Do You Challenge? With a Gun?

invention_45 quote:

If I entered and THEN discovered him in there, I'd draw and shoot. There's no way of knowing how a surprised criminal will react, and I wouldn't want to find out the hard way by hesitating.
Click to expand...

I'm surprised nobody has mentioned what a bad tactic that is.
(Probably too involved in their own long winded philosophical-emotional rants, I guess.)

Anyway, your "draw and shoot" in that situation is over the top.
Learn to draw, scope, challenge, detain.....then, if needed, defend yourself.

Here's a tip:
Most burglars are common thieves. Statistically they're not pros, killers, home invaders, junkies, etc.
Many times they're just kids not aware of the consequences of their actions.

That said, go easy with the trigger....but 'always' protect yourself from danger.

For your own good pal, get some basic training........quick!
.
 
Warning, what follows is just my opinion and I am just some chick on the internet. YMMV, professional driver/closed course, etc. etc. IMHO.

Nicely put, Springmom, and while we may use similar ideas and reasoning to reach divergent conclusions (or maybe not), I can see your side of it -- and perhaps a bit more of UnClint's, as well.

Every's mother's son is precious to her. But is that enough to always stay one's hand? It may be enough to stay society's hand; no judge or jury can see the crime as the victim saw it or know the perpetrator's true heart. But in the moment of the crime, when the decision is a matter of yes or no, to survive or sucumb, he who hesitates will lose. There are definite answers, but there may not be any good or satisfying answers and the person whose choice created that blind alley is the perp, not the prospective victim defending himself.


stephen426, we're not all that far apart, really; but Adam Smith's "invisible hand" can as readily weild a gun as a checkbook: if law-abiding citizens defend themselves against aggression, the greater social good will take care of itself. The broader interest is served by serving oneself, just as the grocer makes available a wide variety of tasty foods to you not from love, but for his own profit. Setting out to be "doing society a favor by offing some of these scumbags" is a goal all too easily perverted, especially if one is then tempted to take it upon oneself to cull the "scumbags" in advance. Been tried; can't be done. Like the poor, the lawless are ever with us. They must be dealt with one at a time, as they reveal themselves through direct actions against others. That said, I liked the Batman movies, too.


Skyguy, I think you just may be at a critical part of the matter. Some of what's going on here might be people taking a different meaning from similar words:
  • Don't draw unless you're ready to shoot.
  • Don't draw unless you intend to shoot.
  • Don't draw unless you're prepared to shoot.
  • Don't draw unless you are willing to shoot.
I have heard each one, and other versions besides, from many trainers and other gunnies and I never took them to mean that if I drew, I had to shoot -- only that if I went so far as to make my sidearm visible, I had darned well better understand that the situation was one that could rate, and might result in, gunfire.

But I don't know that everyone else took those words to mean that. On reflection, I can't say that I am completely sure every well-trained professional that ever uttered them to me meant them as I have taken them.

How do the others here interpret those words?
 
Good advice, Skyguy -- however I believe this comment of yours is a little superfluous:

Many times they're just kids not aware of the consequences of their actions.
Click to expand...

The flip-side of this coin is that "kids" are more dangerous because they are "not aware of the consequences of their actions."

And let's not fool ourselves -- even "kids" know the consequences of their actions enough to be aware that home invasion = bad news.

Let us also not refer to criminals as "kids" unless they actually fit the definition. I refuse to consider a 19 year old burglar a "kid". Or 18, or 17...

I remember when I was that age. People this age are capable of just as much ill intent as someone twice their age. To disregard this possibility, is dangerous and naive.
 
Roberta X said:
stephen426, we're not all that far apart, really; but Adam Smith's "invisible hand" can as readily weild a gun as a checkbook: if law-abiding citizens defend themselves against aggression, the greater social good will take care of itself. The broader interest is served by serving oneself, just as the grocer makes available a wide variety of tasty foods to you not from love, but for his own profit. Setting out to be "doing society a favor by offing some of these scumbags" is a goal all too easily perverted, especially if one is then tempted to take it upon oneself to cull the "scumbags" in advance. Been tried; can't be done. Like the poor, the lawless are ever with us. They must be dealt with one at a time, as they reveal themselves through direct actions against others. That said, I liked the Batman movies, too.
Click to expand...

Sorry Roberta... I was just venting. I am not advocating in any way, shape, or form genocide based on race, religion, color, creed, sex, or national origin. My first name is not Adolph and my last name certainly isn't Hitler. I am a minority myself and I bust my butt to make a better life for myself. I have no respect for those people who just cry about being victims and don't do anything to improve their lives. Instead, they prefer to live off of handouts and steal from others rather than working. This does not refer to any group in particular so don't think I am racist. In fact, I hate everyone equally! :D Just kidding.
 
Has this thread gone on so long as to incur Godwin's Law? --stephen426, I was thinking more of self-appointed vigilantes than any mob or movement when I cautioned against preemptive looks-like-a-badguy removal.

