Have a Few Tactical Questions for Home Intruder Situation

Status
Not open for further replies.

BigO01

Member
Joined
Feb 15, 2006
Messages
560
Something thing I don't recall seeing discussed I would like some input on .

Suppose when investigating a late night noise you find a burglar with your property in their hands yet they immediately drop the object and raise their hands to surrender yet have a pistol visibly tucked in their waistband .

First if they are in say your living room and you are in the hallway looking into the room do you even enter the room they are in ?

Entering the room correctly requires Pieing it before entry because he may not be alone . How would you do this safely with a man you know is armed in front of you when you would have to take your eyes off of him to do so ?

Do you order him to disarm himself by dropping the gun ? Or Perhaps interlace his fingers behind his head and simple back up towards you so you can remove the gun ? What position would you first order him in if you disarm him ?

If you get him into the hallway and disarmed do you restrain him in some manner so you can continue the search of your home or do you halt it at this point and wait for the Police to arrive .

Would you simply stop the search at the point of finding him and wait there for the Police while he still has the gun in his waistband with you holding him at gunpoint ?

What if they have no visible weapon do you order them to do a 360 and raise their shirt so you can look for one ?

Would you assume he is alone even if you had only searched half of your home and there are bedrooms with family members in them to go and halt the search ?

Do you just tell him to drop his gun and get out of there hoping he will run completely away and leave you free to finish your search ?

Please keep in mind when responding , that to shoot him when trying to surrender would be cold blooded murder something I am not comfortable with .
 
These seem like really unlikely scenarios and yes they have been discussed at lenght on THR.

First, if you see a perp on your house why are you ordering him to drop his weapon? Could be a screw driver but could be a gun. If I identify a perp with a weapon in my house the only noise he'll hear is bang bang bang. Talking to him creates these problems of 'what to do now' and also gives him and any of his cohorts a chance to attack or get away to strike again another time.

But if you find yourself in this situation, remember you are not a cop. It seems like the obvious answer is to give him orders like to lay on the ground with his arms and feet outstretched while you call for the police with your gun trained on him. From there if he flees let him flee and if he goes for the gun you are generally in fear of imminent life threatening danger and are (in most states) within your rights to shoot in self defense. Everything you do, however, will be scrutinized by a DA, especially if it's recorded on 911 tape.

If you MUST secure someone, have them lay face down with arms and legs outstetched, palms facing up. Distance is your friend, and keep an eye and gun on the person.

Regarding going for the weapon or ordering the person to do it, that's a very risky call. If you get too close you risk being grabbed and wrestled with. I think your best bet is just to leave it in his waistband and keep 100% watchful eye on him until the cops have the situation under control.
 
Intruder raises hands in compliance with my order, but has firearm on person: I would likely order him to turn around, facing away from me, while maintaining the raised-arms position. As a LEO, I occasionally gave this speech to anyone being held at gunpoint: "Any action you take that is not part of what I tell you to do will be considered an act of hostility. Any failure or refusal to take an action I do tell you to take will be considered an act of hostility."
I would not approach him to disarm him. My next course of action would depend on the "feel" of the situation. If I were to decide to have him disarm himself, I would instruct him to do so after giving the aforementioned speech. He would be told to use his which hand (based on my observation of the weapon's position)to use to remove the weapon and hold it back out to the side in outstretched arm. He would then be ordered to either drop it, or toss it further to that side. If space permits, he would then be ordered to take steps backward, in my direction (I would also step back, if possible.)
The best outcome in a non-shooting situation, however, would be to get rid of him as quickly as possible. If he disarms himself (or doesn't appear armed) and is compliant with all of my orders, then he may be held at gunpoint while LE is notified. If he attempts to flee, while either disarmed or without obvious weapon, in any direction not toward me or another loved one, he would likely be allowed to escape. I would not pursue once I knew that all my household members (presently, only two) were accounted for and he was actively fleeing the scene.
If an intruder moves out of sight, but remains, or is believed to remain, within my house, then my next course of action would depend on the location of other household member(s) and, again, the "feel" of the situation. In all likelihood, assuming other household member(s) are in the same end of my ranch-style home as I am, I would simply maintain armed watch of that end of the hallway, with every intention to fire on anyone whose forward profile becomes visible in it, or who moves into it. I would make this clear by use of verbal commands ("Leave this property immediately! Do not approach further or you WILL be fired upon!")
Florida has an excellent "castle-doctrine" law that extends to ANY PERSONAL SPACE occuppied by a person accosted by another in a criminal situation. This includes home, place of business, place of consumerism, or even while standing on a sidewalk or other open public place. While flight from a life-threatening situation, if strategically practical and possible, is preferred, it is in no way required.
 
