Wife calls and says man at door wont leave.

Status
Not open for further replies.
By definition if you have a loaded handgun on your person you cannot go to condition white. You must exercise care as it relates to the gun. You cannot zone out or you could accidentally discharge your gun. Happens to LEOs and citizens all the time. Do you "constant-carry" types keep the back-up gun on as well at home or is just the primary? Body armor? Sounds like a great life - cops and robbers 24/7. BTW, I especially like the interjection of "constant-carry" as I call it, in a thread regarding a woman who will not engage in any carry.
 
Mortimer,

Perhaps I misunderstood your meaning -- can you explain what you mean when you refer to the Cooper color codes? Also, where did you get your understanding of them?

pax
 
I think Cooper's wisdom is ageless. The "four rules" being the greatest and the "four conditions" being the second greatest. Call me old fashioned but I think highly of both of these mental approaches. Anyway, I don't know if you agree with my opinion of the Colonel, but I believe/assume, (you are a respected expert), you have read the "four conditions" and from Condition Yellow we know that: "You don't have to be armed in this state, but if you are armed you should be in Condition Yellow." Further it is stressful to remain in Condition Yellow and even though: "You can remain in Yellow for long periods, as long as you are able to 'Watch your six'" it cannot be healthy to be "geeked-up" even on a lower level for every minute of every waking hour. I am aware that you advocate "constant-carry" but I think it is unhealthy. Prayer, rest, meditation, fun, family, i.e. the good things in life are diminished/impossible in Condition Yellow. It is a commitment level.
 
Okay. I just wondered what you meant, since you appeared to be using a scale that is significantly different from the one Jeff Cooper developed when you talked about "being in orange."

We should probably start a fresh thread to discuss the color codes -- what they mean, and also what they don't mean.

pax
 
I misspoke, intended to say "yellow" as I am well aware of the conditions and their definition per Col. Cooper.
White = not geeked-up
Yellow = somewhat geeked-up
Orange = geeked-up
Red = really geeked-up
My take
 
TheNocturnus,

Please print out this article to discuss with your wife. It doesn't address firearms at all, but may be helpful to your conversation about what happened at the door. It's quite possible that embarrassment (unwillingness to be rude) played a big part in what she decided to do and say when the man was on the porch.

http://www.corneredcat.com/article/u...embarrassment/

Hope it helps.

pax
Click to expand...

What a great article. I will share it with my wife. I can also learn a thing or two from it. Thanks!
 
It's not terribly uncommon for burglars to knock to determine if anyone is home and if they get no answer, to attempt entry.
Click to expand...
Fine. Since I'm one of those "paranoids" that carries 24/7, I'd rather one attempt entry while I'm home than when I'm not. I'd rather stop a burglary in process than pick up what's left of my home later. I can see the front door from the family room, but it's about 40 feet away from me. And I can see from there who just came up the porch steps. Some open floor plans are great for that. Driveway alarms are great too. So are security systems with cameras. But nothing beats nosy neighbors. Neighborhood watches are best.
 
I'd rather one attempt entry while I'm home than when I'm not.
Click to expand...
Because home break-ins when the homeowner is at home never go badly for the homeowner?

Maybe I'm just different, but, given the choice, I find a property crime preferable to a violent confrontation.
 
Since I do not answer the door or the phone and since it has been noted in this thread that someone knocking might be just checking to see if anyone is home before attempting a break in,,,that makes things a whole lot more interesting....

Should I now always answer the door and the phone putting up with the nonsense and hassle of telling the person on the phone or at the door that I am not interested and if they are pushy having to hang up the phone or close the door on them,,,but if they were there just to see if anyone was home before attempting a break in and now seeing that I am home not attempting a break in,,,,

Or should I continue to not answer the phone or the door,,,eliminating all the nonsense and hassle of dealing with people but possibly setting up a potential break in and potential life threatening situation by someone on the phone or at the door who now thinks no one is home and will attempt a break in.

Personally with an alarm system and signs posted outside on every door and window on the house and with a dog and with police and medical only minutes away,,,I will continue to just not answer the phone or the door.
 
Because home break-ins when the homeowner is at home never go badly for the homeowner?

Maybe I'm just different, but, given the choice, I find a property crime preferable to a violent confrontation.
Click to expand...
Oh come off it, not everybody is looking to kill you, life itself is a gamble, and I prefer to have none of the above happen. How about a person breaks in for some quick cash or belongings, meets a pointed gun and runs like hell? I'll be willing to bet there's a lot more of that going on than that which makes the news. Personally, I've been a victim of theft and burglary too often to be one of those that comes home to a house askew and says "thank God we weren't home, lets call the insurance company so we can get back a third of our stuff!"
 
Oh come off it, not everybody is looking to kill you, life itself is a gamble, and I prefer to have none of the above happen.
Click to expand...
I'm sure that everyone feels exactly the same--they would prefer neither one happen.

But that wasn't what I was responding to. I was responding to your comment that you would rather encounter a criminal breaking into your house than to come home to find it had been broken into in your absence.

