In Tennessee, a person may use deadly force if he/she reasonably believes that he/she or a 3rd party is in imminent danger of serious bodily harm or death. Also, if someone breaks in to your home (comes in uninvited) that is prima facia evidence that they intend to cause serious bodily injury or death and you may use deadly force no matter if they are armed.
I couldnt believe this!
- Thread starter Offshootboy
- Start date
I live out in the country a ways at the end of a gravel road, we don't see much traffic. No one can mistake my home for theirs due to them being excessively intoxicated. I also have 2 small children and a pretty petite wife at home. So, someone comes into my home uninvited in the wee hours of the morning, I'm going to shoot them, and I'll shoot them until the fall down. Most likely it will be multiple shots, I don't care if it kills them or not, but they most certainly will no longer be a threat to me or my family. If I go to jail for that, for making sure my family stays safe at that time, so be it. I will not let my families safety suffer for fear of going to jail.
chrisandclauida2
New member
everyone needs to quit listening to a ccw instructor their best friend or the cop that pulled you over last week.
read you state and local statutes. when someone breaks into an occupied structure i.e. your own home while your in it what you are allowed to do varies.
in many states you can kill them where they stand. this is regardless of if they threaten you verbally or not. they wouldn't be there to give their offering to the church for the week to you.
other states require you to retreat before you can engage. this is a grey area cause you are already in your house and if you retreat your going to throw away options the further back into the corner you go. still you have to show you retreated before you engage
still other states require a threat beyond breaking in and the means to actually carry that threat out at that exact moment. it can be as stupid as the intruder says I'm going to shoot you dead but they dont have a gun so they cant carry the threat out right then. i know I'm nitpicking but so do many liberal prosecutors.
the majority of states allow deadly force when someone burglarises and occupied structure. in some states the difference between burglary or robbery is the occupation how they broke in if the used tools or even what they stole.
bottom line is this isn't the place to ask this question. i have seen so many flat out wrong answers....as far as my state is concerned but they may or may not be wrong in other states.
read the statutes for your state it will clearly state what is a justification for use of deadly force. teachers ccw instructors police or lawyers dont know it all and may twist the info, like firearms or ccw instructors, to reduce their liability.
read you state and local statutes. when someone breaks into an occupied structure i.e. your own home while your in it what you are allowed to do varies.
in many states you can kill them where they stand. this is regardless of if they threaten you verbally or not. they wouldn't be there to give their offering to the church for the week to you.
other states require you to retreat before you can engage. this is a grey area cause you are already in your house and if you retreat your going to throw away options the further back into the corner you go. still you have to show you retreated before you engage
still other states require a threat beyond breaking in and the means to actually carry that threat out at that exact moment. it can be as stupid as the intruder says I'm going to shoot you dead but they dont have a gun so they cant carry the threat out right then. i know I'm nitpicking but so do many liberal prosecutors.
the majority of states allow deadly force when someone burglarises and occupied structure. in some states the difference between burglary or robbery is the occupation how they broke in if the used tools or even what they stole.
bottom line is this isn't the place to ask this question. i have seen so many flat out wrong answers....as far as my state is concerned but they may or may not be wrong in other states.
read the statutes for your state it will clearly state what is a justification for use of deadly force. teachers ccw instructors police or lawyers dont know it all and may twist the info, like firearms or ccw instructors, to reduce their liability.
Rifleman 173
New member
Old policeman to rookie, "Know what the difference is between a burglar and a murderer?"
Rookie, "Hmmmm. No. Tell me."
Old policeman, "A burglar is a murderer who has NOT been confronted by the homeowner."
Rookie, "Got it. Now I understand why all the concern over burglars breaking into private homes when people are present."
Rookie, "Hmmmm. No. Tell me."
Old policeman, "A burglar is a murderer who has NOT been confronted by the homeowner."
Rookie, "Got it. Now I understand why all the concern over burglars breaking into private homes when people are present."
I suppose we should each have a lawyer we know available at all times? I haven't spoken to any I know in years. Is there a tax-sheltered legal fees fund like an HSA we can keep for such occasion?
Gah, and the pacifists moan that it shouldn't ever be necessary to have a gun...the necessity of keeping lawyers handy at all times is what bothers me.
Gah, and the pacifists moan that it shouldn't ever be necessary to have a gun...the necessity of keeping lawyers handy at all times is what bothers me.
Couple of things
1. A man with a baseball SHOULD BE considered a legitimate threat. You do not know if they have training with weapons. Krav Maga and other forms of martial arts teach some improvised weapons training. Goku Shoreii (sp?) is the art of kicking arse with a cane. Just because it doesn't go bang doesn't mean it isn't deadly.
2. IDENTIFY THE TARGET!! Shoudl have been point 1 I suppose. True, it could be a drunk that is confused, I have read a few stories about this. You never know. Just because I cannot see you, don't think I won't be drawing my weapon. I can aim it at you and light you up before I put my finger in the trigger guard. I personally feel that a tac-lite on your HD weapon is a gret investment.
3. Physical security. I wish I could send y'all a diagram of what we did to our doors, windows, etc. after the 3rd break-in, but I do not trust that it would stay out of the hands of those wishing me harm.
4. +10000 to the guy who gave the CORRECT verbage when spaeking to LEO's after an SD shooting. At work, we are taught to say something like this : "I felt that the (person,perp, subject) was an imminent threat to my life and/or the lives of others. I employed my weapon in such a manner as to neutralize said threat." Followed closely by "where's my lawyer?"
1. A man with a baseball SHOULD BE considered a legitimate threat. You do not know if they have training with weapons. Krav Maga and other forms of martial arts teach some improvised weapons training. Goku Shoreii (sp?) is the art of kicking arse with a cane. Just because it doesn't go bang doesn't mean it isn't deadly.
