Home defense

[P-229]

I live in an area that is very safe. No real crime except for the criminally stupid. I leave the keys in my trucks, doors unlocked most of the time. But, keep guns and valuables in safes. Except for the guns that are "strategic" Nothing is impossible, meth heads are everywhere now days. Plus, theree is nothing to stop some smart guy(s) from saying hey lets go rob some sleepy little town where nothing happens and they still don't lock stuff up. Nothing wrong with being casual, but, be prepared for the possibilities. 99% of the people who get robbed or harmed don't think they are going to be robbed or harmed when it happens. Steal my truck and it is a long ways to anywhere around here, go on my property and smile for the cameras. Screw with me in person at your own risk.

steelslayer,

You seem to have a good strategy. Buy keep in mind that that buys know where to look for strategically placed things...like guns.

Broken Windows by James Q. Wilson was a seminal work in crime prevention. One broken window leads to many. One bag guy in your hood will lead to many. My advice is to call cops when you spot the first tweaker (meth head) or bad guy in your hood. If you don't, others will follow. Believe me cops want to be alerted of dirt bags on their beats. If there are tweakers or bad guys, cops will work 'em until they can arrange their relocation to county living (jail).

Never wait to call cops. When you see a bad guy or a suspicious person, call cops immediately. The sooner cops make contact the better. A screwdriver in a back pocket of most people is just a screwdriver. A screwdriver in the back pocket of a bad guy is a burglary tool, and he'll go to jail for possession of a burglary tool.

Believe me, taking back a city overrun with crime is a lot more difficult than preventing crime from becoming a problem. Cops need citizens' help in preventing crime. If you see a person who looks out of place in your city, call the cops. Cops would rather prevent crime than resolve trauma after a crime has been committed. Get to know your beat cops. Try to arrange coffee times with them. They'll tell you how you can help them keep your hood crime-free or as close to it as possible. They will be grateful for your help.

I used to work for a supervisor who was not a great street cop. He was more of an administrator, and last I heard he lateraled to another agency as a middle manager. He was by nature a genuinely nice guy. Anyway, he used to tell us that he didn't want to hear about crime problems in our beats. What he wanted to know were our plans to eliminate crime problems from our beats. While hands-on police work wasn't his forte, he did know how to motivate cops to take bad guys to jail.

This is an excellent read: Broken Windows - The Atlantic

 

[P-229]

Arik,

What are you searching for?

 

[P-229]

Arik,

While you're at it, bring some popcorn for me. A Gatorade, too, would work.

 

[P-229]

I'm still confused on the part where he doesn't keep his gun inside his home. Either there are some words missing to make sense or the gun is stored somewhere else?!?!?! [emoji15] [emoji15]

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk

Confusion might lead to delusion. My advice is to figure out what other people know that you don't.

 

[Arik]

Confusion might lead to delusion. My advice is to figure out what other people know that you don't.

Aha ok!!!

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk

 

[samnev]

I have a 6920 with a Surefire light and mounted a NXS 1-4Xx24 FC2 reticle scope kept on 1x that I use for HD. A 30 round magazine loaded with 50 grain Sierra blitz projos.

 

[cmort666]

Ask the chief of sheriff of the city or area in which you live for latest crime stats. That'll give you an idea of the safety of your abode.

No, it'll give you an idea of what the stats were, for some indeterminate time.

Will they tell you if somebody's casing YOUR home, NOW?

If you live in a safe community, it's very difficult for bad guys to breach because the second suspicious persons are spotted, half the neighborhood is dialing 911. And your cops are assuredly pretty darn good at spotting people who are suspicious.

Was the doctor's neighborhood a "safe community"? Didn't seem too much like the 'hood where I grew up in Chiraq. Strangely, his wife and two daughters were still raped and murdered, burned to death actually.

Is it now a "safe community" again?

My mother lives only a few minutes away from the Lane Bryant store in Tinley Park, Illinois where six women were shot and five killed. (Lane Bryant Massacre)
I've been in that area many times. It always seemed "safe" from most things apart from the occasional UFO.

Is it "dangerous" now, or has it returned to being "safe"?

Here's a science experiment you can try at home:

1. Find out what the average police response time in your area is. (Note that it's an AVERAGE, not a GUARANTEE.)
2. Get a stopwatch, a beef roast and a stabbing knife of some sort.
3. Start the stopwatch and start stabbing the roast. Continue stabbing the roast until the average police response time of your community has been reached.
4. Count the number of stab wounds in the roast. That is how many stab wounds you would need to absorb waiting for the police to arrive... AT AN AVERAGE. ANY error in the process could lead to MUCH longer response times... or NO response at all. Or as happened in Detroit, the 911 operator could demand that you put your assailant on the phone to confirm that he is indeed your assailant.
5. If you like, you can deduct 25% of the stab wounds to account for some of your assailant's strikes missing as he chases you around the house.