I certainly don't believe everyone is looking to kill me, but I do believe that confronting a criminal carries a lot more risk than being somewhere else while they're committing a crime. In fact, I can't imagine that anyone could argue logically against that assertion.
How about a person breaks in for some quick cash or belongings, meets a pointed gun and runs like hell?
Click to expand...
If I were guaranteed that I would be able to pick exactly how it goes down, that would change things. If I could magically insure that the person would run the instant he saw me, I'd take that option over a break-in while I was gone. Since there's no way to insure that, I'll still chose to avoid the encounter if given the choice.
I'll be willing to bet there's a lot more of that going on than that which makes the news.
Click to expand...
Sure, I'll bet there is too. But it doesn't always go like that, and I'm not willing to bet my life that my encounter would play out like that. If given the choice I'd simply avoid the encounter altogether.
Personally, I've been a victim of theft and burglary too often to be one of those that comes home to a house askew and says "thank God we weren't home, lets call the insurance company so we can get back a third of our stuff!"
Click to expand...
I understand what you're saying. Personally, I feel differently.
 
Stevie-Ray said:
"thank God we weren't home, lets call the insurance company so we can get back a third of our stuff!"
Click to expand...

You need a better insurance company.:eek:

You should be getting full replacement value. I know, my dad just went through this with his camp. Wasn't even his primary home, his homeowners covered it anyway and wrote him a check for 100% replacement value of everything he told them was damaged or missing.

Even if it was 1/3, I fully expect that to be less expensive than a lawyer.
 
Digression... Its like deja vu all over again...
But before I get back on topic with this here thread Lemme digress a bit first...

In response to the aspect of a burglary being better for me than being in the home when a burglary of an occupied dwelling commences... If they find my arms, than it will severely affect me for future protection since my financial lifestyle is such that dead presidents just doesn't exist en masse here making replacement tuff...

I have little in here to protect regarding property so insurance would be a net loss many fold in short order...

Now back to the topic...

Having been in sales of pest control services, I know anyone using such intimidating pressure would be in a bad way trying that with my wife...:eek: May Zeus watch over them if my wife did hand him a phone because he TOLD her to call me... "Sure Mr.Bell, I will be right home to listen to your pitch. Now tell my wife you will be waiting for me so make a pot of coffee...":cool:;)

My wife would have never gotten further than speaking thru the cracked open door at most informing them we are not interested and if they even try to pressure start a dialogue, they would get a polite but sharp, "Now move along..." as the door closes and the dogs are told to stand down...:mad:

Brent
 
But that wasn't what I was responding to. I was responding to your comment that you would rather encounter a criminal breaking into your house than to come home to find it had been broken into in your absence.
Click to expand...
And I stand by that comment, because I in fact, was responding to your statement:
It's not terribly uncommon for burglars to knock to determine if anyone is home and if they get no answer, to attempt entry.
Click to expand...
These particular burglars, I can practically guarantee, are NOT looking for a violent encounter, and will probably flee the scene empty handed at the sight of a determined homeowner holding a gun. I'd feel safer betting on those odds than betting on a safe return from my neighborhood 7-11.

Those looking for, or not caring about, a violent encounter are probably going to cave your door in without checking for occupance. But of course, that's JMO.
 
Give me a break.

99% of everybody goes through life like that and they're never a victim.
This isn't Somalia.
Being prepared is one thing, "you WILL be a victim." is quite another.
We measure violent crime in X per 100,000 numbers and "X" is a small number. In 2011, it was about 386 per 100,000 people. That's a 0.38% chance.
Considering that a SIGNIFICANT amount of that violence was gang/drug related and a significant percent more isolated to "trouble" areas, we're a long ways from "you WILL be a victim" nonsense.


It's your life pal and since you don't owe me any money I really don't care if you see tomorrow.
Odds are also small you will be in a car crash BUT I wear a seatbelt.
Odds are also small your house won't burn down BUT I have homeowners insurance.

Play the odds sport, Me? I cover my bases.;);););)
 
These particular burglars, I can practically guarantee, are NOT looking for a violent encounter...
Click to expand...
As should be abundantly obvious by now, neither am I. But it would be a tremendous error for someone to assume that because I am not looking for a violent encounter that I am also unprepared for one.

In the same vein, while I'm sure that the burglars in question do not want to encounter anyone, it would be a mistake to assume that just because they want to avoid danger that they're unprepared to deal with it if it does come their way.
In 2011, it was about 386 per 100,000 people. That's a 0.38% chance.
Click to expand...
That's across the whole country. Some areas have rates that are much higher, and at least one city in the U.S. has a violent crime rate over 2%.

Besides, while the chance of being a violent crime victim in any given year may be low, the odds get worse when one considers that most of us will live several decades. Finally, in spite of the low odds, people are the victims of violent crime every day. By all accounts it's a thin consolation for violent crime victims to realize that what happened to them was very unlikely.

More to the point, the fact that it is unlikely doesn't mean that we shouldn't take steps to make it even LESS likely if we can. In fact, if you look at any LE anti-crime information, it's heavily oriented towards preventing crime--primarily by educating people how to take steps to make themselves less attractive victims.
 
Because of this:

....while the chance of being a violent crime victim in any given year may be low, the odds get worse when one considers that most of us will live several decades.
Click to expand...

...this does not mean a whole lot:

99% of everybody goes through life like that and they're never a victim.
.... We measure violent crime in X per 100,000 numbers and "X" is a small number. In 2011, it was about 386 per 100,000 people. That's a 0.38% chance.
Click to expand...
On average, the lifetime chance of a twelve year old being attacked by a violent criminal actor at least once is about 50%.

But this thread is about violence at home. The majority of crimes against persons occur somewhere else.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top