lets say encounter him in your hallway and you command him to freeze. you dont know what weapons he has and you have not been able to assess his drunkenness yet. the second you said freeze, he turns toward your 5 year old's bedroom door, do you allow this move or do you terminate him, (reasonable fear for your child's safety). i figure if you have someone else in the house, you can reasonably fear for their safety.
-
If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership The benefits pay for the membership many times over.
-
Be sure to enter the NES/MFS May Giveaway ***Canik METE SFX***
Drunk teen things neighbors house is his, enters, shot to death.
- Thread starter G30
- Start date
If I tell an intruder to freeze and he does anything else other than freeze, I will pull the trigger. Who knows, in a quick second, what the intruder is going to do? If I wait, I or a loved one could end up injured or dead.
Whether I am alone in the house or not, if there is an intruder I fear for my safety.
What no one has mentioned yet is as you are engaging this intruder, you really don't know yet how many other intruders there might be somewhere in your house. Either the one you are engaging first immediately complies with your commands or you take action. You still have to clear the rest of the house, especially if you have other household members in areas you haven't been able to access yet.
It is your duty to secure the kids, wife and dog first. Then take action, then shut your mouth till you speak to a real criminal lawyer, no matter how justified you feel never make any statements to the cops. dont even answer if you fired the gun. just call 911 and state that there was a break in and shooting.
You can think whatever you want, but when you get woken up by a burglar alarm in the middle of the night, do you strap on a bat-belt with a variety of less-lethal options and have two free hands to use them just in case its a confused drunk?
SalemCat
Banned
I pray I never have to make that choice.
As do I, but mentally preparing and considering as many options as possible before hand is important too. Have you listened to any of LT Col Dave Grossman's bulletproof mind speeches? (On YouTube) Mentally rehearsing an encounter like this can drastically affect the outcome, rather than confronting it in actuality for the first time.
That Guy
Banned
I'm not sure how you're connecting race to this in any way. This case is absolutely nothing like the Martin case where a guy shot an unarmed kid outside after following him and initiating contact with him.
Regarding shooting an intruder in my home: I'm not going to jump straight to deadly force in my escalation of force drill unless I can see a weapon. If I see someone advancing up the stairs they get at least a verbal warning before I fire (in general - things change if they are charging, etc).
From a legal standpoint, this sounds like a good shoot, as the intruder was in the house after having come in through a window and setting off an alarm and then advancing up the stairs; however, from a moral standpoint that is something the homeowner and the homeowner alone will be left to contemplate because non of us will ever have all the facts. Did he shoot a teenager drunkenly stumbling up the stairs without ever telling him to stop or did he only shoot because an adult sized figure was charging up the stairs after ignoring commands? It makes a difference from a moral standpoint only - again, legally it sounds as if the homeowner was in the right. But, as NES members love to point out, there can certainly be a gap between what is right legally and what is right morally.
Once again I'd like to point out that taking the life of another human being is a traumatic experience that changes people for the rest of their lives, regardless of whether it was a justified killing or not. That trauma is amplified the closer and more personal a killing is, such as in your home. Read Dave Grossman's On Killing for the definitive look at the subject.
By all means, protect your home and your loved ones, but be aware that shooting someone will have traumatic consequences for you, so you might want to be aware of that as you're doing your mental shoot/don't shoot rehearsals.
Regarding shooting an intruder in my home: I'm not going to jump straight to deadly force in my escalation of force drill unless I can see a weapon. If I see someone advancing up the stairs they get at least a verbal warning before I fire (in general - things change if they are charging, etc).
From a legal standpoint, this sounds like a good shoot, as the intruder was in the house after having come in through a window and setting off an alarm and then advancing up the stairs; however, from a moral standpoint that is something the homeowner and the homeowner alone will be left to contemplate because non of us will ever have all the facts. Did he shoot a teenager drunkenly stumbling up the stairs without ever telling him to stop or did he only shoot because an adult sized figure was charging up the stairs after ignoring commands? It makes a difference from a moral standpoint only - again, legally it sounds as if the homeowner was in the right. But, as NES members love to point out, there can certainly be a gap between what is right legally and what is right morally.
