View Single Post
 
Old 03-24-2013, 03:16 AM
brokenprism's Avatar
brokenprism brokenprism is offline
US Veteran
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Oregon
Posts: 884
Likes: 13
Liked 302 Times in 116 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeffersonwasright View Post
... but I couldn't help wondering why he didn't attempt to warn the burglar away.
mc5aw's first post in this thread is golden. It was very balanced, reasonable, insightful, and sensitive to where the OP is coming from. That said, I'll go down a less tolerant path. It's just my opinion, of course.

One good reason not to shout a warning (as a poster has already said here) is that it gives your location away. (So do steady-stream flash lights at night.) You lose a tactical advantage that you need. 'Tactical' is not a dirty word -- do you want to live? Are people counting on you for some kind of support, or even your simple reassuring presence? Then you have a duty to survive this if the knock (or the shattering glass) comes. How do you know the guy at the door is acting alone? What if his job is to distract and occupy you while his buddy comes through the back door to subdue you, or take your wife or child hostage, and then unlock the front door?

I read an interesting statement by the FBI recently. Whereas in years past burglars avoided the use of weapons -- which added time to their sentences -- we are now, as a Nation, so broadly and predictably armed for legitimate self defense, that the bad guys are beginning to arm themselves again for 'illegitimate' self defense! And they're working in crews more often than they used to, for the purposes of shock, awe, and tactical advantage through overwhelming numbers. There are too many 13-rd Gkocks out there to ignore, so they form larger teams.

I don't want to shoot either, but I look at this philosophically (and even religiously). Anyone who is trying to break into my house, where my 10-yr old daughter lives, has already forfeited his right to compassionate treatment and restraint from me (the other reason the Texas homeowner remained silent, I suspect; he was morally willing to 'take out the trash...'). When an aggressor makes a foolish life-or-death choice, and has the gall to involve me in it, his rights end at my door.

You mentioned "shooting to kill." Another member called it "shooting till the threat is down." That's the proper view to take; you want to stop a threat from proceeding, pure and simple, and expired aggressors are incidental to this goal; the goal of survival. If you happen to miss the Vulcan pinch point with your generous 'warning' shot, and hit an aorta, oh well. Bad for him, and better his than yours. But it was his choice to be at your door, and now your actions may have some input into whether he appears the next night at someone else's door.

BTW, personally, I wouldn't linger near an entrance trying to forestall an invasion. I'd grab cell phone, gun, and daughter, and retreat to the most defensible part of the house -- the part I have already selected in case I ever have to go there -- and make my stand there. If in my absence the bad guys plunder the house, fine. The cops are coming, and it's only stuff. But they're not coming upstairs.

Last edited by brokenprism; 03-24-2013 at 02:33 PM.
The Following 6 Users Like Post: