Because there are never multiple attackers.

Sure, a lot of incidences see more than 3 shots fired, but a great deal see only one shot, maybe two. I would assume that three shots is only the average, not the fixed limit.

This account balances out the statistics, more than 1 attacker and zero shots fired.

Wait and see how this story unfolds. These killings were probably not random. There was probably some involvement with organized crime or the drug trade and the boys father probably had some previous illegal dealings with the people who shot him.

Usually the type of people who commit property crimes like breaking into houses, do so because they are lazy and want something for little effort. If you make it a little hard on them with lights, good locks or a barking dog they simply move on to an easier target.

Unless you are involved in the drug trade or international espionage, the chances of more than one lone nutcase breaking in when you are obviously at home is extremely remote. But even if some group were to kick down your door and you started shooting they would probably scatter. Gun fighting is too much like work and most people will go to extreme lengths to avoid it.

There is a world of difference between being attacked by multiples of common criminals and a group of trained soldiers. Criminals are not fighting for a cause greater than themselves nor do they face court martial for retreating without orders. The typical crack head is probably not willing to lay down his life so that one of his buddies can carry off your big screen TV.

That being said, there is always a chance of some type of calamity like the L A riots or hurricane Katrina or war where civilized society breaks down into anarchy and there is no police protection. That is why you need a modern high capacity firearm.

The typical crack head is probably not willing to lay down his life so that one of his buddies can carry off your big screen TV.

Click to expand...

Depends on how recently he hit the pipe.

Criminals are not fighting for a cause greater than themselves nor do they face court martial for retreating without orders. The typical crack head is probably not willing to lay down his life so that one of his buddies can carry off your big screen TV.

Click to expand...

Based on reports ("Armed Citizen," my local paper, etc.), often one shot is all it seems to take. No two cases are identical, but the script is usually for bad guy to intimidate, and homeowner to be compliant. Occasionally you read about an exchange of gunfire, but those shots are usually spent in retreat. The Worst Case Scenario of amped-up psycho on PCP who laughs off .44 slugs to the chest is unlikely in the extreme. Sure, won't hurt to have 17+1 9mm at your disposal, but 5 in the snubbie will probably save the day.

That being said, there is always a chance of some type of calamity like the L A riots or hurricane Katrina or war where civilized society breaks down into anarchy and there is no police protection.

Click to expand...

Curiously, the same calculus seems to apply. I remember those Korean store owners on the roofs of their shops with handguns and shotguns, and they successfully defended their property without actually shooting anyone. The rioter will climb through a window and grab some stuff, but they aren't inclined to face gunfire for that. Here, we saw a very small number of armed citizens holding off a mob. So it seems to be a truism that people try to avoid having bullets enter their bodies when they are given the choice to go do something else.

There was probably some involvement with organized crime or the drug trade and the boys father probably had some previous illegal dealings with the people who shot him.

Click to expand...

Owen, jump to conclusions much?

From the article linked:

Authorities said one of the suspects grabbed the boy and asked who he called. "911," the boy responded, according to the department.

The suspects fled without injuring anyone or taking any property, authorities said

Click to expand...

Also, if you listen to the (heartbreaking) audio of the boy's call, it sounds to me like he was telling the dispatcher that the men first rang the doorbell, then forced their way into the home when the door was opened.

Owen Sparks said:

Wait and see how this story unfolds. These killings were probably not random. There was probably some involvement with organized crime or the drug trade and the boys father probably had some previous illegal dealings with the people who shot him.
...........................

Click to expand...

What killings? Whose father was shot?

From the article:

The suspects fled without injuring anyone or taking any property, authorities said.

Click to expand...

should have had a double 12g next to the bed and there wouldn't be a man hunt!!!!

Anyone else notice the cops didn't show up until after the incident was over?

We have a problem from time to time down here with small groups (usually a duo or trio) of bad guys busting in a door or attacking someone in their driveway. In fact, a couple of the less bright ones tried to carjack a cop in an unmarked police car (bad choice). In these situations, it doesn't matter so much whether you have the ol' 50-cal with a full belt or a Glock with a 30-round clip, it's what you have ready to hand when the splinters start flying. Incidentally, for those with bedroom arsenals, these types of attacks don't normally happen late at night; they're in the evening when people are still up and active.

It's like the poor woman on the security system ads: her ex has broken in and the security service calls to see if anything's wrong. That's a very poor time for a chat and it delays a call to police. Worthless. The lady really needed Smith & Wesson Security but try advertising that on TV.

Five on you beats fifty somewhere else.

Yeah thats the flaw about those comercials, If your running from someone thats breaking in the last thing i'm gonna do is stop and answer the phone, plus the cops would be a few minutes away while the guy can do his harm. But they want you to believe that all criminals run from a simple alarm.

Every statistic has it's exceptions...

