I would be willing to bet that most of the deaths related to the break-ins above are due to the homeowners not having much practice with their weapons. Just sort of a spray and pray approach it appears.

I keep a loaded Glock .40 under my bed (no children) in the case of a break-in. In the case of a break-in, I'd like to think I could handle shooting below the waist, if I felt shooting was necessary. Now if the intruder has a weapon clearly visible, I will be going straight for the chest.

I also keep a loaded (birdshot) 12 ga. Winchester nearby. But that's only for multiple intruders

True story...

I and a couple of other dumb high school kids get invited out to a girls house. She claimed her parents were not going to be home. We show up and no lights are on and we think she just fell asleep so we proceed to go wrap on the girls window to see if we can wake her up.

Turns out the parents were home the dad hears us and comes out a blazin. Lucky for us he couldn't hit a broad side of a barn. I ****ing shit my pants and I tell you what I probably sprinted a mile in under 3 minutes.

He called the cops and reported that he was trying to shoot some guys trying to steal his stuff. Cops found out what actually happened and he got in some shit over it. If he had hit any of us he would have been up for manslaughter and a high school kid would have been dead over nothing.

I guess what I am trying to say is the whole ****ing shoot first and ask questions later line is bullshit. I have no problem with someone shooting someone if there is a danger. But you better be sure there is actual danger and not just some dumb kid or anything else like that.

Lots of gangstaz in this thread.

http://panhandleprint.files.wordpres...stiwaslike.jpg

I don't think I would have shot the guy and I know its easy for me to say not having been in the situation but in real time I guess anything could have happened.I definitely would have let him know I had one and let him hear me chamber a round just in case he didn't know what it sounded like.
Posted via Mobile Device

It's not gangsta to have a policy of shooting intruders in one's home. It's pretty much why we have the Castle doctrine. Naturally, a few people are deriding the position, and pretending that they can somehow find a 100% safe position.

The problem is that hesitating can get the homeowner killed.

Those of you opposed to 'just shooting' someone in your home, please post your full addresses in this thread. Thanks.

This. A criminal should have no rights whatsover during the commission of a home invasion.

you guys need to make sure you understand the castle doctrine. Not just a vague idea but the brass tacs.
I have zero problem killing an intruded who is a danger. none. Shoot them in the face and shoot them again for good measure.

But imo if you have ANY kind of tactical relationship with a weapon, shooting a intruder or suspect on site is a huge over kill that could land you in the pen.

Permutations vary state-to-state. The basic concept remains the same.

It does to a point. Doesnt give you shoot first ask questions later rights.

Yep and you'd probably be surprised at the number of people that think taking a CCW class gives them a license to kill.
Posted via Mobile Device

Yes, it pretty much can, actually. The extent of that depends upon the state. The key, as is so often the case, is to be found in the interpretation of "reasonable".

Texas is a great example of this.

why the **** was he showering?

Big Richard... That instance you were outside. Its different inside one's home. Had you and your buddies walked into the home instead of knocking on the window, he would have every right to blow you away. Tragic? yes. Illegal? Absolutely not. And my guess is the old man missed on purpose.

Exactly. By all means.. shoot the shit out of a dangerous intruder.

The entire point of the arguments in this thread is that you better be damn sure of the situation once you make that decision. As the links and the stories in this thread have pointed out.... lots of people fail in that decision making process and end up shooting somebody that wasn't actually intending to do them harm. Just a few posts back, a high schooler got shot at just because of the home owner's daughter inviting him to the house. Had that homeowner been a better aim, he'd likely be in prison with an unnecessary death on his conscience.. Hard to continue to protect your family when you're in prison.

The internet tough guys act like it's an easy clear cut thing, to be in position to take another man's life in the heat of the moment.