a personal defense situations any additional repercussions resulting from them?
(And statesman's 100% right to mention that it's properly referred to as less-lethal, vice non-.)