2nd Amendment

WilD wrote: Very true. If someone is going to kill you for your wallet, giving it to them is not going to greatly improve your odds of survival. I agree with the situational aware ness thing though. If they got the drop on you and you are held up, a gun in your pocket might as well be a thousand miles away.

Exactly. If you're already in the situation where you're held up, your holstered gun is useless. If you have time to ready a firearm before the confrontation starts, you're not yet in a confrontation and can thus remove yourself from the situation.

In the on-road scenario, the running (driving) like hell seems like the more solid plan. If your friend had tried to pull out a gun, they would have been a sitting target (literally) to have been killed.

That's not to say that there are no situations where having a gun is an advantage. There was a recent story of a guy prepping a property for rental. Two guys broke in and attempted to rob him at gunpoint. He faked a heart attack (or something) and while falling down, drew his concealed gun and killed both assailants.

You have to be able to fire and stop all assailants before any of them has opportunity to react.

Not opposed to concealed carry. I'm just opposed to the mindset that "I'm safe because I have a gun. Anybody who wants to attack me had better watch out."

Let me add 2 more things that seem to negate a lot of what people have said.

1) Situational awareness is great for a lot of things, but when they come to you in a hurry, as they did to me, just breaking in there's not a lot you could have done. And since I don't walk around carrying a gun that wouldn't have helped a whole lot either.

2) I "threw down the money". I showed them exactly where the $$ was and they grabbed it and then they tied me up and stuck the gun in my throat.

So, was there anything you could have reasonably done to make that situation turn out any better? Doesn't sound that way. Sometimes you're just in a E36 M3 situation that you have no control over.

Don't panic. Don't be confrontational. Don't show weakness.

In those situations where you do have a significant effect on the outcome, what is usually a best course of action? I still think that, for me, the best course of action doesn't include being armed.

Of course, I say this as someone who is very much a poor target. I'm young, healthy, male, not wealthy, and generally more aware of my surroundings and confident than the vast majority of people around me. I'm not enough of a target that I need to take special precautions.

I will say, if someone presses a gun to me, I'd actually rather be unarmed and trained in martial arts. It's really easy to disarm a gun if you know what you're doing. If you're unarmed, they won't suspect it either. Granted, that wouldn't work in your situation, with two attackers.

As far as I know there is nothing I could have done to make the situation come out any better or to have kept it from happening other than to have lived in another neighborhood. A smash and grab doesn't give you much time to react.

These guys were also robbing 7-11s all over town and shooting the clerks so there would be no witnesses. If they hadn't got in a hurry they would have shot me.

They were apprehended, I appeared in court and identified them and they went to jail for several lesser crimes since they had killed all the witnesses. They both got out in a couple of years and both went back in again later. I heard one of them got really messed up in a fight the second time he was in jail.

I tried to be calm and rational. I even was sweet talking the guy who had the gun to my head. At one time I reached up and moved the gun and told him I wasn't going anywhere nor was I going to do anything, it simply wasn't worth it. It still didn't calm him down, but it did ease the pain for a while.

The strange thing is that I wasn't really scared at the time but I got the night shakes for weeks afterwards.

link

this guy seemed to manage ok with a holstered weapon

Salanis wrote:

WilD wrote: Very true. If someone is going to kill you for your wallet, giving it to them is not going to greatly improve your odds of survival. I agree with the situational aware ness thing though. If they got the drop on you and you are held up, a gun in your pocket might as well be a thousand miles away.

Exactly. If you're already in the situation where you're held up, your holstered gun is useless. If you have time to ready a firearm before the confrontation starts, you're not yet in a confrontation and can thus remove yourself from the situation. In the on-road scenario, the running (driving) like hell seems like the more solid plan. If your friend had tried to pull out a gun, they would have been a sitting target (literally) to have been killed. That's not to say that there are no situations where having a gun is an advantage. There was a recent story of a guy prepping a property for rental. Two guys broke in and attempted to rob him at gunpoint. He faked a heart attack (or something) and while falling down, drew his concealed gun and killed both assailants. You have to be able to fire and stop all assailants before any of them has opportunity to react. Not opposed to concealed carry. I'm just opposed to the mindset that "I'm safe because I have a gun. Anybody who wants to attack me had better watch out."

