1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Relying a home security system and no gun...can get you killed.

Discussion in 'General Gun Discussions' started by gopguy, Jul 24, 2009.

  1. gopguy

    gopguy Well-Known Member

  2. springmom

    springmom Well-Known Member

    I do get their point but...

    ....I found myself wondering about the incredible challenges presented in having that many special needs kids, not so much in terms of securing firearms but in terms of getting a field of fire that didn't have a child either behind the BG or (worse) in front and a potential hostage.

    This is probably not the best scenario for beating the drum on carrying in the home. Seven guys= a couple of shots (if possible, per above) and five more who can grab your kids as hostages. This was a no-win situation, no matter what they'd carried or not carried, owned or not owned.

    Proof positive that this is a dangerous world and evil is out there that *can* take you out.

  3. meytind

    meytind Well-Known Member

    The article mentions the main problem in the beginning. These were rich people who's wealth was discussed on TV. If you don't advertise what you have, you are less likely to be targeted to begin with, but yes, if they had a gun, they could have barricaded the family in a room and just fired through the door as the badguys tried to break it down.
  4. Maelstrom

    Maelstrom Well-Known Member

    I consider myself a pretty substantial obstacle when armed and on my home territory, but seven on one is a really bad situation. Incidentally, the previous post about round capacity of your firearm seems to have been answered here.
  5. Matrix187

    Matrix187 Well-Known Member

    Yeah.. this is a case where any high cap semi auto rifle would come in handy, or be required maybe.
  6. hardluk1

    hardluk1 member

    The system in that house was for locating lost kids,to find where they might have gone. And security systems don't fire off alarms as shown on tv , typicaly 20 second delay so you can disarm the system or if a threat is know you can then hit the panic botton that will send notice if your door gets kicked in. I have never seen an alarm go off like these tv commercials. But remeber thats not what these folks had cameras for. Even under best of conditions with a house full of your closest friends try to round everyone up and hussle them to any room in a matter of seconds. The best they could have done would have been to grab the closest kids and run AFTER you hit the panic botton on the alarm and still leave people out to die??? This was a no win deal to begine with when that many people are depending on your help. Even with a gun on hip it would still have cost your life as these people were intent on getting in . Beside in a house this big you can't move across it faster than they can get in from different directions. To many people to watch, to many moves about safe rooms in houses. I use to build maga homes and all had security systems and even though your in town ,in a multi millon dollar home it still might take 10 minutes + for the law to get there. Just a no win for that family. To Bad.
    Last edited: Jul 24, 2009
  7. Steve N

    Steve N Well-Known Member

    Some questions that I haven't seen the answers to anywhere:

    Was the alarm system set?

    Did the alarm system sound inside the house, or to a security company, or both?

    Were the victims shot in their bed, before even being awakened?

    Were there signs of the victims struggling with the intruders?

    I've got a feeling this was cold-blooded, premeditated murder. Just break in, shoot the family, and steal the safe. If you shoot the family first, there's no chance they could pull a gun on you.
  8. gopguy

    gopguy Well-Known Member

    Hi Jan,

    I agree it seems like a no win scenario, but being armed would have given options and a chance. We see how being unarmed played out.

    Maelstrom. I discounted the revolvers for the reason of capacity. Anything where you would have needed a reload in a seven on one situation as you are being rushed is about impossible. Granted there are some seven and eight shot centerfire revolvers, but light and portable is debatable and the one shot stop iffy at best.

    My point was being unarmed left them no options. It is probable they knew the thugs were on the grounds before they got in the house, they may have held off the attack (assuming both mother and father could have been armed) from different points. The object lesson is relying on the security system was folly. It is my hope the piece would get those who don't like guns and are relying on cell phones or security systems to think a bit more realistically.
  9. BBQLS1

    BBQLS1 Well-Known Member

    Not commenting about Pensacola, but I always see the security system TV commercials and think how silly they are.

    Guy breaks in, alarm goes off and all is well. IMO a home security system is to alert you, you need a gun in hand.
  10. ccsniper

    ccsniper member

    i like this statement, at my house almost everyone is armed or at least in arms reach of a gun/guns

  11. Z-Michigan

    Z-Michigan Well-Known Member

    I think Springmom pretty well nailed it. I also think as the country goes crazy, we all need to think more about conventional physical security - good locks, solid doors, planned windows, maybe a gate on your driveway, etc. It might not have mattered here, but you need everything that can help you.