And that's if he doesn't have a gun...

 

[JCFindley]

Hi JC,

Tennessee v. Gardner was a US Supreme Court case. However, I do agree that states can make more restrictive law. But a conviction contrary to Gardner would certainly be overturned on appeal.

Thanks, I was not aware of that. Good information to know.

 

[StakeOut]

I have a Model 59 that is close by me at all times while I'm at home.

A 39-2 is also available.

Shotguns are good in a few situations but consider "what if a family member in a different part of the house or bedroom became a hostage"

First don't lay down your weapon and never give up your gun.It will be the only thing that keeps everyone alive and safe.

A pistol can make an accurate shot if needed,a shotgun can't

I've fired my long guns and handguns in confined spaces several times on stakeouts and personal defense while out and about and my hearing survived.The ringing goes away.

Once was six shots from a Colt DS in a 4' x 4' elevator from inside my overcoat pocket that was just slashed through the outer layer by a knife wielding robber intending to kill me.

 

[JCFindley]

Self defense is personal and subjective. What works for one might be all wrong for another.

Our dog is our primary early warning defense.

I don't keep a gun inside of my home for two primary reasons: I live in a very, very safe city, and I'm usually gone most of the day, especially during summer. While I can legally carry a handgun anywhere I choose, I very, very rarely do. I will take a handgun with me if I absolutely cannot avoid going into LA. The reality is I cannot tell you the last time I've had a handgun on my person.

However, with these firgging idiots sniping cops, I might start carrying my P-229. Were I to see a dirtbag preparing to snipe a cop, I'd want to prevent it. The only way I could prevent it would be if I were armed.

Spot on IMO and everyone is in a different situation. When my wife decided she would join me in FL from NY we needed somewhere to rent pretty short notice. We have a nice townhouse but it is not in a great area. Not horrible but not great. A couple neighbors have had their house burglarized. We have had someone very lightly tap on the front door probably testing to see if the beware of dog sign is backed up by a dog. (It is though not the doberman silhouette in the picture.)

Until this year I had gone 20 years without a CWL. Since I worked most of that time either in the military or for the military I couldn't carry any time I was at work anyway so seemed a touch pointless.

I was also an airline pilot and was a Federal Flight Deck Officer so had an issued HK and creds to carry it to, from and when at that job. So, I had a pistol to stop air piracy and it was available and close at hand most other times.

All that said the last year or so has just felt differently. I carry anywhere it is legal for me to carry now. Maybe I watch too much First 48 where I see them investigating the murder of some poor slob that was just in the wrong place at the wrong time or trusted the wrong person. Maybe the whole kill a cop for fun mentality pisses me off and I want to have the ability to stop it if I am put in a circumstance where it would matter. Maybe terrorism has changed the way I view circumstances that should be safe.

I really cannot tell you why I seemly need to carry a gun when I have been happy enough with my emerson knives and flashlight for years but I can tell you I am almost always armed these days.

 

[Muss Muggins]

Tennessee v. Gardner opined that because of the likelihood of a violent confrontation with a homeowner, deadly force is appropriate for residential burglars. If a bad guy knows a house is occupied and enters it, it's probably safe to assume he's not bringing you a pizza. He's assuredly has made up his mind to harm residents if he thinks it's necessary to accomplish his criminal intent.

I am not a lawyer, but I know a little bit about federal law, and I can use a search engine. I can't find TN v. Gardner anywhere, so I'd appreciate a link. TN v. Garner, on the other hand, held that cops can't shoot fleeing felons unless they pose a risk to public safety . . .

 

[P-229]

Muss,

You're good. Thanks for the correct spelling of Garner's surname. It makes all the difference. I mean that erroneously added "d" changes the whole complexion of Tennessee v. Garner.

You might want to check your local law enforcement agency's shooting policy. It will be 100% legal.

The agency that employed me sanctioned shooting dangerous fleeing felons. I knew cops I've worked with that did shoot and some killed dangerous fleeing felons. They were all good shootings. I knew of only one agency that didn't allow its cops to shooting dangerous, fleeing felons. Ironically, is was a high crime city within LA County.

Tell me, what else do you do besides searching the 'net for minutiae for some unknown reason?

 

[Muss Muggins]

Muss,

You're good. Thanks for the correct spelling of Garner's surname. It makes all the difference. I mean that erroneously added "d" changes the whole complexion of Tennessee v. Garner.

You might want to check your local law enforcement agency's shooting policy. It will be 100% legal.

The agency that employed me sanctioned shooting dangerous fleeing felons. I knew cops I've worked with that did shoot and some killed dangerous fleeing felons. They were all good shootings. I knew of only one agency that didn't allow its cops to shooting dangerous, fleeing felons. Ironically, is was a high crime city within LA County.

