i'd go further -- deciding to act with aggression and force against one that is threatening it upon you cannot be malicious.Not everyone who wants the element of surprise in their own homes has malicious intent.
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***
i'd go further -- deciding to act with aggression and force against one that is threatening it upon you cannot be malicious.Not everyone who wants the element of surprise in their own homes has malicious intent.
No one is saying that though. Some of us just live in reality.i'd go further -- deciding to act with aggression and force against one that is threatening it upon you cannot be malicious.
That's still not malicious intent. You're pushing back against me on a perspective that I don't hold.No one is saying that though. Some of us just live in reality.
The John Wick types here are more likely to shoot senile Grandpa coming in the wrong door, or a cop doing a wellness check, than kill some team of ninja assassins.
But no one here’s mind is going to be changed. So carry on. Just don’t ask me for donations to your legal fund.
I don't get this thread.i'd go further -- deciding to act with aggression and force against one that is threatening it upon you cannot be malicious.
The cases cited addressed "reasonable" under the circumstances and would still be used as precedent. MA Supreme Court gave specific examples of what would be reasonable such as giving a verbal warning. What is reasonable is still a matter of fact for a jury to decide. 8A did moot prior case law holding that "a defendant must use every reasonable avenue of escape available to him."Case law on "duty on said occupant to retreat from such person unlawfully in said dwelling." would've been mooted by the legislation passed a half decade later, adding 8A.
Yeah, see you lost me on the “retaining your property” part.I don't get this thread.
My own initial response was clearly misinterpreted by some as a sort of John Wick vs Navy Seals scenario because I would rather have eyes on the person before announcing I have a gun, maintaining some element of surprise. Maybe I'll catch them trying to steal something valuable. If I simply yell, they might have time to leave with my property. If I catch them off guard, I can retain my property and can possibly have them arrested. Maybe they'll be scared enough to flee in a hurry without anything. Maybe yelling I have a gun will work to acare them off. Maybe it won't. I'd rather be looking at them when I tell them so I can see what their reaction is.
Wanting to maintain the element of surprise doesn't mean I want to or expect to kill the person. I just want as much advantage--in every benign sense of that word--in the situation as possible.
Is that so wrong?
I said nothing about shooting them.Yeah, see you lost me on the “retaining your property” part.
I think that’s a mindset issue. There is nothing in my house that costs more to replace than the legal fees of shooting someone.
Steal what you want. Leave the Conan comics though please!
I don't want to shoot anyone either, but I am not volunteering the information that I am armed unless I have eyes on the person inside my home and I know exactly where they are.
Different living situations might affect how one would respond. Imagine if you were in a loft or studio apartment.Not taking issue with what you're saying here; I think it's wise, in many ways. But in sitting here, thinking about my house? If I'm at the top of my stairs waiting for a target, "eyes on" isn't really an issue. "Ears on" would do. I know my home well enough that I'd feel comfortable tracking an intruder on the ground floor just by the sounds the rooms make as people walk through them.
I don't feel I'd need to wait to shout at them. Indeed, if they're in the dining room and I know they're there, there's zero line of sight between me and them. And they've presumably never been in the house before, so it's not like they know exactly where they're going. If they hear a loud voice from upstairs, they have no mental map for precisely where that voice is coming from.
It doesn't really give up an element of surprise, is what I'm saying. As I posted before, they're 90% sure you're upstairs even before they break in.
Please see posts #s 1-250.Just like my opinion of open carry in public.
I don't want you knowing what my level of protection is.
You will see it only when it is too late for you to do anything about it.
Now open carry in the woods where allowed is one thing or on my private property.
Why show your cards when you don't have to?
you and i are aligned.I don't get this thread.
My own initial response was clearly misinterpreted by some as a sort of John Wick vs Navy Seals scenario because I would rather have eyes on the person before announcing I have a gun, maintaining some element of surprise. Maybe I'll catch them trying to steal something valuable. If I simply yell, they might have time to leave with my property. If I catch them off guard, I can retain my property and can possibly have them arrested. Maybe they'll be scared enough to flee in a hurry without anything. Maybe yelling I have a gun will work to acare them off. Maybe it won't. I'd rather be looking at them when I tell them so I can see what their reaction is.
Wanting to maintain the element of surprise doesn't mean I want to or expect to kill the person. I just want as much advantage--in every benign sense of that word--in the situation as possible.
Is that so wrong?
My post was a complete joke for the record, I don't keep a cannon on top of my stair case.No one is saying that though. Some of us just live in reality.
The John Wick types here are more likely to shoot senile Grandpa coming in the wrong door, or a cop doing a wellness check, than kill some team of ninja assassins.
But no one here’s mind is going to be changed. So carry on. Just don’t ask me for donations to your legal fund.
And how will they know you did this?I would do just the opposite. Let them know you are armed and that you have called the police and they are on the way. When you are being sued for killing/maiming the guy that broke into your house (and you will) you will be questioned by the dead guy's families' lawyer. He will ask you if you did everything reasonable to prevent his client from being dead/wounded. If you did not do everything possible, he will exploit that to the jury, and may be able to convince them that you have some culpability. Obviously other factors can negate that.