IMO, there's nothing wrong with unadorned venting but we really should come up with an icon, glyph or typographical convention to indicate it, a "ventie" to go along with all the "smilies," to delineate between unloading frustration and, what, "rabble-rousing?" Everyone fuliminates sometimes but few of us are after initiating anything when we do.

I think responsibility -- accepting it, being able to handle it, rejecting it or failing under it -- is a key component in being a healthy member of society. If there are enough responsible people around, just everyday responsible types, not even heros, then things get along pretty well. Fall below some critical proportion, though, and it starts to come apart. Successful societies have some means of encouraging the growth of responsibility in children who have an aptitude for it; in terms of success, it may not matter exactly how that's done just as long as it does.

Not all irresponsible people are criminals but just about all criminals are irresponsible. And that's pretty much what you said, stephen.
 
Obviously, we've lost our way in the quest to answer the question; Do You Challenge? With a Gun?

The tactical pertinence of long winded emotional and philosophical rants, genealogy, nit-picking, word meaning....escapes me.
I've learned nothing from these ramblings.
.
 
Just in case anyone missed the point of my little story, the answer to the question; Do You Challenge? With a Gun?; is yes, should circumstances warrant it.
 
Exactly, The answer is yes.

I will draw my weapon, asess the situation, IE: Identify the threat, Give verbal commands, and hope the situation de-escalates. BUT, when I draw said weapon, I will be willing to fire if NECESSARY.

If the " Unknown Person" can identify himself and his reason for being there to my satisfaction, Nuff said.

If He cannot or will not Identify himself, then He may lie on the ground in a safe (to Me) position until LE arrives, or he may exit the premises, at which time I will secure myself and wait for LE.

If He makes any threatning movements or gestures other than the above, TAP,TAP.
 
<Do you challenge with a gun>

Statutorily in most states you are empowered to use deadly force to defend yourself, but not to make idle conversation. That is a federal right under the First Ammendment, but will not be used as the law of decision in a state court. Actually, an admission on your part that you challenged could go against you in that it evidences you did not perceive an immediate threat but instead found time to chit chat. Then you gotta come up with another good reason why you suddenly felt threatened enough to open fire. Somewhere in all that legal mubo jumbo, a good prosecutor could start your goose cooking if you make a verbal slip, assuming you elect to take the stand or tak to the cops after you talk to your lawyer. And God forbid it ever comes out that your were yelling commands to the perp with your finger on the trigger in a tense and stressful situation, the adrenaline pumping, the muscles of your hands and fingers twitching like it's been proven scientifically they do, resulting in accidental firings, to which self defense statutes do not apply.
 
You would have to draw to have control of the situation. But, unless you have determined you are under an attack, or in danger, I would hate to shoot the wife sleepwalking.

The key to me would be before issuing commands, to scope the situation out a little bit more to see if the person is alone. If alone one can more in and begin to issue commands controlling the situation with the firearm.

If an instructor somwhere said to shoot in this situation, I am betting they have buried some family members, or will.

Shooting is final. Can't take it back.
 
Aww, I'd've written something shorter if I'd had time! (Mark Twain had the same problem but was way more interesting to read).

In answer to the question, yes -- but only if "HANDS UP! GET ON THE FLOOR!" counts as a challenge. And I'll accept running rapidly away as a reponse as good as or better than compliance: I'm not really in the prisoner-taking business.

...About those long, philosophical rants: there are conditions under which I will shoot with little or no warning. There are people, gunnies, who are horrified to think any of us clean and decent gun-owners would do such a thing. I feel obliged to (try to) explain. Done.
 
Drawing a weapon is not the same as actually using deadly force. If drawing the weapon prevents someone from getting killed, even a BG, it's probably worth it.

<<Actually, an admission on your part that you challenged could go against you in that it evidences you did not perceive an immediate threat but instead found time to chit chat. Then you gotta come up with another good reason why you suddenly felt threatened enough to open fire.>>

That's asinine. Having a gun in your hand isn't using deadly force. The reason you opened fire is that you felt your life was threatened. That can occur at any time based on the evolving situation. If you can't safely handle a weapon under stress you need to not have one. Depending on the situation, after you issue your verbal commands the BG might have:

1. Started to close with you. Even unarmed and with your weapon in it's holster a wrestling match is a deadly confrontation for a CCW.
2. Put a hand in his pocket, behind his back, in his pants, etc. You though he was going for a weapon.
3. Turned out to have a knife. If he's within 21 feet, he gets shot per the Tueler drill.
 
Exactly, The answer is yes.

I will draw my weapon, asess the situation, IE: Identify the threat, Give verbal commands, and hope the situation de-escalates. BUT, when I draw said weapon, I will be willing to fire if NECESSARY.

If the " Unknown Person" can identify himself and his reason for being there to my satisfaction, Nuff said.