    Having an AR or AK in hand would certainly have scared the attackers silly, but it would not have guaranteed a successful defense. Definitely would have been better than dying without a defense though. But as already noted, how could you practically have a carbine ready to go for an unexpected attack like this, with the kid situation?
  12. Deltaboy

    Deltaboy Well-Known Member

    7 guys vs 1 armed man is not good unless your properly trained with at least a Lever action Rifle. God Rest their souls this is a sad sad story.
  13. hardluk1

    hardluk1 member

    Even if you carried a gun 24/7 sh*t happens ,could have been in the shower ,knock'n a chunk off or just watch'n a good tv add on security systems . 7 men with a want to do harm to you will get the job done. All that while with'in arms reach all the time or carry'n all the time even in your home. None of us have any idea how you will act till the sh*t hits the fan. With all those kids around all you would need to drop your gun would be 1 man to hold a gun to one of your childrens head or another one just shoots you.. If you say other wise ,,,u r of sh*t. You should be willing to eat one for your family. To many full of poop mucho types. To many people in that house, one shoot from a good guy would have turned that place into some else all together. Could have been a couple bad guys die bit all the kids died too. Think about that . How many would die for there family when push come to shoot.
  14. rbernie

    rbernie Well-Known Member

    I concur. Perhaps, with an appropriate layered defense (dogs, locked doors, entry alarms, accessible firearms, and a home invasion plan), the odds could have been evened somewhat. But even that's a crap shoot, and the odds are still heavily in favor of the intruders. Factor in the notion that the house was rigged for special needs kids (making accessible firearms a difficult thing to arrange), and frankly this is a case study in how sometimes the bad guys win through sheer force of numbers.
  15. damien

    damien Well-Known Member

    I suspect these guys are very cowardly men. One goes down, the others will run.
  16. Jeff White

    Jeff White Moderator Staff Member

    Shooting is contagious. It happens all the time in military and police scenarios. You have a bunch of armed people looking for trouble, the first round goes off, doesn't matter who fired it, and everyone else is likely to start shooting thinking they have been fired upon.

    I think rather then counting on them turning and running when you shoot one, you should expect the whole house to erupt in gunfire and prepare accordingly.
  17. withdrawn34

    withdrawn34 Member.

    This was a well-planned, well-executed crime; it is unlikely that having defensive firearms would have made a difference without a plan by the victims, of which there were none.

    The only way this could have turned out would be to have a plan ahead of time involving exterior motion sensors and driveway sensors - for early warning - and then a planned safe room and secured defensive posture.

    However, with so many special needs kids, and such a large home, as well as a lack of an early warning system, the likelihood of implementing such a plan is none.

    The crooks knew exactly what to hit and where; it's likely they worked in the home at some point, perhaps as repair or helpmen... or perhaps just posing as such. In such large homes, it's not uncommon to have such service people coming and going all the time - if someone is not watching all of them and checking out who comes into their home, such things can happen. With a pair of people as genuinely good hearted as these folks, they may have been too trusting of people and not paid attention to strange going-ons.
  18. Pizzagunner

    Pizzagunner Well-Known Member

    My carry piece is a 1911, but all of the pistols I have stashed around the place are 9mms sporting 15+1 147gr. JHPs or more. The shotgun holds eight and the AK 30+1 as well. The presumption being that in the case of a home invasion I am going to be outnumbered by anyone who has the slightest clue as to how best commit the crime.

    I don't want to be taken down for a lack of firing back.;)
  19. springmom

    springmom Well-Known Member

    :) No one does. But I remember when my kids were little; it was like herding cats in a sack to get them into the bedrooms with the promise of story and bedtime snack. And none of them were particularly "special needs". Imagine, instead of three little ones, having 13, and I think we can assume that those 13 would be unlikely to be able to figure out what was going on and get to a safe room independently (even assuming there were some safe rooms in the house). Imagine those seven men coming in; dad and mom start shooting, a little one runs in between to daddy and...

    ...well, you get my point.

    All of us who carry guns for self defense like to think we are up to the task if we are attacked. Many of us spend a great deal of money and time training for that "just in case" day. But honestly; unless you ran your house like a fortress, with a moat full of hungry Dobermans and a band of claymores just beyond them, do you HONESTLY think you could have a house with 13 kids in it and keep security up all the time? The fact of the matter is, if someone really wants to mount a small army and take your house, they can probably do it. You may take one or more with you, but you're not likely to come out of it alive if they really, really REALLY don't want you to and there are that many of them. Gun ownership is no guarantor of invicibility; it just gives us a better chance in most cases.

    This wasn't one of them.

  20. doc2rn

    doc2rn Well-Known Member

    The worst part is the robbers didnt get the safe with the valuables, so this was a sensless act of violence. I hope they still have the gas chamber in FL. I know its not very high road but this reaks of C.S.S.
    Should have had a safe room on every level.

Share This Page