Once again I'd like to point out that taking the life of another human being is a traumatic experience that changes people for the rest of their lives, regardless of whether it was a justified killing or not. That trauma is amplified the closer and more personal a killing is, such as in your home. Read Dave Grossman's On Killing for the definitive look at the subject.
By all means, protect your home and your loved ones, but be aware that shooting someone will have traumatic consequences for you, so you might want to be aware of that as you're doing your mental shoot/don't shoot rehearsals.
That Guy
Banned
I just re-read both of the articles in the links on page one and I see no mention of a warning shot being fired. Do you have a cite for that?
RE: Warning shots. I cannot come up with a scenario where I fire a warning shot in my home. A) where is that round going? B) A warning shot is just as likely to cause a panicked intruder to do something irrational like run straight at you as it is to make him do do what you want him to do (I've personally witnessed several reactions to being shot at for the first time and I promise you, some people immediately stop acting with any sense of intelligence or even self-preservation).
YMMV. Again, I can't come up with a scenario where I would use a warning shot - doesn't mean such a scenario doesn't exist.
RE: Warning shots. I cannot come up with a scenario where I fire a warning shot in my home. A) where is that round going? B) A warning shot is just as likely to cause a panicked intruder to do something irrational like run straight at you as it is to make him do do what you want him to do (I've personally witnessed several reactions to being shot at for the first time and I promise you, some people immediately stop acting with any sense of intelligence or even self-preservation).
YMMV. Again, I can't come up with a scenario where I would use a warning shot - doesn't mean such a scenario doesn't exist.
That Guy;3046797 But said:
Totally agree. Just because someone breaks into your home, you may be morally wrong in firing, regardless of what the superficial law might say. Remember, what's law today could change tomorrow. What matters is what is left on your conscience after all is said and done.
This is a complex topic. And you're right...we'll never know all the facts. Did he shoot just because his command to stop wasn't obeyed? Did the intruder pose a great threat? He may not have known whether or not the teenager was violent or not, and he wasn't waiting to find out when it may have been too late to save himself or family. I think we can all agree that we hope we never have to put in a situation where we have to make that decision. Once you pull that trigger, the shot can't be called back and you deal with all the moral and legal consequences of your actions.
That being said, it's easy for all of us to monday morning quarterback these situations. This guy was in the pitch dark with an intruder in his home. Sometimes you don't have time to rationalize all of this stuff and split second decisions are made.
Me? Here's to hoping my targets only consist of paper bulleyes at the range and that none of us ever have to make that sort of decisions these homeowners are put in!
That Guy
Banned
In what way? I'm curious to hear who that is directed at and what your justification for the statement is.
![[laugh]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/012.gif "Laugh [laugh]")
+1000 You guys can try to asses the situation, and your conscience all you want. If someone is in my home I'm emptying some mags and STOPPING ANY PERCEIVED THREAT! people like you can sort out the details later AFTER I know my daughter, and myself are safe.
we have no idea who initiated contact in the Trayvon case.
and no matter what you never give up the right to defend your life, no matter what law on some book says.
if you are worrying about that, a jar of anal lube would be a more appropriate side carry for you.
the "kid" was ****ing 16 for criss sake! In my generation "kids" of this age hauled ass at a factory. If instead of breaking into people's house he as pissing on the third rail or walked on train tracks and got wasted, would that be wrong? Tragedy for sure, but he's got to evaluate his choices of action in life.
these kids these are very well fed on the govt dime (your and my money) they have 6 inches and 50 pounds on me. I'm pretty effin tired and everything hurts, I enjoyed a little hand to hand a few years back. Today if you break into my house and are within eyesight, you are a threat to me.
Similar threads