If He cannot or will not Identify himself, then He may lie on the ground in a safe (to Me) position until LE arrives, or he may exit the premises, at which time I will secure myself and wait for LE.

If He makes any threatning movements or gestures other than the above, TAP,TAP.
Click to expand...

I agree exactly. This is essentially what I would do in such a situation. Regardless of what some might argue, I want my piece out of the holster and ready for use if necessary.
 
The Bottom Lines...

1) "I wonder who they are?" - not a question you want to be asking yourself 'after' you have drawn your firearm...but you might be in that position?

2) "I'll just scare them!' - not a good rationale to be having while you draw your firearm...

3) "How do I 'safely' handle this situation?' - a good question to be asking yourself...before you cross the line...

4) "Do they have a weapon?" - good preemptive thought!!!

5) "Officer, I live at such and such address...there's a stranger in my house...who I think might be a burglar...I'm outside on my cell phone... - not a bad idea!!!!

6) Okay...it's 3am...you're out in the country...and downstairs in the darkness of your own home...you hear someone ransacking your house...and you have a handgun on your nightstand - yep, it's a good idea to be loaded, drawn and ready!!!!! Now however it's still unpredictable ie. a lot depends on the layout of the place. Are you cornered? Do you have to enter the same room as the intruder to turn on the lights? Can you call from your cell phone and not be overheard? Is the stranger alone? Are there others outside? Lots of variables!!! Do you verbally challenge? Yes - but it's a judgement call and depends on your survey of the scene and the level of real perceived threat.
No - if you realistically fear being harmed when you challenge. Is this a wild eyed armed fiend with a gun in your house - or is this the problem teenager you've known for years from next door who thought you were gone on vacation? Not a nice batch of scenarios!!!!

7) A Gun Fight is a terrible thing!!! A Gun Fight is not a happy adventure!!!

8) An oz. of Prevention is worth a pound of cure.

9) Seriously, a well trained dog (in my case a few well trained dogs) can do what a gun cannot do ie. prevent the intruder from coming in, challenge the intruder if he does come in, defend you in the dark, scare the intruder, hold the intruder at bay...and keep their canine eyes and ears open while you get some sleep...and work even when the alarm system has failed!!!

10) If you do have a dog - make sure it's a well trained dog - 'cause you'll be liable for that too!!!! Yep a dog is again the bottom line - yep a good dobie is the best defense!!! :cool:
 
It simply would not be in my nature to shoot an intruder without first attempting to get him to yield at gunpoint, unless he was already coming at me, which is obvious.

But yeah, if you're gonna yell orders, Jack Bauer is a good character to try and imitate, voice wise.
 
I see no problem with the challenge with drawn gun if you know what you are about and the circumstances of using deadly force.
Click to expand...
me neither, especially if you can avoid having to shoot this way. However, it depends on: where.

Out in the public challanging is extremely dangerous because some concealed carrying bystander or police etc, might be motivated to interfere and "defend" the "harmless and unarmed" who is "being attacked" and that might lead to two good guys fighting each other.

So at home or in confined spaces I control anyway: yes, challange.
anywhere else: only if you can be very very sure to be the only one with a gun (or a knife at 20 yds etc...)

Glen, always a pleasure to read your posts and answer your threads!
 
good reason for factory trigger

Assuming you draw and then give orders (that is what I would do) have a factory trigger on that weapon.
 
My doors are always locked, and if someone I don't know (only one person, my best friend, has a key) breaks in here, I'll shoot first (loaded .38 in the bedroom) and deal with the consiquences later.
 
Roberta X said:
I have heard each one, and other versions besides, from many trainers and other gunnies and I never took them to mean that if I drew, I had to shoot -- only that if I went so far as to make my sidearm visible, I had darned well better understand that the situation was one that could rate, and might result in, gunfire.
Click to expand...
Yeah, that always bothered me too. When I was more of a newbie to a lot of these ideas, I had interpreted it as "don't draw unless you're going to immediately shoot, otherwise don't draw". I am honestly not sure why some people stick with this viewpoint. Granted, there are some situations in which that is your only option: you encounter someone in your living room, they rush you. That's not much of a dilemma; there's little or no time to react, and you have to shoot.

I remember reading a thread a while back about people who have had to draw their gun or display it in some fashion when confronted with danger (they were often in their cars at an intersection). In the vast majority of these situations, the sight of the weapon was enough to deter the aggressor. Drawing your gun and challenging are essentially the same thing, though you can always add to it with a loud, commanding voice.

Yes, you MUST be willing to use the weapon if you have drawn it, but it seems that in many cases, the deterrant effect of the weapon itself saves us quite a bit of complications. Not that we should count on it, but we shouldn't altogether discount it, either.

All this, and every fraction of every second that you are in a confrontation is full of variables the psychological stresses of which are extremely difficult to stay ahead of.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top