Dave
This. He keeps it in his living room aimed at the door.My post was a complete joke for the record, I don't keep a cannon on top of my stair case.
I only have 1 floor
they'll know if he called after because most people would be half deaf and shouting into the phone after shooting in an enclosed space for the first timeAnd how will they know you did this?
Did you really call the cops before shooting the dude? ... or did you shoot him and call the cops 5 seconds after?
NES has some wild fantasies of how things actually play out.
you do you. it's not my stuff I'm worried about, it's my family. my wife will be calling 911, but remember how well that worked out in uvalde. violent criminals deserve violent ends.Let's be real, just call 911.
No one is going to break into your house.
If in a one and twenty million chance someone mistakenly does. You have no right to protect yourself anyways.
Let them steal every and anything they want and simply flee your residence.
No need or reason to tell them anything, but that you called 911.
There now you can close this thread...
While the main reason for suppressing my nightstand gun is to preserve night vision, hearing also weighs in the decision.they'll know if he called after because most people would be half deaf and shouting into the phone after shooting in an enclosed space for the first time
I'm considering adding night vision on top of my motion-activated lighting. Do you do goggles or is it on your scope?While the main reason for suppressing my nightstand gun is to preserve night vision, hearing also weighs in the decision.
That, and because i moved here to have the choice.
alternatively "bans on normal capacity magazines"why did you shoot him six times? Did you see the group I had going?
By "preserve night vision", I meant not blinding myself with muzzle flash rather than not blinding light-intensifying optics.I'm considering adding night vision on top of my motion-activated lighting.
Every year I tell myself I will take advantage of "night coyote season" to figure out what night vision setup (goggle or scope, visual or thermal) works best for me, then January 1st comes, I look at the thermometer, decide it can wait.Do you do goggles or is it on your scope?
By "preserve night vision", I meant not blinding myself with muzzle flash rather than not blinding light-intensifying optics.
I have my setup so entry areas go to full brightness and the bedrooms, hallway where I have a good position stay dark.Because of the event-triggered lighting, I haven't considered night vision as an indoor application. Any alarm in "Armed-Home" mode, the entirety of the non-bedroom space (including landscape lighting) goes to full brightness. And specific to CO/smoke alarms, all the lights (bedroom included) come on, and the furnace turns off.
Every year I tell myself I will take advantage of "night coyote season" to figure out what night vision setup (goggle or scope, visual or thermal) works best for me, then January 1st comes, I look at the thermometer, decide it can wait.
Let's be real, just call 911.
No one is going to break into your house.
If in a one and twenty million chance someone mistakenly does.
There now you can close this thread...
I do respect your confidence but you’re way off on this topic.
There are 2.5 million burglaries annually in the United States. 66% of these are home invasions. (US Department of Justice)
View attachment 757648
Key insights + statistics
• In 2017, the FBI reported 1,401,840 burglaries with 57.5% of all burglaries involving forcible entry. (Criminal Justice Information Services Division)
• There are 2.5 million burglaries annually in the United States. (FBI)
• Every 15 seconds a home burglary occurs in the United States. (Crimepreventiontips.com)
• A break-in occurs every 26 seconds in the US. (FBI)
• Homes without a security system are 300% more likely to be broken into and burglarized. (Alarms.org)
• 46.9% of people don’t have a home security system installed in their home. (The Zebra)
• 83% of would-be burglars check for the presence of an alarm system before attempting a break-in. (FBI)
• 34% of burglars use the front door when breaking into a home. (Bureau of Justice)
• There are 2.5 million burglaries annually in the United States. 66% of these are home invasions. (US Department of Justice)
• Police solve only 13% of reported burglary cases. (Pew Research Center)
But where do they occur?I do respect your confidence but you’re way off on this topic.
There are 2.5 million burglaries annually in the United States. 66% of these are home invasions. (US Department of Justice)
View attachment 757648
Key insights + statistics
• In 2017, the FBI reported 1,401,840 burglaries with 57.5% of all burglaries involving forcible entry. (Criminal Justice Information Services Division)
• There are 2.5 million burglaries annually in the United States. (FBI)
• Every 15 seconds a home burglary occurs in the United States. (Crimepreventiontips.com)
• A break-in occurs every 26 seconds in the US. (FBI)
• Homes without a security system are 300% more likely to be broken into and burglarized. (Alarms.org)
• 46.9% of people don’t have a home security system installed in their home. (The Zebra)
• 83% of would-be burglars check for the presence of an alarm system before attempting a break-in. (FBI)
• 34% of burglars use the front door when breaking into a home. (Bureau of Justice)
• There are 2.5 million burglaries annually in the United States. 66% of these are home invasions. (US Department of Justice)
• Police solve only 13% of reported burglary cases. (Pew Research Center)
It’s 2.5M. Spread them out however you like but I’d guess the burbs get hit a lot more than the cities. Single family homes in quiet neighborhoods are a much softer and more productive target than the 3rd floor of an apt building in the ghetto.But where do they occur?
Are we talking about suburban areas like Granby or Brockton?