I am happy to see some common sense break out on the Supreme Court.

About tossing your wallet at their feet and backing off; sure, that's an option. As noted in other posts in this thread, the guy robbing you probably does not have your best interests at heart .Outlawing weapons won't affect him in the least and would probably make him more likely to shoot, since dead men tell no (verbal) tales.

Holstered gun isnt useless if you give him your wallet and the second he turns to walk away you shoot him in the back.

You know, I hate to say this, but I don't think we're really in disagreement. I just don't feel concealed carrying would greatly benefit my own personal safety or the safety of the majority of people. It's a good thing that a portion of the population carries though.

I'm very glad the Supreme Court has made it explicit that the 2nd Amendment is a personal right, not just a communal one.

I also think that will help in future personal rights cases. It will makes it more explicit that the rights in the first 10 are personal ones.

you're right, Glenn. in that case, the gun is really useful for sending you to prison for attempted murder (or at least assault w/ a deadly weapon).

Yeah, but it would send a message to those people that if they try to mug people, they might get shot in the back by a crazy-liberal-fornian.

in my own little world anyone that uses the threat of deadly force to steal immediatly looses all protection under the law. Maybe the court doesnt agree with me but thats just how i feel. If i had the power to stop someone who uses deadly force to commit crimes, i let them go, and they went on to kill someone i would feel partialy responsible.

edit: In the video posted above it looks like the thief took 3 or 4 in the back as he tried to dodge out the door. I doubt the shooter is sitting in jail for that right now.

Having a gun is NOT a guarantee that you will always be safe, anyone who thinks that is a fool. But in the right circumstances it can definitely stack the deck in your favor.

Here in Chucktown a woman who ran a little escort (yeah, right) service out of her house has had murder charges dropped. It appears that she was being chased? attacked? in her house by a male former housemate (who was unarmed), she ran into her bedroom, got her .38 out of its hiding place and shot him as he broke through the bedroom door. The finding was self defense as he was 6'4", 275 pounds and she is 5'2", 108 pounds. In this case if she hadn't shot him it's very likely he would have killed her with his bare hands.

GlennS wrote: in my own little world anyone that uses the threat of deadly force to steal immediatly looses all protection under the law. Maybe the court doesnt agree with me but thats just how i feel. If i had the power to stop someone who uses deadly force to commit crimes, i let them go, and they went on to kill someone i would feel partialy responsible. edit: In the video posted above it looks like the thief took 3 or 4 in the back as he tried to dodge out the door. I doubt the shooter is sitting in jail for that right now.

some states have a "duty of retreat" requirement before you can use deadly force to protect yourself. it basically states that you have to run and hide if someone is breaking into your house, and can only use deadly force if you are cornered, and have nowhere else to run. in texas, you can use deadly force against anyone unlawfully in your house, regardless of whether they are coming or going, armed or not. i believe its called castle doctrine, and i'm sure Billy3 will correct me, but i think in texas it also extends to your personal vehicle.

GlennS wrote: edit: In the video posted above it looks like the thief took 3 or 4 in the back as he tried to dodge out the door. I doubt the shooter is sitting in jail for that right now.

The guy seemed to just kind of keep shooting. After those first two shots, it looked liked reflex just took over. He was clearly jumpy and nervous for the rest of the video. The thief wasn't retreating before the guy started shooting.

I don't like either of the "duty of retreat" or "if they're in your house you can gun them down" laws. Stupid kids breaking into a house to steal a PS3 shouldn't be gunned down. Although I would retreat to a defensible position and not directly confront an unknown assailant, I shouldn't have to wait until I'm cornered either.

Salanis wrote: Stupid kids breaking into a house to steal a PS3 shouldn't be gunned down.