In my house un-invited=Dead in my house.

Care not if you are lost or Zombie. Enter my residence un-invited, you DIE.
 
Storydude,
The male hormone Testerone is a powerful force. PLEASE think thru your response, YOU may find it a little over the top. THE BEST GUNFIGHT THAT EVER WAS, WAS THE ONE THAT NEVER HAPPENED!
 
Speaking generally, you must control the encounter. Don't do anything that may cause you to lose control; this includes approaching the perp to disarm him.

Call 911 for professional support as soon as possible. As long as he behaves, all is well; at the first sign of aggressive action, exercise your lawful 'Castle Doctrine' options. :cool:
 
If he attempts to flee, while either disarmed or without obvious weapon, in any direction not toward me or another loved one, he would likely be allowed to escape. I would not pursue once I knew that all my household members (presently, only two) were accounted for and he was actively fleeing the scene.
Why allow him to escape? He's a felon, he's a (formerly) armed intruder.....he violated your home.

Why not go after him?

I'm curious about your thinking, especially since you are LE.
 
Last edited:
To enter my abode, you must pass through TWO locked Entry doors, or come through a window.

All doors are locked, and property is MARKED NO TRESSPASSING.

You enter my house uninvited, you are there under the prediposition to do me harm. My Local Firearms codes allow me to drop you on sight if you are in my house un-invited.

I care not what public opinion is of me. You enter my house without me letting you in, finding ME is the least of your problems. If the Dog barking to wake the dead was not deterrent enough, hearing the Shotgun being racked should be enough. IF you continue to the point I find you clearing the house, you have had more than enough chances to vacate. You choose to stay, you chose to die.
 
one problem with telling him to stop, it gives away your position. If he is not alone, you immediately give his criminal buddies the upper hand. While you are centered on trying to control him, you are distracted from protecting the rest of your home from other threats.
I agree with MedWheeler, but since I'm not LEO, the intruder would get one and only one chance to do as he is told. If he deviates in any way or hesitates, he goes down. Until you know for absolute sure, don't ever assume he is alone!

LEO here responded to a grocery store armed robbery. The two officers entered the store, found one bad guy. His friend entered the store after the officers and started a firefight. Both BG's were killed due to inability to shoot straight, not bad tactics.
 
In my house un-invited=Dead in my house.

Care not if you are lost or Zombie. Enter my residence un-invited, you DIE.

You choose to stay, you chose to die.

I would agree with taurusowner, Storydude, might be a good idea to read the Bloodlust sticky.
 
Actually, I think these are good questions, some of which I have not seen addressed on THR before (although that doesn't necessarily mean they haven't been).

First, I have question for the OP: what is "Pieing"?

Disarming someone definitely presents some difficult questions.

No assumption should be made that the perp is acting alone, either.

Holding him at gun point and disarming him could allow an accomplice to outflank you.

I don't have any glib answers and need to give this scenario some thought.
 
I won't shoot anybody who isn't a threat. If they have a visible weapon, they're probably expecting trouble.

It pains me to say I'd shoot, but I probably would.
 