Tell me, what else do you do besides searching the 'net for minutiae for some unknown reason?

So where are we at with this?:

Tennessee v. Gardner opined that because of the likelihood of a violent confrontation with a homeowner, deadly force is appropriate for residential burglars. If a bad guy knows a house is occupied and enters it, it's probably safe to assume he's not bringing you a pizza. He's assuredly has made up his mind to harm residents if he thinks it's necessary to accomplish his criminal intent.

 

[P-229]

cmort666,

I'm good with what works for you.

It's logical fallacy to attempt to disprove a rule by citing an exception.

Stats reveal trends. And that's their utility. One murder in a safe city does not make the city unsafe. Without more info, it was an isolated incident that could've happened in Beverly Hills.

I'll skip your experiment. Thanks for the thought, though.

Stay safe

 

[P-229]

Muss,

You tell me. You initiated it. So you must have had something in mind.

I gotta go. It's a gorgeous So Cal day. That means bikinis on the beach. And no, I ain't taking a gun.

 

[P-229]

Muss,

You do what's right for you. I cannot tell you what's right for you. You're on your own with that one.

 

[Muss Muggins]

Here's a summary of TN v. Garner, for those who care to read it, and a link to the whole opinion at FindLaw. Remember that this case was about police officers and not private citizens.

Tennessee v. Garner


United States Supreme Court
TENNESSEE v. GARNER, (1985)
No. 83-1035
Argued: October 30, 1984 Decided: March 27, 1985

A Tennessee statute provides that if, after a police officer has given notice of an intent to arrest a criminal suspect, the suspect flees or forcibly resists, "the officer may use all the necessary means to effect the arrest." Acting under the authority of this statute, a Memphis police officer shot and killed appellee-respondent Garner's son as, after being told to halt, the son fled over a fence at night in the backyard of a house he was suspected of burglarizing. The officer used deadly force despite being "reasonably sure" the suspect was unarmed and thinking that he was 17 or 18 years old and of slight build. The father subsequently brought an action in Federal District Court, seeking damages under 42 U.S.C. 1983 for asserted violations of his son's constitutional rights. The District Court held that the statute and the officer's actions were constitutional. The Court of Appeals reversed.

Held:

The Tennessee statute is unconstitutional insofar as it authorizes the use of deadly force against, as in this case, an apparently unarmed, nondangerous fleeing suspect; such force may not be used unless necessary to prevent the escape and the officer has probable cause to believe that the suspect poses a significant threat of death or serious physical injury to the officer or others. Pp. 7-22. [471 U.S. 1, 2]

(a) Apprehension by the use of deadly force is a seizure subject to the Fourth Amendment's reasonableness requirement. To determine whether such a seizure is reasonable, the extent of the intrusion on the suspect's rights under that Amendment must be balanced against the governmental interests in effective law enforcement. This balancing process demonstrates that, notwithstanding probable cause to seize a suspect, an officer may not always do so by killing him. The use of deadly force to prevent the escape of all felony suspects, whatever the circumstances, is constitutionally unreasonable. Pp. 7-12.

(b) The Fourth Amendment, for purposes of this case, should not be construed in light of the common-law rule allowing the use of whatever force is necessary to effect the arrest of a fleeing felon. Changes in the legal and technological context mean that that rule is distorted almost beyond recognition when literally applied. Whereas felonies were formerly capital crimes, few are now, or can be, and many crimes classified as misdemeanors, or nonexistent, at common law are now felonies. Also, the common-law rule developed at a time when weapons were rudimentary. And, in light of the varied rules adopted in the States indicating a long-term movement away from the common-law rule, particularly in the police departments themselves, that rule is a dubious indicium of the constitutionality of the Tennessee statute. There is no indication that holding a police practice such as that authorized by the statute unreasonable will severely hamper effective law enforcement. Pp. 12-20.

(c) While burglary is a serious crime, the officer in this case could not reasonably have believed that the suspect - young, slight, and unarmed - posed any threat. Nor does the fact that an unarmed suspect has broken into a dwelling at night automatically mean he is dangerous. Pp. 20-22.

710 F.2d 240, affirmed and remanded.

 

[cmort666]

It's logical fallacy to attempt to disprove a rule by citing an exception.

The rule is that you have no control over what strangers will do, when or where.

You only have control over what YOU will do.

Statistics are a poor form of protection. When someone decides to target you, your odds of being a target are 100%.

I've never believed that "Insh Allah!" served anyone well outside the United States. I've never seen it do any better here.

 

[JohnSW]

Very first thing your going to pick up.

The phone, to call 911. Our suburban police department has a very fast response time. Other than that, my 640 would suffice.

 

[Lee's Landing Billy]

No, I'm pretty sure he's saying that he doesn't, under any circumstances, open his door unless he's leaving or entering. I know people of similar ilk . . .

Oh!!! So now I'm ilk?!?!