What does your home defense plan consist of?

Motion detector lighting that covers all sides of the house as well as same for the outbuildings.

This house has single-hung windows in which the lower sections of the window slides up and down. Have taken broom handles , cut them to length and mounted them in the upper portion of the window so the bottom window can't be slid up from the outside.

Rose bush's on treliss's under lower bedroom windows. The rest of the shrubbery kept trimmed. Less hiding spots for prowlers.

On inside of basement entry door, there are chimes hanging that make a lot of racket when door is opened.

There are "baby minder's" in the outbuildings with the monitor's in the bedroom. They work well...ask the coon that got in the garage. :rolleyes:

There are other small things done but IMO, you just can't beat a good dog.
There are two here that will alert us to someone outside.

Someone in an earlier post made reference to equipping your house so a possible perp will find an easier target elsewhere. IMO, that's the key to lessening my chances of possibly having an issue and depending on how the house is laid out, those ways may vary. Just takes a little thought about our own setups.
 
Last edited:
HeadHunter said:
StainlessSteel215 said:
Anywhere in USA, even southern states like Florida that adopted the stand your ground laws. There is VERY specific language that went into legislation when these laws were crafted. You have to really prove without a shred of doubt that you had no way to exit the house safely before discharging your firearm at an intruder. Im telling you, you'd be surprised!
Click to expand...
Well, in a word, NO. That's just not true. In Massachusetts that was true years ago. North Carolina was about the last Southern state that had weird Castle Doctrine and even it's been changed. In South Carolina, the Attorney General issued a public statement that people should shoot intruders in their home. In Georgia, our Castle Doctrine has existed for the better part of 100 years. No retreat is necessary.
Click to expand...
I've been pretty tied up the last few days and missed SS215's comment. So let me help HH clarify things.

Every Stand Your Ground/Castle Doctrine law has one or more conditions that must be satisfied in order to come within its protections, but in no case is the inability to retreat one of those conditions.

I discussed the Florida law in some detail in this post:
Frank Ettin said:
...[3] The Florida's Castle Doctrine/Stand You Ground law at Section 776.013 helps by providing, among other things:
(1) A person is presumed to have held a reasonable fear of imminent peril of death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another when using defensive force that is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm to another if:

(a) The person against whom the defensive force was used was in the process of unlawfully and forcefully entering, or had unlawfully and forcibly entered, a dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle, or if that person had removed or was attempting to remove another against that person’s will from the dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle; and

(b) The person who uses defensive force knew or had reason to believe that an unlawful and forcible entry or unlawful and forcible act was occurring or had occurred.​

(2) The presumption set forth in subsection (1) does not apply if:...
Click to expand...

[3] A presumption is a rule that affects evidence and burden of proof in court. Ordinarily, one who asserts something in court will have the burden of proving, by presenting good evidence, that certain facts supporting that assertion are true. But sometimes the law might allow one of those facts to be accepted as true without specific evidence of that fact if the party with the burden of proof shows that certain other facts are true. So the party might be entitled under a rule of law to have fact A presumed to be true if facts B, C, and D are shown to be true, even if the party produces no direct evidence that fact A is true.

[4] So you can establish that your use of lethal force was justified, thus satisfying 776.012, if --

  1. You can show that

    • The person you used force against was, "...in the process of unlawfully and forcefully entering, or had unlawfully and forcibly entered, a dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle, or if that person had removed or was attempting to remove another against that person’s will..."; and

    • You, "...knew or had reason to believe that an unlawful and forcible entry or unlawful and forcible act was occurring or had occurred...."

  2. None of the exceptions in 776.013(2) apply.

And if you can do that, you don't have to specifically establish that you believed, "...that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself...."

[5] But note that you don't get the presumption automatically. You need to show that the conditions that create the presumption exist. That might be easier than showing a fear of imminent death or great bodily harm, but you still must do some work to establish your claim of justification. ...
Click to expand...

The Florida law is fairly typical of Castle Doctrine/Stand Your Ground laws. They help one establish one or more threshold legal requirements for justifying one's use of lethal force by providing one or more helpful presumptions. But one would still have to establish the facts giving rise to those presumptions.

In any case, Castle Doctrine/Stand Your Ground laws are not "licenses to kill" or "get out of jail free cards."
 