There's no single correct way to handle this scenario. Running this 10X in a force-on-force exercise could easily get you 10 different results.

All you can do is try to survive the encounter the best way that you think can. Getting close to the intruder is probably a bad idea.
 
FCFC asked:

>>>Why allow him to escape? He's a felon, he's a (formerly) armed intruder.....he violated your home.

Why not go after him?

I'm curious about your thinking, especially since you are LE.<<<


I am former LE, not current. I currently work in EMS. Arresting armed felons is no longer my duty-bound obligation, and arresting them alone without backup, and with my wife present, never was.
The purpose of lawful self-defense, in any level up to and including deadly force, is to "remove or neutralize any threat to life and/or limb". Keeping someone possibly bent on doing harm to me or my wife around longer than necessary adds an element of danger we don't need. I am NOT going to run after someone like that, leaving my wife behind, without a radio, baton, BPV, or handcuffs, and our "castle-doctrine" laws do not permit the shooting in the back of a person no longer presenting an immediate threat to anyone. He'll get his later, either at the hands of LE investigators (if he has left his weapon behind, there will likely be evidence there), or at the hands of another armed "non-victim".
 
If he had a really nice gun, I would probably relieve him of it and his wallet and keys and maybe his shoes, then I would escort him out of the house and hope he had a long walk home.:evil: Seriously, trying to disarm and or restrain an intruder is probably the most dangerous thing that you could do. To physically disarm or restrain an intruder you must be in close proximity with the person which would give them the opportunity to grapple with you for control of your weapon. I would keep my distance and order the individual to the ground, hands on head and legs crossed all the while he is covered by my gun, then wait for the police to arrive.
 
Unless I see him with a weapon, with the intent on using it, I won't shoot.
If he so much as goes for the gun, he's a dead man in my book. I'm sorry to say this, but he intends to do me or my family bodily harm. I won't give him that chance.
 
First, I have question for the OP: what is "Pieing"?

It is a technique for entering a room or turning a corner wherein you use the door jam or corner as something of a pivot point. By continuing your circular turn (with the door jam or corner as your pivot point) you gain new angles of sight "resembling" the way a pie is sliced.

You don't have to move too far to gain a large(r) picture of the room. It's a great way to determine if the room is empty or not.

You can practice this at home and don't have to use a firearm to get comfortable with the technique. The last thing we need to hear is about an AD while training!

You choose to stay, you chose to die. - Storydude

I'm inclined to agree with the others about reading the blood-lust sticky. Another point to consider is what you are writing may come back to haunt you in the event you're involved in an incident. If the prosecutor read this thread I would imagine you would have a great deal of explaining to do.

Remember, we shoot to stop / neutralize a threat: we don't shoot to kill and we don't fire warning shots.

Please rethink your position before something occurs that you will really regret.

Thanks,
DFW1911
 
Last edited:
Hold the intruder at gun point, hopefully I am searching the house with my winchester 1300 defender. Accuracy isn't quite so important with a shotgun and its much more intimidating then a standard handgun. I don't want to kill someone, I have no blood lust in my heart, but I also don't want someone hurting my family.

Storydude, what DFW1911 says about some prosecutor reading the thread is very true. That could present real problems for you if something bad were to happen. Just my 2 cents.

If I caught someone in my house who is armed, I would give them one chance to surrender, if he resisted I would use force. I would not try to take his weapon, my wife would be on the phone with 911 while I am searching the house and I would have him slowly lay on the floor "spread eagle" with my 12GA shotgun on him the whole time. If he tries to pull his weapon, I would then use force. If he runs, then he is free to flee, I won't shoot. Not only is it against the law here, but I have a conscience.

Anyhow that is more then my 2 cents.

Little John
 
I would hopefully never have gone looking for an intruder at all but rather retreated to a safe room/area at the first sign of unauthorized humans in my house and follow the checklist I have rehearsed for such types of events including calling the police.

