hardworker
New member
Or just load it with 38. Problem solved
Not to beat the dead horse, but homes should be 'fortified' enough to give you warning time to:
1. get the gun
2. call the law
3. put on muffs
4. hunker down - (yes, you might have to go save the kids).
Protecting your hearing - that means you are waiting to shoot someone?
A break-in and they come to you as you are on the phone to the law,
One's use of reloads is most, most unlikely to be "used against" one.Posted by Salmoneye: After all that, if you indeed have to shoot someone in self defence, won't all these 'premeditated' actions be used against you just the same as the oft repeated mantra of "Reloads Are Evil For SD/HD"?
YMMV - if you don't like the reload risk, you are stretching it in some kind of reaction formation or cognitive dissonance.
With electronic muffs, you can talk on the phone. And we do have more than one set.
But I suggest you don't call the cops if someone breaks in or hunker down. Sounds like a good plan to go with the reloads.
One's use of reloads is most, most unlikely to be "used against" one.
The idea that getting one's gun if there is a break-in could be characterized as an indication of premeditation is preposterous; it is not the same as putting on your firearm before going out to discuss a grievance with someone...
...as would characterizing calling the law as premeditation; who would call the law as he or she undertakes the murder of someone?
If you think there is a possibility that you are going to have to fire a gun indoors, putting on muffs would simply be prudent; many trainers recommend it.
Which would be more likely to indicate the possibility of premeditation, walking forth with gun in hand to meet someone in your house, or getting into a defensive postion and shooting only if that someone should come into your saferoom?
You did ask a question: "won't all these 'premeditated' actions be used against you...". Your question has been addressed. I saw no reasoning behind it. perhaps you could explain.Posted by Salmoneye: I asked a sincere legitimate question; gave my reasoning behind my concerns;...
With the majority of home invasions occurring during the day, your strategy should encompass more than reacting from your bed.I will have maybe 2 seconds (at most) from door to bed, and they won't be wasted grabbing hearing protection...
You did ask a question: "won't all these 'premeditated' actions be used against you...". Your question has been addressed. I saw no reasoning behind it. perhaps you could explain.Posted by Salmoneye: I asked a sincere legitimate question; gave my reasoning behind my concerns;...
Quote:
I will have maybe 2 seconds (at most) from door to bed, and they won't be wasted grabbing hearing protection...
With the majority of home invasions occurring during the day, your strategy should encompass more than reacting from your bed.
Dr. Meyer's comment was "but homes should be 'fortified' enough to give you warning time to....". If the door is the only means of ingress, address 'fortification' inherent in the door. If not, do not stop there. There's plenty to study on the subject.
One more time, the reason has to do almost entirely with the rules of admissibility of forensic scientific trace evidence, and with the risk that the inadmissibility of certain evidence could, under some circumstances, tip the scales against the defendant in court. That has been explained repeatedly and at length. See the link above.Posted by Salmoneye: [(in response to "one's use of reloads is most, most unlikely to be 'used against' one)] Then why since I found this forum (and a few others) have I seen the question at least once a month about reloads, and 90% of the responses saying that they should not be carried?
In combination with a lot of other evidence pertaining to state of mind, the use of reloads devised to have unusually destructive capability could conceivably be used to the disadvantage of the defendant in a case with a lot of questions. But that is a very, very secondary reason for not using reloads. It's not on my list.They may indeed be correct that a case could be made by a DA to a Jury that reloads showed an intent or 'want' to do more harm than just protecting one's self..
Therefore it is not very valid at all.If so, then that makes my first question about the list of 'preparations' culminating with donning hearing protection more valid in my mind...
Hmmmm.. someone breaks into your house, unlawfully and with force, and you believe that someone will say that you had been planning to shoot that someone because you grabbed you gun, sought help, and took defensive measures?I believe that in the right situation, with the right DA, all of that could be taken as a WHOLE as to be made to LOOK like someone had been 'planning' on having to shoot someone...The hearing protection clinches it for the DA (just a theory)..
Not in most states.If you have that much time, don't many trainers also recommend leaving the building?
Better choice than the .32 Long that we had for years.BTW...To get this back on track, I do not feel that .357 is good indoors, thus the .38 S&W (not special) at the head of the bed, and it even has Winchester factory ammo in it...
Anything that can be used against you will be. But some things that may have a potential downside also have enough upside to make them worthwhile. As someone who now wears hearing aids, anything that will help protect what's left of my hearing is just such a thing.Salmoneye said:...They may indeed be correct that a case could be made by a DA to a Jury that reloads showed an intent or 'want' to do more harm than just protecting one's self...If so, then that makes my first question about the list of 'preparations' culminating with donning hearing protection more valid in my mind...
@melcob: After giving few rounds and also reading your advices, 1st two rounds of my Taurus 651 are loaded with .38 Golden Saber +P 125grain; if threat is not down, dialogue will go on with 3 rounds of .357 HP Blazer 158 grain. Now a pair of air muffs are next to my bed side JIC
And who knows if Glock 19 will join in the future anyway...
My thanks
.357 for Home Defense?
In a S&W 686+ 6", is it too loud or too much recoil to use effectively in a self defense situation? Would the noise and blast make you hesitate more between shots?
I've shot one before and it didnt seem too bad, but I'm sure it's differet when you just woke up in the middle of the night and it's pitch black.
Anybody remember the OP?