What would you do different--tactics in a home invasion video?

Status
Not open for further replies.
I think she did very well. She stayed hidden until they started heading into the part of the house she was in. When she engaged them she took the initiative from them and used speed and violence of action to "keep up the skeer" on them as Nathan Bedford Forrest would have said. I think that "ole devil Forrest" would give her an "atta girl"
 
At the moment, she is on my hero list. Having never been in combat or hostile gunfire situation myself, there is no way I will criticize any of her actions. She was in imminent mortal danger and responded with her choice of the fight/flight decision. I'd say it worked out as well as it could have for her.
 
At the moment, she is on my hero list. Having never been in combat or hostile gunfire situation myself, there is no way I will criticize any of her actions. She was in imminent mortal danger and responded with her choice of the fight/flight decision. I'd say it worked out as well as it could have for her.
There is a huge difference between criticism and analysis and improvement. If we never analyzed anything then results would forever remain random with no ability to know what should be maintained or changed and improved.

Any person or organization wanting to continuously improve should always conduct an after action review (AAR) to determine things that went right to keep doing and things to improve for next time. As we don't typically get in gunfights, we can analyze others instead.

So, following the military AAR model:

Sustain: 1) Violence of action, she took the fight to the enemy
2) Movement, she stayed mobile once the fight started

Improve: 1) She should have fought from a barricade position, making them expose themselves while coming to her.

2) She could have better used cover/concealment to her advantage, kept more distance.

None of that is "criticism" on a personal level. She did great, glad she's still with us. It is just objective analysis (and actually answering the OP).
 
I agree with the above analysis. If forced to guess, I would say that getting frightened led to her becoming really pissed off, which is what led to her "charge of the light brigade."

Jeff Cooper used to say that the antidote to fright is anger.

The female is the deadlier of the species.
 
The long version including 911 call has enough talking between the 2 housemates and 911 operator to make it difficult for me to believe their position wasn't compromised and it looks like the man with the hoodie is intent with his move down the hall. Hard to know what the configuration of the bedroom was but her assertive move sure sent them all scattering.
It was quite a while from the door being kicked in to the point she came out firing and the only audio I've heard was that of the 911 recording so it's hard to know what threats or communication went on in the house.
Interesting the woman was the one who took the fight to the intruders.
 
Lots different, running around out of control like a lunatic spraying bullets carelessly is not how to handle that situation.

Controlled aimed shots from concealment, pretty much sums up my approach.

She got violence and force of action right, but was completely out of control. You need to keep your wits about you.

She got lucky they were more scared than wanted her crap.

Who has boxes stacked all over their house like that?
 
Last edited:
Interesting the woman was the one who took the fight to the intruders.

I wondered about that part too. You have to be a pretty sound sleeper to overlook people firing pistols in your house.
 
Difference? I'd have used a shotgun... and they, all three of them, would be right there for the cops to find. DRT...

Deaf
 
What, as opposed to the man? Really?

Who was the gun owner? Who was the manager of the restaurant?

It has to do with dragons, knights and so forth. As alluded, I was not there, it worked out, and so hokay. Not a lot of good questions left after that.
 
The gender of anyone involved in this incident is completely irrelevant to anything that is on topic in ST&T. I don't want to start deleting posts and handing out infractions. Let's keep the discussion on topic.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Did anyone notice how long she talked with the 911 operator and she still didn't understand her because of her accent? Wonder how long it took the police to arrive.
 
I saw that and got me thinking about how bad things can happen with simple errors in understanding different accents. Cops come into a place that dispatch sent them with reports of gunfire and injuries but they hit the wrong place.

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk
 
Lots different, running around out of control like a lunatic spraying bullets carelessly is not how to handle that situation.

Controlled aimed shots from cover pretty much sums up my approach.

She got violence and force of action right but was completely out of control. You need to keep your wits about you.

She got lucky they were more scared than wanted their crap.

Who has boxes stacked all over their house like that?
Where in your house do you have actual cover as opposed to concealment?
 
Did anyone notice how long she talked with the 911 operator and she still didn't understand her because of her accent? Wonder how long it took the police to arrive.