No one is in instant danger upon hearing the noise if the intruder doesn't come rushing into specific areas of my house within a few seconds.

Going "intruder hunting" when there is an alternative like a safe room available seems irresponsible to my family and to myself. My job is to keep my family safe and myself safe for them.

If I had come across an armed intruder as in the original scenario I would have advised him that he is free to leave in peace as I retreated from the area they are in to a safer more defensible area to call the police (then possibly crap my pants and vomit). Hopefully.

My first priorities are to:

1. Keep myself safe and my family safe.
1. Avoid potentially deadly situations.
2. Avoid exposing myself to potentially bankrupting financial burdens by shooting someone in "self defense" when it is avoidable.
3. Avoid situations where I could get injured or killed doing something that I really don't have to do.

There are too many unknowns as well. I wouldn't know how many intruders there might be. There might be one or there could be two or three or more.

For those that would either execute the intruder or attempt to take the intruder into "custody" for the police, what if one of the other possible intruders (or even the first one you see) is a Johnny Rambo wannabe with a subconscious desire to commit suicide by forcing someone else to kill them and he's high, hyped and wanting more than anything else in the world to kill you. You get half a second after seeing him to put him down instantly. Without a good shot you could shoot him many times over many minutes with him just getting more angry and more motivated to kill you at any cost to himself. (I just read a report of a shoot out where the bad guy was shot at least 17 times with .40 S & W and .223 over 3.5 minutes and the LEOs involved still had to fight him to put handcuffs on) Meanwhile he's shooting back with what? What kind of weapon or weapons does he have? Does he have a .22LR, a 12 gauge semi-auto or an AK? (Would you rather be shot in the thigh with a 12 gauge or in the eye with a .22LR?) What class is his body armor and so on?

Maybe he doesn't have a gun but has a black knife, that you can't see well in the bad light, in his hand and is 10 feet from you. How much time do you have to react? If you double tap into his center of mass as he starts to move to attack you and he doesn't feel the bullets hitting him and continues with a knife attack for say 3 to 9 seconds (before collapsing from the bullet you put in his heart with your lucky shot) where would you prefer to be stabbed or slashed?

Does anyone want to roll the dice and try out their skills and luck with an unknown number of opponents, carrying unknown weapons of any kind (including surefire flashlights, pepper spray, body armor, automatic shotguns/rifles, machetes and etc.?) Please. This is all possible, there was a home invasion in Phoenix in the last year with three intruders wearing body armor and carrying automatic AKs. The armed homeowner died.

Everyone has their own idea about what they'd do in an emergency situation I hope that in the future as in the past that my training would kick in and I'd make the best decisions possible to preserve my family's life, health, financial stability, emotional stability and etc.

In real life a burglar likely wouldn't have made it through the various layers of security I have without being detected so I don't really have to worry about this kind of situation as much as someone who hasn't hardened their house. For a fraction of the cost of a lawyer in a "good" SD shooting I've hardened my house, put in multiple layers of security, alarms and video surveillance/recording with night vision and audio. If I ever had to shoot someone not only would there be a trail of physical evidence showing the bad intention of the intruder but the video and audio as well.

Shooting someone is the last thing that I would do to defend my life or my family's lives but if I had to do it because I feared immediate death or grave injury to myself or another innocent person I would do so without hesitation.

Just my 2 cents.
 
Do you order him to disarm himself by dropping the gun ? Or Perhaps interlace his fingers behind his head and simple back up towards you so you can remove the gun ? What position would you first order him in if you disarm him ?

Having seen a draw that rivals mine from the surrender position to a front waistband draw-and-fire, I'd say he should be disarmed before you ever approach him.

Having him remove his firearm with HIS WEAK HAND and TWO FINGERS, with any noncompliance at that point earning him a double-tap, is the way I would go with that situation. There may be other options, but that's the one I'm the most comfortable with.


