Home defense with handgun

E

expresso-bongo

Inactive
Question for you legal types out there:

If a perp breaks into your home with intent, is it better to off him or wound him? I hear of wounded jerks suing the homeowner post recovery.
 
The laws will vary from state to state, and for a definitive answer, check with a lawyer.
Now that we have that part of the disclaimer over, if I am ever need in need of actually having my firearm out and at the ready, I will also be ready to shoot. And if I am in fear of my life, I will shoot for center mass. I do not think you defend your life by shooting to wound.
 
If you really want to get into legal tech, we do not off, cap, snuff (or any other slang) BG's, we stop them. Before you decide to shoot someone entering your home, find out what the exact law is in your area and how your local DA is going to view a shooting of this nature. Being sued is going to be the least of your problems. In most states, the use of deadly force to protect property, even in one's home, is a felony.

Robert
 
and your such a good shot that you think you can shoot a BG in the knee in the heat of the moment?

If you ever have to shoot someone in self defense, shoot to stop the threat!

Shoot to Live!, not to kill, wound...
 
Ditto what Robert said. If someone breaks into my house. I would have to fear for my life. And believe me I would. Then deadly force comes into defensive issue. If you have to defend your life then center of mass shots are best. My only intention is to stop the person from taking my life. You need to learn the key words to say to police and neighbors when and if you live through it."Feared for my life", "Thought he was going to kill me or my children" "I tried to stop his bleeding and give him some comfort" "I Called police as soon as I could" "Feared for my life and tried to stop him" But I hope we all never have a home invasion.

------------------
Courage is only fear that has said its prayers.
 
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by expresso-bongo:
Question for you legal types out there:

If a perp breaks into your home with intent, is it better to off him or wound him? I hear of wounded jerks suing the homeowner post recovery.[/quote]


Shoot to kill...
If the perp is in your home...remember, it's likely he's going to be more experienced then you...if you shoot to wound, he can still harm/kill you.

Also, for home defense, get a shotgun! A .410 will be fine.
 
NEVER, NEVER SHOOT TO WOUND,OR KILL!!!!!!
ALWAYS SHOOT TO STOP!!
IF THE BG JUST HAPPENS TO DIE IN THE PROCESS OF YOU STOPPING HIM, IT'S HIS OWN FAULT!!
HE SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN THREATENING YOU OR YOUR FAMILY WITH DEADLY FORCE IN THE FIRST PLACE!!!! :)

------------------
Just as there is no such thing as too much fun,
there is no such thing as owning just one gun!!!

Now, go do the right thing, and buy that Walther!!
 
Shoot to stop the threat. Shoot center mass one bullet or double taps at a time until the BG stops his actions. If he drops to the floor and is still searching in his jacket or pants shoot him again.
What you don't want is to unload an entire clip before observing whether or not he has stopped or not.
I personally would love to do it but a lawyer will eat you up with your intent to kill.

Never shoot to mame or injure. Thats worse then shooting to kill. You have to understand that most states allow shooting someone if your life or someone elses is in danger. If the threat was low enough that you only had to shoot a leg then you probably didn't need to shoot at all.
In addition, in a courtroom, a BG in a wheel chair is more dangerous to you then he was in your house.

Best thing to do is shoot till he stops and then if you want...
dial 911 reeeeaaalll slow. :)

------------------
"It is easier to get out of jail then it is a morgue"
Live long and defend yourself!
John 3:16
 
Few shooters have a clue about the legality of self defense. But to attempt to shoot to wound is out of the question. In fact, police at 21 feet or LESS have a miss rate of 92%. That should give you a clue.
The closer the target is to you the higher the miss rate also which stumps many. In a home you can be sure the range will more realistically be under 12 feet.
Civil suits can come from the deceased of the family if he/she is killed and if they survive they can sue.
Check with your homeowners insurance and you will find in almost all states State Farm and Alstate EXCLUDE intentional acts which self-defense is. Most insurance firms will NOT pay for such happenings and many are now limiting or failing to insure homes with guns. This is an anti-gun movement that is hitting many shooters and we don't hear much about.
 
Agree with the notion of shooting to stop. Aim for center mass and keep shooting until the violator is no longer a physical threat to you or others in the house. Of course, you should only be shooting in defense from physical harm or death, not protection of property.
Suggest that you read up on Massad Ayoob's "In The Gravest Extreme". This should be required reading for anyone who has a gun for self defense. You can order it from www.ayoob.com . This book will answer many common questions you may have about when you can and can't shoot, and how to handle many aspects of gun related self defense. It focuses on the legal and moral aspects of using deadly force.
 
Always "shoot to stop the threat."

Not to "kill," not to "wound."

Though of course stopping the threat may include the above. So to may missing, while scaring the hell out of the BG so that he runs.

On where and how to shoot: Shoot center mass until the threat is stopped. Center mass is the largest target on the human body- that is why you shoot there, not because of the vital organs contained there. You don't double-tap, or empty the magazine- you continue to engage the BG until the threat is stopped- be it one round, or ten. Though you will have to justify ten...

Erik
 
Agree. Now it coincidentally happens that the parts of the body which need to be shot in order most effectively and quickly incapacitate are the same ones which will make it more likely the perp will die (i.e. heart, lungs, CNS, other vitals). Well that's tough for the VTA. But you're still shooting to incapacitate the THREAT of your bodily harm. Until the VTA freezes and puts his hands over his head (or lies motionless), he's still a threat to make swiss cheese of (not to "kill").
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top