2. IDENTIFY THE TARGET!! Shoudl have been point 1 I suppose. True, it could be a drunk that is confused, I have read a few stories about this. You never know. Just because I cannot see you, don't think I won't be drawing my weapon. I can aim it at you and light you up before I put my finger in the trigger guard. I personally feel that a tac-lite on your HD weapon is a gret investment.
3. Physical security. I wish I could send y'all a diagram of what we did to our doors, windows, etc. after the 3rd break-in, but I do not trust that it would stay out of the hands of those wishing me harm.
4. +10000 to the guy who gave the CORRECT verbage when spaeking to LEO's after an SD shooting. At work, we are taught to say something like this : "I felt that the (person,perp, subject) was an imminent threat to my life and/or the lives of others. I employed my weapon in such a manner as to neutralize said threat." Followed closely by "where's my lawyer?"
Jermtheory
New member
im divided on alot of the arguments going on here.it would depend on specifics which i think are ambiguous and causing alot of the failure to see eye to eye.
but racking a shotgun sounds like an excellent warning to me.
ive actually heard that refered to as one good reason for a shotgun as a home defense weapon....immediately recognizable and unmistakenly threatening.
but racking a shotgun sounds like an excellent warning to me.
ive actually heard that refered to as one good reason for a shotgun as a home defense weapon....immediately recognizable and unmistakenly threatening.
Threads like this make me fear for the future of CCW in this country. There was a malpractice case in Mass where a pediatrician's internet comments were used against him. I hope to God that if I am ever in a situation where I have to convince a jury that I am a reasonable person I am not painted with the broad brush that people could use against all of us who are members of this board based on the comments of a few.
For instance this comment:
There are any number of reasons why someone might forceable enter your home without malicious intent, someone mentioned a few earlier. A jury is usually only going to find that you had a reasonable fear of bodily injury if you did indeed have a reasonable fear of bodily injury.
You really have to consider the culture we live in. The vast majority of people are not going to condone using lethal force to protect property, but the overwhelming majority of people would condone using lethal force to protect life or limb.
As for shooting a guy who is already down, circumstances have to be considered, but, I believe that most LE agencies now advocate the firing of three shots in rapid succession to stop a threat. I think that using this as a benchmark in your own use of lethal force would be a good idea, it at least gives you a basis for shooting that many shots, a sort of "state of the art" defense.
For instance this comment:
There are any number of reasons why someone might forceable enter your home without malicious intent, someone mentioned a few earlier. A jury is usually only going to find that you had a reasonable fear of bodily injury if you did indeed have a reasonable fear of bodily injury.
You really have to consider the culture we live in. The vast majority of people are not going to condone using lethal force to protect property, but the overwhelming majority of people would condone using lethal force to protect life or limb.
As for shooting a guy who is already down, circumstances have to be considered, but, I believe that most LE agencies now advocate the firing of three shots in rapid succession to stop a threat. I think that using this as a benchmark in your own use of lethal force would be a good idea, it at least gives you a basis for shooting that many shots, a sort of "state of the art" defense.
avenger-do you think crminals consider the ramifications? the fact of the matter is I have had the training, both in weapons and use of force. my job puts me in a position every day where I may be forced to take someone's life.
what scares me even more than someone breaking into my home is what he's going to do at the next house, especially if he manages to kill me and get me weapons.
also I don't apreciate your personal attacks on me.
what scares me even more than someone breaking into my home is what he's going to do at the next house, especially if he manages to kill me and get me weapons.
also I don't apreciate your personal attacks on me.
Im a big fan of the magazine full...chamber empty plan
Ive been shooting my pump shotgun 2-3 times a week clay shooting....shooting at LEAST 90 clays every time I go for the past 9 months or so. Ive gotten pretty fast with the thing....Pumping my action is faster than saying get the F*$@ out of my house before I send you out in a body bag......If it goes downhill from the time I rack the action I could have ...lets see 1,1/8 x 3 carry the one....3 and 3/8 ounces of metal in him before he could even think about drawing a bead on me.
Ive been shooting my pump shotgun 2-3 times a week clay shooting....shooting at LEAST 90 clays every time I go for the past 9 months or so. Ive gotten pretty fast with the thing....Pumping my action is faster than saying get the F*$@ out of my house before I send you out in a body bag......If it goes downhill from the time I rack the action I could have ...lets see 1,1/8 x 3 carry the one....3 and 3/8 ounces of metal in him before he could even think about drawing a bead on me.
thats what I'm saying
racking your shotgun lets the burglur know that you do have a weapon, and just about everyone in this country knows what that sound means. it lets the person know that they have made a poor decision and that if they want the chance to make better ones they'd better listen to any instructions that may follow.
racking your shotgun lets the burglur know that you do have a weapon, and just about everyone in this country knows what that sound means. it lets the person know that they have made a poor decision and that if they want the chance to make better ones they'd better listen to any instructions that may follow.
That's kinda the point, there is plenty of room between malicious and good, the real world is not really all that black and white, that's why the law has such things as "reasonable man" tests.
It is reasonable to think that someone is up to no good, but there are a couple more steps to take before you can reasonably be in fear of life or limb.
BTW, I'm not sure anyone is all that qualified to decide whether someone should live or die. Some of us find ourselves having to make such decisions, usually with incomplete data, that doesn't mean that we are qualified to do so.
It is reasonable to think that someone is up to no good, but there are a couple more steps to take before you can reasonably be in fear of life or limb.
BTW, I'm not sure anyone is all that qualified to decide whether someone should live or die. Some of us find ourselves having to make such decisions, usually with incomplete data, that doesn't mean that we are qualified to do so.