The position you should have him in is ON HIS KNEES, FACING AWAY FROM YOU, HANDS ON HEAD, palms up, feet crossed (deliberately slightly uncomfortably - once he complies, tell him to cross his feet "the other way" so it's not as comfortable for him...this will keep him slightly off balance and you need every edge)

If you get him into the hallway and disarmed do you restrain him in some manner so you can continue the search of your home or do you halt it at this point and wait for the Police to arrive .

If you have no means of securing your prisoner, then your searching stops there. You have an unrestrained prisoner. You hold him how you like until the law arrives. Be sure you're comfortable and he isn't. Don't get complacent and definitely have a solid "reactionary gap" between you and him, and WATCH HIS HANDS. Make sure you have enough light...because at that point, he has nothing to lose and everything to gain by killing you. He is now MORE dangerous than when you first confronted him. Never forget this.

Would you simply stop the search at the point of finding him and wait there for the Police while he still has the gun in his waistband with you holding him at gunpoint ?

Yes on stopping the search, yes on waiting for the police, no on letting him stay armed. Strong hand straight up in the air, weak hand reaches for pistol (note which way the pistol is turned and tell him to reach with the hand the butt is facing AWAY from) and grasps the butt with TWO FINGERS. Warn him before he reaches that noncompliance in ANY WAY will get him a hail of bullets. If he thinks he can push the issue with you, using three fingers, manipulating the gun in any way, he will. Remember, he has NOTHING TO LOSE AND EVERYTHING TO GAIN, and his BEST opportunity to kill you will be while his hand is on the gun. Have him drop the firearm at his feet and kick it towards you. THEN make him turn around with his hands in view at all times, kneel down facing AWAY from you so he can't see you, cross his feet, and you can let him place his hands ON his head.

Failure to comply can take three forms:

1) Obviously threatening move: This means not only is he not complying, he's trying to kill you. In my situation, that's when he gets the double-tap. Justifiable homicide.

2) Not obviously threatening but noncompliant move: This is the most difficult. Because you don't KNOW what he's doing, whether he's going for a backup weapon, or trying to escape and not actually being threatening. Here is where you MUST use your own judgement and live with the consequences of that judgement. If it's obvious he's escaping...and this is going to suck...LET HIM GO. You're not a cop, and as much as you want to do SOMETHING at that point, it is best you do not. You'll feel like crap for sitting there, watching him run away while you look down your sights at him, but it's better than having to go through a shoot, especially a questionable one, with lots of unpleasant police attention to you and large legal bills.

3) Not moving at all: At least he's not reaching. He may be defiant, or he may be scared. Or, he may realize that you disarming him and putting him in the suspect position lessens his later chance of escape or turning the tables on you. Really, if he doesn't comply, there isn't much you can do except close and go physical, shoot him, or continue to do nothing. Two of these options: Close and go physical, and continue to do nothing, actually will act in his favor. Closing and going physical means that he has manipulated you into closing the reactionary gap, where obviously he thinks he has the advantage, AND he's still armed. Continuing to do nothing means that your attention, focused right now, will eventually fatigue and waver, and when that does, he is STILL armed, and is patiently waiting for you to make a mistake so he can kill you or escape. Since you don't know which one he's going to choose, and for that matter, possibly neither does he, this is a risky situation to be in. I'd advise taking cover while continuing to cover him with your weapon (back up, get partially around a corner, etc.) and making your decision as to what to do next.


While you right now might consider shooting a noncompliant armed suspect as cold blooded murder, you might think differently as you read the totality of the situation, including body language, what the suspect is saying (if anything) or how the suspect's eyes and facial expression telegraph his intentions. This is the dynamic part of a shoot/don't shoot situation that does not translate well to print and thus, many scenario solutions that "look good on paper" don't do well in the real world. There's just too much data variance to make a solid recommendation, which is why most courses don't have hard-and-fast rules of thumb when it comes to this, but instead have legal criteria that are applied to training scenarios so that you can understand the dynamics of the process and have a better chance of making the right choice under stress, because every real-life scenario is different; By which I mean, there could be five incidents that all fit your description to a T, with five different suspects, and five different defenders, and have five different outcomes, even with the same set of starting criteria. Mindset, evaluation skills (of both suspect AND defender), and motivations, all of which are not knowable in totality by anyone, play crucial roles in the behaviors presented.