First Line of Defense Neighborhood Watch blessed with extremely nosy neighbors serious about their safety and protecting their belongings.

Second Line of Defense Most houses here are bristled with security lights. When the Watch was first enacted, most of the neighbors installed motion detectors, which I already sported, to the liaison officer's delight. There were a few nights of dozens of lights kicking on and the sound of rattling fences all over the block.;) It pretty much stopped after that. (~10 yrs)

Third Line of Defense Strong locks on doors and windows, and braces where needed.

Fourth Line of Defense Security system with cameras and video. I don't have this in my present home as I am moving, but it will be installed in the new home. Security lights are already there, along with the locks and braces and I fully intend to enact a Neighborhood Watch when I become a full-time resident.

Fifth Line of DefenseCurrently a Kimber Ultra CDP in .45 ACP, my EDC, due to small spaces. When I move, either a Mossberg 930 SPX or a Colt 6721 as I haven't really decided on which, but it's nice to have options.
 
My defense plan - Blow em away, oh wait that is my Zombie everything plan

My defensive lines are simple
First line - DOGS.
Second line - Lights
Third - 45 ACP
 
I live in an apartment with roommates, they're 21 and in college, they fit the stereotype for that particular group of people completely (getting drunk and coming and going and banging around at all hours of the night). I am paranoid, in Afghanistan I lived in a compound that had been overrun twice before the Marines took it over so I slept lightly. I have to tiptoe with my defense plan.

My roommates aren't dumb enough (at least I hope) to come banging on my bedroom door at 3am. I have nothing to defend in my apartment that isn't in my bedroom. My plan is to sit with my Mossberg 590 with my br door locked until it gets banged on. Then I'll ask who it is. If I dont get an answer after a try or two I call the cops and wait for my door to be breached, when that happens someone gets a face full of 00. No solo room clearing for me, just sit and wait and listen.
 
Outside motion lites, a loud dog, a loaded gun. I am looking at a wireless video camera system that is very mobile, you can move the cameras around easily, hook up to a vid recorder and woila. I got a friend has some very interesting items for watching the place, cameras look like rocks etc. A person should never be caught in his own home like many do.
 
I have quite a few layers of defense but also realize every plan is vulnerable, even if your home is built like a castle.
 
Motion lights, a few decent cameras, beyond that I sleep with a loaded hangun in a holster next to my bed, an 870 defender model behind my bedroom door.

My last line of defense...."...any occupant of a dwelling is justified in using any degree of physical force, including deadly physical force, against another person when that other person has made an unlawful entry into the dwelling, and when the occupant has a reasonable belief that such other person has committed a crime in the dwelling in addition to the uninvited entry, or is committing or intends to commit a crime against a person or property in addition to the uninvited entry, and when the occupant reasonably believes that such other person might use any physical force, no matter how slight, against any occupant." Colorado 18-1-704.5 Use of deadly physical force against an intruder.

Without a doubt the best "castle doctrine" law in the entire country.
 
My room has all of my personal items, I am ready if someone wants to take my things, they can have what they want, as long as they don't come in my bedroom. Nothing worth me getting killed/shot/hurt over outside of my bedroom. My bedroom is safe, my daily ccw's are on my dresser and ready to go.

I think you are safest in your room, don't roam around your house because someone could be hiding and jump you, or sneak up on you. House phone + cell phone are on my dresser also. It also proves to courts that you are in defense mode and didn't go and search out your invader. If he comes in thats his problem. I don't want to leave my room and get owned, if my door moves I know where the person is. My dog is 14 years old and is pretty much out of the question of barking, he is pretty subdued around people now.
 
Not in Missouri

First, I don't know about Philly, but in Missouri, the Castle Doctrine insures that you will not be sent to prison.

That said:
1. exterior lighting
2. replace the Glock with a 12guage loaded with buckshot (don't even need to be a GOOD shot!!)
 
I'd feel pretty vulnerable with out a good dog. I rely on that dog to hear what I can't hear. I can also count on the dog to fight pretty viciously if anyone gets in. That will give me enough time to limber up the gun du jour.
 
noosredna

Welcome to TFL.

I like your idea of the shotgun but...

First, I don't know about Philly, but in Missouri, the Castle Doctrine insures that you will not be sent to prison.
Click to expand...