But there were never ANY shots fired in this incident. Suppose the homeowner managed to draw and fire if he had a safe opportunity to do so. Who's to say that the other attackers wouldn't cut and run? Who's to say that they wouldn't have gunned him and his family down once he missed that first shot? He's out gunned and out numbered. Even if you have a Glock and a 30 round mag, can you be fast enough to pull off 3 spinal cord shots? These are armed bad guys waving guns, giving them double taps and waiting for them to bleed out might not be enough.

Looks like one of those situations where I can see both sides of the argument. Drawing a weapon on 3 armed bad guys may be playing out a losing hand and jeopardizing your family's life. Playing it safe and letting them take what they want may work, but they may want more than physical possessions. I'd be inclined to fire on the boldest of the 3 first, but who knows...that could be my last unwise decision or I could save the day for my family.

Or you could slow them down with a hail of gunfire, perhaps forcing them to retreat or scatter and allowing time for family to escape or obtain additional firepower. In that case, it would be handy to have a nice, fat magazine.

Why not go all the way back to the begining, and ask why did mommy or daddy open the door to some strangers just because they rang the door bell?

With a good strong door, a good strong dead bolt, and a window to see any I.D., why open a door for people you don't know.

After more than 40 years of reading the American Rifleman and the Armed Citizen page first thing every month, I've never seen an account of any running gun battle involving a home owner and a criminal/criminals. Here we have a case where a little boy said he called 911, and the so called bad guys take off running. The little kid with a cell phone did as much as a guy with a gun.

So how does this case prove you need as much firepower as Rambo?

Inaccurate reading and wild speculation. Guys, let it go....

Jim H.

Yeah, the way the anti's could/will spin that is that none of us need guns because the mere mention of 911 causes attackers to flee. Stupid of course, but that's how they'll try to make it out. Betcha a buck.

The little kid with a cell phone did as much as a guy with a guy.

Click to expand...

How did this thread turn gay?

The first report I heard said that the boys father was shot and I believed it.

That being said, if all it took to disperse the home invaders was a kid calling 911, what would a magazine full of bullets do? Common criminals usually scramble at the first sign of armed resistance.

"How did this thread turn gay?"

Oh! Those thilly boys are just EVERYWHERE!!

the "3 shots fired" stat is WRONG.

It does NOT include "no shots fired," as some think.

It DOES include: accidental discharges, warning shots, suicides, animal put downs, etc.

These are not even "confrontational" self defense situations, but they are lumped together with them, skewing the number downward.

Or you could slow them down with a hail of gunfire

Click to expand...

I would hate to live next door to you.

Remember that whether you fire one shot, or empty the mag, you're still accountable for each bullet, and a jury will not think highly of a "hail of gunfire" as an escape tactic.

[No offense meant.]

Zoidberg523 said:

I would hate to live next door to you.

Remember that whether you fire one shot, or empty the mag, you're still accountable for each bullet, and a jury will not think highly of a "hail of gunfire" as an escape tactic.

[No offense meant.]

Click to expand...

Well, you have to survive to be charged or sued.

David E said:

the "3 shots fired" stat is WRONG.

It does NOT include "no shots fired," as some think.

It DOES include: accidental discharges, warning shots, suicides, animal put downs, etc.

These are not even "confrontational" self defense situations, but they are lumped together with them, skewing the number downward.

Click to expand...

Interesting. Where do I find these "crime" stats?

Multiple attackers

seem to be more common lately, especially in home invasions. It seems like a lot of the stories documented in "Armed Citizen" involve more than one home invader. It also seems like it is becoming more and more common for breakins to happen while people are home and awake. Even here in Maine, not exactly a hotbed of criminal activity, we have had several home invasions in the past year that involved multiple attackers, some of which turned extremely violent. In one case a pair of violent individuals broke into a home and attacked a man and his daughter with machetes. The girl was about 10 at the time and has to live with scars for the rest of her life.

I don't know how many bullets it takes to stop the "average confrontation" but, since I have always been a little bit above average, I'll carry as many as I can.

What do you do in a shootout when you run out of ammo? It's ok to have more than 1 gun, most here do, so why not keep a Hi-cap Glock type pistol in the house, available for such incidents. Regardless of how rare, they do happen. You can carry your 38 or whatever you please, and still leave yourself the option of having another Hi capacity weapon for extraordinary situations. Having lived through 18 years of hurricanes , I can attest to the need for this. After 3 days with no food or water, it got pretty scary in some areas of FL. There were little or no emergency services, and groups of people wandering through the streets looking for anything of use to them. Many businesses were looted and homes broken into. Like Louisiana much went unreported, "they don't want to scare the public". But there is no doubt we will see more bad things like storms, power failures, and who knows what else, so why limit your ability to ward off an attack with 5 bullets.