I highly doubt that a person would intentionally intrude into someone's home when they know the person is armed.

So if he had, say a knife, you would allow him to keep at you? Even if he wanted to kill you?

Well, I'm glad I don't live in a country that dosen't allow me to defend myself to the fullest extent.

Having shot at full body targets, I can say this: Hitting a thigh is quite difficult. Now, add the fact that you are scared (from the knowledge that someone is somewhere doing something in your house), tired, and it's dark. Possibility of hitting a thigh on purpose is very hard.

Actually, almost everyone here would agree to give the person a chance to leave. Or at least they would call "STOP!" (or something along those lines) before firing. Your gun is a last resort. The only thing is, the "resorts" go along very fast.


After giving the intruder a chance, of course.

In Rivers of Africa (1893), Winston Churchill observed:

If you will not fight for right when you can easily win without bloodshed; if you will not fight when your victory is sure and not too costly; you may come to the moment when you will have to fight with all the odds against you with only a precarious chance of survival. There may be a worse case. You may have to fight when there is not hope of victory at all, because it is better to perish than to live as slaves.

Anyone who boasts that they would kill another human being when there's another option has obviously never done so, and if they have, are beyond the pale and have left the human race behind.

I know police officers who have needed years of counseling for a single shooting due to the incredible amount of guilt and second-guessing that follows. If I had done this, if he hadn't done that, if, if, if. It can kill you.

Guns are something that have been a part of my life since I was in preschool, toting a little .22 rifle with my daddy squirrel hunting. I've been taught since I was that age that guns are weapons for the specific purpose of taking life, and that all other uses are training. Saying otherwise is wishful playtalk. I was also taught that if you draw a gun, your very next two actions should be to gain sight picture and fire. No exceptions.

I guess the difference is that if it ever comes to that for me, it'll be a case where I don't see an alternative. I don't like to think about having to kill another human being. Hell, I was in the military for 6 years, and I still don't like the idea. Will I if I must? Yes. My life is precious to me, as are the lives of my family. If someone forces me to make the choice between my life, or the lives of my family, and that of an aggressor, I will pull the trigger..

.. and probably immediately throw up.

I understand you have little knowledge of firearms in your country, but you are wrong on the defense portion of things. I understand Hollywood makes a pistol out to be a super weapon (They never miss in movies it seems), but in reality, its good for about 20 feet reliably, though it is very manuverable in close quarters and is a decent close quarters weapon. It is purely a defense weapon and anyone that thinks it can be used offensively in more than a crutch manner have never used one. That is why your boys in Iraq don't even bother to carry a pistol.

Only a rifle could be coined an offensive weapon.

-S

PS. If it is serious enough to put someone down, they probably deserve to die by the way.

PPS. You don't have to shoot to kill either by the way - just like a martial arts person - that is another Hollywood myth that anyone that gets shot in the torso dies. SHoot a leg if you have to. Problem is in this day in age, whether you use martial arts or guns and do not kill your attacker, you may get sued for the rest of your life over it.

If you're mugged by someone with a pistol, then it's an offensive weapon. Any weapon can be used offensively.


Ok, through my limited experience of gun use, it's hard enough to hit someone without worrying about tricky bits of anatomy. Especially in a tense situation. There are posters online with much more experience, so have at it :)

For those of us who own a firearm and think they can hit a kneecap of a mugger or robber at close range, please commit to the following exercise:

Will need:

-1 clay pigeon.
-Sidearm of your choice with preferred method of concealment and ONE round for said sidearm.
-trusting friend

Phase 1.

Step one: Go to firing range and have a friend hold onto the clay pigeon for you while you do the following.

Step two: Park vehicle one mile from firing range (preferably with a hill somewhere in between)

Step three: Arrange sidearm as you would while carrying concealed.

Step four: RUN all the way to the range, immediatly upon arrival do 20 rapid pushups. During step four, your friend will place the clay pigeon on the range and exit the line of fire

Step five: Immediatly upon completion of step four you will jump to your feet, quickdraw your sidearm, and use the ONE round you have in your sidearm to hit that clay pigeon. If it's a fluke, do it again.