Police would have been enroute once the dispatcher typed in the address for the first time and then redirected when she corrected the number. Given that response times are rarely under 10 minutes, it probably did not have much influence on the arrival of the cops. However, it could have gone badly if the street name sounded very similar to another street by a similar name across town and the dispatcher wasn't understanding the correct street name.
 
Old saying--"Sometime the safest action is the boldest action"
And, "When in doubt, attack!"
Hey, this time it worked for her.
Love the one handed shooting, moving into the opponents and the aggressive mind set.
Which reminds me of another old saying, " Even a bad plan stands at good chance of success when done in an aggressive manner".
 
jeepnik

I always wonder as threads like these unfold, how many of the respondents have been involved in violence, much less a firefight. I also wonder about ages.

Yes for me, with a set of contextual factors removed in significant ways from a home invasion (Afghanistan, Iraq). Two firefights, and lots of rockets landing close for comfort. I'm in my early 30s.

Now having addressed your question, how does that change the crux or value of my comment?
 
OK, I'll answer the OP's original question: What would I do differently? I'd like to say that I would have been the equivalent of Audie Murphy or Sargent York in tactically and methodically eliminating all 3 threats. However, I fear that I would have curled up into a fetal position and cried for mamma. I hope to never find out for sure.
 
Just goes to show you how worthless 911 is most of the time.

Remember how annoying that conversation is and that seconds matter when something is happening.

Calling the cops and talking to them while people are in your house is just going to give away your position while the operator keeps trying to ask stupid questions.
Dispatcher is a job that really benefits from someone with communication skills, but often does not pay well and is depressing enough not many stick with it. So you get someone that is just filling the position.

Really the only certain benefit 911 provides is audio recording and medical help after the fact. It starts the ball rolling but the situation is typically over before help arrives.

She managed to defend her home from multiple armed adult men. We can say it would have been better if she did a number of things. But she got 3 men to back out of a violent home invasion.
If it takes more than those shots in an intense fight in the dark to hit never mind put down even a single target, having a low capacity weapon certainly seems undesireable. She fired all those shots and not one dropped, and none may have been hit though you often cannot tell in handgun fights.
I don't want to seem to be advocating wildly firing a gun, those bullets are going somewhere, but gunfights in the dark are not easy and she certainly had the element of surprise in her attack, which she may not have retained against the numerically superior force if they found her.
They had cleared some area and started to let their guard down, if they had started clearing new area their guard may have been back up with their gun at the ready.
I wouldn't be too quick to second judge her timing, just her results are less than what you can be confident in. Running out of ammo and physically stopped nobody, so she was vulnerable but still prevailed.

Some angles of fire are also safer, and if you choose to attack the perp at a specific time you can choose the direction they are being fired at from better than waiting for them to choose. You may have family in some directions, more people in others, but be free to unload in a couple directions with less risk. Clearly you would then want to fire preferably in those directions if you are letting loose lots of lead, and when that opportunity is close your time to act may be short.
What we do see is that the element of surprise is why she won her, even though she did didn't do things perfectly from an outside perspective. Her chances would have been a lot lower in a direct standoff without that element of surprise.
 
Last edited:
The essential point of the video is that nothing was done to the perimeter and shell of the home to prevent them walking in as they pleased. We can argue the merits or tactical issues all we want, but having that tight a focus on this ignores the major failure of keeping them away, and keeping them out in the first place.

Because gun forum - all we talk about are what gun, what ammo, then (almost tragically) how to properly use them, but never any preventative actions to keep from using it in the first place.

Watch the long video - we have perps running in and out doors like a Bugs Bunny cartoon. This home had no defense or security at all except a plan to act when it WOULD fail. Very typical of American lifestyle and home construction.

This thread will focus on her actions - but ignore the negligence in how the intruders decided to go there, having no perimeter security, and simply opening a door and walking in. That exterior door they got thru obviously was no barrier at all. They should have been working their chosen ingress point over for at least 15 minutes and failing that, moving on when they heard sirens.

Home Defense is NOT a gun centric solution. If you need a gun and done nothing to make intruders work hard at getting thru a door, you have planned to fail.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top