...you may want to elaborate on that part a bit. Especially the 'insures' part. ;)
 
Last edited:
noosredna said:
...in Missouri, the Castle Doctrine insures that you will not be sent to prison...
Click to expand...
Nope, sorry. You don't understand Castle Doctrine/Stand Your Ground laws. See my discussion of that topic in post 22:
Frank Ettin said:
HeadHunter said:
StainlessSteel215 said:
Anywhere in USA, even southern states like Florida that adopted the stand your ground laws. There is VERY specific language that went into legislation when these laws were crafted. You have to really prove without a shred of doubt that you had no way to exit the house safely before discharging your firearm at an intruder. Im telling you, you'd be surprised!
Click to expand...
Well, in a word, NO. That's just not true. In Massachusetts that was true years ago. North Carolina was about the last Southern state that had weird Castle Doctrine and even it's been changed. In South Carolina, the Attorney General issued a public statement that people should shoot intruders in their home. In Georgia, our Castle Doctrine has existed for the better part of 100 years. No retreat is necessary.
Click to expand...
I've been pretty tied up the last few days and missed SS215's comment. So let me help HH clarify things.

Every Stand Your Ground/Castle Doctrine law has one or more conditions that must be satisfied in order to come within its protections, but in no case is the inability to retreat one of those conditions.

I discussed the Florida law in some detail in this post:
Frank Ettin said:
...[3] The Florida's Castle Doctrine/Stand You Ground law at Section 776.013 helps by providing, among other things:
(1) A person is presumed to have held a reasonable fear of imminent peril of death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another when using defensive force that is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm to another if:

(a) The person against whom the defensive force was used was in the process of unlawfully and forcefully entering, or had unlawfully and forcibly entered, a dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle, or if that person had removed or was attempting to remove another against that person’s will from the dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle; and

(b) The person who uses defensive force knew or had reason to believe that an unlawful and forcible entry or unlawful and forcible act was occurring or had occurred.​

(2) The presumption set forth in subsection (1) does not apply if:...
Click to expand...

[3] A presumption is a rule that affects evidence and burden of proof in court. Ordinarily, one who asserts something in court will have the burden of proving, by presenting good evidence, that certain facts supporting that assertion are true. But sometimes the law might allow one of those facts to be accepted as true without specific evidence of that fact if the party with the burden of proof shows that certain other facts are true. So the party might be entitled under a rule of law to have fact A presumed to be true if facts B, C, and D are shown to be true, even if the party produces no direct evidence that fact A is true.

[4] So you can establish that your use of lethal force was justified, thus satisfying 776.012, if --

  1. You can show that

    • The person you used force against was, "...in the process of unlawfully and forcefully entering, or had unlawfully and forcibly entered, a dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle, or if that person had removed or was attempting to remove another against that person’s will..."; and

    • You, "...knew or had reason to believe that an unlawful and forcible entry or unlawful and forcible act was occurring or had occurred...."

  2. None of the exceptions in 776.013(2) apply.

And if you can do that, you don't have to specifically establish that you believed, "...that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself...."

[5] But note that you don't get the presumption automatically. You need to show that the conditions that create the presumption exist. That might be easier than showing a fear of imminent death or great bodily harm, but you still must do some work to establish your claim of justification. ...
Click to expand...

The Florida law is fairly typical of Castle Doctrine/Stand Your Ground laws. They help one establish one or more threshold legal requirements for justifying one's use of lethal force by providing one or more helpful presumptions. But one would still have to establish the facts giving rise to those presumptions.

In any case, Castle Doctrine/Stand Your Ground laws are not "licenses to kill" or "get out of jail free cards."
Click to expand...
 
Wow...great post Frank and 100% unaware that inability to exit the home wasnt a STRONG requirement like it is in PA. I thought most states that adopted SYG type laws all had a version of this in place. Now we know...thanks for taking the time to post that.
 
Coupla differences I've noted among state 'castle' laws:
  • In some, entry must have occurred; in others, an unlawful attempt will suffice
  • Entry must be made or attempted with force in some states, but not inothers
  • In some but not all, the defender must be defending an occupied residence

Don't rely on the letter of the law alone. In Missouri, for example, the supreme court approved jury instructions place a greater burden on the defender than the statute itself would seem to.

Know the law, assume nothing, and don't shoot unless you have to.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top