Phase 2.

Repeat phase 1 except using a mannequin for a target. More likely than not, you'll aim for center mass every time rather than try for a kneecap.

The thing you have to remember about robbers is that they are opportunists and will naturally gravitate toward the easier pickings. IE: An unoccupied home is easier to rob than an occupied one and, in unexpected encounters, an unarmed victim is easier to deal with (dispose of) than an armed one. In those situations the mere presence of a gun in a homeowners hands or that unmistakeable sound of a .12 gage pump being operated and the gruff "who's there?" sounding from somewhere upstairs, can be enough to defuse the situation before it comes to violence. The robber just beats a hasty exit for easier pickings.

The Criminal that enters a home he knows to be occupied is a different story. He has a plan to deal with (or dispose of) those he expects to find there. While having a gun in that situation is certainly no guarentee of safety it can give the victim a chance at survival. On the other side of the coin however the unarmed victim has absolutely no chance of preventing the criminal from doing whatever he wants to do so it's a case of betting your life and your families lives that he won't slit everyones throats to eliminate witnesses.

Ah yes, for example, there has been such a case nearby where two guys broke into a house, tied up the two elderly people living there, stole a couple of things, and then tortured those two people for a few hours before leaving. If I remember correctly, they did survive, but with serious injuries.

That isn't what you said on the previous page, you said you would just shoot him in the noggin. Now you say you would give him a chance? Which is it?

I would rather have that, than someone's death on my conscience. Even if they were the dregs of society.

Yes, shoot him after you give him a chance. That (Shoot him) was the final step.

Firearms: Yes or No.

So have we reached a concensus?

Nope, as I will not support it...:|\\

I am not against owning a gun, what I am against is using it to kill someone.

Like I said above, I don't think anybody not in the military or police should have anybody's death on their conscience.

Agree 100%
Taking someone's life is a same thing as acting as a God, and for a commandment: YOU SHALL NOT KILL!!!
For a self-defence, just hurt him so he may live...:hmm:

Nice. First, it's Thou shall not kill.


Let's try these:

#8) "Thou shalt not steal."
#10) "Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's house,.....nor anything that is thy neighbor's



Lets keep religion OUT of this. Please.

I will only address this one point, since others have answered the rest.
Actually, it's not a given fact. People (?) on PCP (AKA Angel Dust) have been know to be shot multiple times in the legs, arms AND torso and still lived long enough to do serious damage to police officers and their vehicles. If you manage to seriously break both legs it might help, but its still not a certainty.
As some with once said "I'd rather be judged by twelve than carried by six". Truth is, if it's just me I wouldn't say for sure, but if someone is endangering my kids I wouldn't even think twice.

Whose death would you rather have on your concience? A dreg of society or your families because you stood by and did nothing?

Lower legs, yes they might just still be able to stand, but they lose their thigh muscles they will do down, immaterial of drugs because the thigh is what keeps you standing up, and moving, without that, you are immoble, lose both and you are history.

Its noble you do whatever it takes to protect your children but, I would rather sacrifice myself than see my father become a killer even in self defence.

Nobodies preferabbly. But I am no hero, if anybody in my family was going to die at the hand of a dreg of society, then it would probably be me, least likely to die would be my brother becuase he has a vicious streak a mile wide and the strength and power to back up any threat he would make.

Thnx for the correction, I knew it's thou, just didn't remeber when I wrote that...

Now, just someone is stealing from you does not give you a right to KILL someone.
You are allowed to hurt him, but not to execute him...
Given the case of stealing, use stealth, under cover of darkness and knock him out and call 911 or whatev, but first things first, bound hiim so he couldn't move...
There you go, he lives, but paid the price...
IF the suspect is packing heat, then, well... Deadly force is authorized if a life is threatened by a thief...
The best solution is if the incident could be avoided and no kills...