What if they have no visible weapon do you order them to do a 360 and raise their shirt so you can look for one ?

Not a bad idea but be careful how you go about it. Having him raise his shirt and expose a gun just made HIS draw that much faster against you. Recognize this danger BEFORE you choose this course of action.

Would you assume he is alone even if you had only searched half of your home and there are bedrooms with family members in them to go and halt the search ?

Two things: Assumptions in a lethal force situation will get you killed. Rats run in packs. Nowadays, burglaries are done with speed, home invasions are done with shock and awe, both almost always require multiple suspects.

The reason why you are halting the search is because you already HAVE a suspect, and you don't have the manpower to complete the search. Continuing to search while you have an unsecured suspect is STUPID. Don't do it. You've halted the search because you have a higher priority to make sure that suspect doesn't hurt you or your family, NOT because you assume he's alone. In fact, assume he's NOT alone, and EXPECT there to be a diversion that may be a distraction, either intentional or unintentional...another reason not to have too light a trigger pull on a gun you may have to use to defend yourself against humans. Because all it takes is a finger on the trigger and a startle response, and you've gone from justifiable to potentially negligent homicide. And the diversion may not come from another BG; It may come from one of your own family members.."JOHN! WHat are you DOING out there in the HALLWAY with THAT THING!!" or "Daddy! What'cha doin?" -- especially if the suspect is not visible to the inquiring family member.

These are all factors you MUST take into account when making a tactical assessment, especially in your own home. Remember that untrained family members can and will be a liability. Mr. Murphy assures me that he'll make sure to motivate them to do the absolute stupidest thing at the absolute worst time.

Be prepared for that.

Do you just tell him to drop his gun and get out of there hoping he will run completely away and leave you free to finish your search ?

Note what I said above about having him disarm himself. If after the gun you can see is safely away from him, it is your decision as to whether or not you want to let him go, for whatever reason. Just understand the long-term consequences of this behavior (such as the fact that now he knows you have a gun and are a soft touch, he might just come back, either to take your stuff, take advantage of you, or revenge...you DON'T KNOW.). Honestly, though, if he runs of his own accord after being disarmed...fine. In most states you can't shoot him in the back anyway. But continue to search your home? Your call. But after I found ONE in my home, I'd gather my family members in one room where I could protect them all, and be all over the phone to 911. Once my perimeter has been breached, it's not safe for me to search solo with a family to protect. If I were alone, with only my safety to think of, then I may choose to search knowing the risks to myself and knowing that I risked no one's life but my own. But with family? Stay put and protect them; That's your primary responsibility.

Please keep in mind when responding , that to shoot him when trying to surrender would be cold blooded murder something I am not comfortable with .

And I realize that. But after reading the above, you must be certain in your mind that he IS trying to actually surrender, and not just playing along in order to get the upper hand and kill you. Becuase you may only get one chance to make the right choice, and if you guess wrong, you are dead.

That's what "life or death" means.

Your call.

S
 
I'm not qualified, by experience or training, to handle the situations described. I don't have the luxury of affording an intruder any rights or privileges. The safety of my family and myself is paramount, and the wellbeing of the intruder is a distant second. An intruder bringing a weapon into my house is a threat, and I presume he is an expert in the use of his weapon. I presume his speed, training and experience far outstrip my own. I presume he has armed and dangerous accomplices. I presume the police aren't coming, until I can hear them or they are actually here.

Everything is case by case, but a threat is a threat until it has demonstrated otherwise.

And if I shoot somebody under any circumstances, I'm waiting for my lawyer before I speak at all.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top