I completely disagree. I think stupid kids should be gunned down for breaking into a house no matter what they intended to steal. I actually think if they were minors their parents should then get a bill for cleaning up the mess, fixing anything that got broken, and buying replacement ammo for the homeowner. Then maybe parents would take an active role in teaching their kids right from wrong and there would be fewer punk kids in the world.

And on the guy keeping shooting, one method of backing up a self-defense claim is to prove you were scared. One way to prove you were scared is to empty the clip. Just saying...

that, and you don't shoot to injure, to stop, or to scare in that situation, you shoot to kill

I'm going to argue semantics and say that you do shoot to stop. The best way to ensure an attacker stops is to shoot them in the places that will kill. If they happen to live after being shot in the torso several times, I'm not going to execute them.

And those kids breaking into the house are less likely to kill or injure someone than kids who decide it would be fun to try speeding around in the new car their parents bought them. There is more than one person on this board who has driven like a jackass when they were younger and turned out okay. I don't think people on this board would say that kids should get in a fiery crash and die for driving like a jackass.

Salanis, that's not a real good comparison. To go out screwing around in a car is dangerous and dumb, yeah. To break into someone's house is a completely different level of misbehavior; burglary is recognized as a felony for that reason.

Me, if someone breaks into my house and threatens my family, I won't worry about how young or old they are. I will take any opportunity to keep my family safe and if that means a 14 year old kid playing a stupid dangerous macho game goes down I won't hesitate if that's what is needed. It would cause me many a sleepless night but that's the breaks.

Okay. A stupid kid gets drunk at a party with friends, steals a car, and drives around drunk.

Would you say that he should get in a fiery crash and die?

I'd say that a drunken kid in a stolen car is a greater threat than the stupid kid trying to steal a couple hundred bucks worth of stuff.

If you feel that 14 y/o kid is a genuine threat (which they may well be), by all means, defend yourself and your family. I would not condone gunning them down as soon as you see them in your house.

If a stupid kid gets killed while burglarizing someone's house, I will probably feel about as bad as if he'd died while drunk driving though.

the kid driving drunk shouldn't have to die for it. they should be caught and arrested. hopefully they can be one of those 7 people a year DUI checkpoints actually catch.

when someone breaks into a home while the people are still inside it, i'd rather the "stupid kids" die than the innocent people about to sit down to dinner

Strizzo wrote: in texas, you can use deadly force against anyone unlawfully in your house, regardless of whether they are coming or going, armed or not. i believe its called castle doctrine, and i'm sure Billy3 will correct me, but i think in texas it also extends to your personal vehicle.

You're essentially right. Incidentally, it also extends to your workplace. I don't have the statute in front of me, but I remember discussing that when it passed.

Lots of things are legal in Texas. Like marrying your first cousin.

Dr. Hess wrote: Lots of things are legal in Texas. Like marrying your first cousin.

Naw that's Arkansas, and it's OK all the way up to and including your sister. They do draw the line at your Maw tho.

And look what it got us - Bill Clinton :p

Strizzo wrote: that, and you don't shoot to injure, to stop, or to scare in that situation, you shoot to kill

Minor detail here, but you DO shoot to stop, not kill.

I could shoot you with a .22 in the femoral that would kill you. With that fatal wound, if you were attacking me and a stage 3 BG, you still might kill me.

You shoot to stop. Most of the time, that's center mass, and a kill anyway. Hell, if you shoot and miss or miss center mass, and the BG stops, mission accomplished. There's been reports of guys curling up into a ball and crying just at the sight of a "victim" with a handgun/shotgun/whathaveyou.

I might have a longer post to follow, if I can put thoughts to paper...err...electrons.

Dr. Hess wrote: Lots of things are legal in Texas. Like marrying your first cousin.

IIRC, in Virginia, if you are pregnent and your parents agree, you can get married at 14.

As for home defense, my vote is a 12 ga. pump, there is just nothing like the sound of cambering a round in one.