What is your primary defensive firearm?

Solomonson said:

Why? Primary defensive weapons differ from person to person. Some people cannot or choose not to carry. For such people the default would be their home defense firearm, no matter what it might be. Others do carry -- even at home so their primary defensive weapon would be whatever they carry.

Click to expand...

Seems to me you should have narrowed your parameters then. When asking about a primary weapon and then introducing long guns into the poll, who EDC's a long gun? The answer is no one.

Therefore the rational person is going to assume you are referring to HD.

Beretta 92FS as it is my primary conceal carry gun.

However for home (ranch) defense my primary is a carbine as it is more useful for a variety of tasks.

Wisco said:

But if not clearing anything and only defending, I'd pick a long gun.

Click to expand...

I would be hard pressed to use a long gun from cover in my bedroom. I would have to expose my entire upper body.

When I'm out and about it's my S&W 637 Airweight or Beretta Cheetah 84FS double stack and usually keep one of those close by when I'm at home. I have a variety of options for home defense but in the bedroom it's usually a LCR .327 on the nightstand with a Stoeger 12 ga coach gun in the corner. My wife prefers her Bersa .380.
Although I live in the city limits my side of town is fairly rural. Bordering my property is a creek with about 100 acres of woods that occasionally attracts some nefarious two legged critters that like to wander up onto my place and look in to car windows or steal things. To give those folks a hearty welcome to the neighborhood, especially at night, it's my 12 ga. pump with #4 buckshot and a surefire light/strobe attached.

What is my primary defensive firearm? It would be one of three 9mm Glocks. Unless I’m out and about, then it could be a 380 or a 9.

On the street, right now it's the CZ SP-01 Phantom. If in the wild, most likely the BREN 805. However, I am fat and old, so I rarely wander too far afield. Might get lost.

Around town, my Glock 42 has been getting the nod. Out and about backpacking/hiking it's my Glock 20

Primary is my Charter Arms Undercover Southpaw.

Kleanbore said:

If you think that force would be justified in the event of someone looking into a car window, you are in need of some education.

And by the way, where you live in Texas, displaying a firearm to give someone a "hearty welcome" would only be lawful if force were justified. In most states, the threshold for justification is a lot higher.

Click to expand...

Sir, I'm not one to start an argument but I've been in some type of law enforcement in this state for close to 40 years.The law governing deadly force in Texas is pretty unique and the Texas statute for Use of Deadly force is pretty clear. See below. If I go outside to confront someone on my property who I believe is in the "imminent commission" of burglarizing one of my vehicles or committing or attempting to commit some other crime outlined in section 2 A of the statute I am taking a firearm with me. Would I use that firearm? It would depend on the circumstances of course but I have every right in this state to protect my property with deadly force. As a property owner in this state I am allowed to display a firearm on my property as long as long as I don't openly threaten anyone that is not committing a crime. Stepping outside with a firearm while on my property or property under my control is not a crime in this state. Do I do it all the time. Of course not.
I've lived in this house for 25 years and in that time I've had two people spread eagle on the driveway waiting for the local police to come. One I saw on camera attempting to break the lock on my fence and the other was looking in the window, at 2AM, of my wife's vehicle. The first one had a screwdriver and a pair of pliers the second one a flat blade putty scraper and a buck knife. I will do what I must to protect my family and my property but I am not openly advocating here for someone to use deadly force in those type of situations. My comment concerning a "hearty welcome" was just at an attempt at humor. Nothing more. I do not know what the thresholds are for deadly force in other states and can only suggest that responsible firearm owners be aware of their state statutes.

• FindLaw
• Codes
• Texas
• Penal Code - PENAL
• § 9.42

Texas Penal Code - PENAL § 9.42. Deadly Force to Protect Property
Search Texas Statutes

• Search by Keyword or Citation

3 2637

« Prev

Next »





A person is justified in using deadly force against another to protect land or tangible, movable property:

(1) if he would be justified in using force against the other under Section 9.41;  and

(2) when and to the degree he reasonably believes the deadly force is immediately necessary:

(A) to prevent the other's imminent commission of arson, burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, theft during the nighttime, or criminal mischief during the nighttime;  or

(B) to prevent the other who is fleeing immediately after committing burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, or theft during the nighttime from escaping with the property;  and

(3) he reasonably believes that:

(A) the land or property cannot be protected or recovered by any other means;  or

(B) the use of force other than deadly force to protect or recover the land or property would expose the actor or another to a substantial risk of death or serious bodily injury

Double post

Because of summer months and lighter dress, I'm now regularly carrying my Ruger LCP. It has the 7 round extended mag, and the standard mag with an extension for a backup. When my dress gets a bit heavier, I'll go with an IWB carry .38 revolver, most commonly my Taurus Poly Protector. My standard house gun for evenings is either one of my 9mm's or one of my .40's. The most commonly used being a Ruger SR9c or a Smith and Wesson M&P .40 full size.

On foot: Glock 43 & NAA 22wmr

In my vehicle: ditto + Glock 20sf 9x25 dillon with 18 Extreme Defenders

Bedside/safe: S&W 681 357mag, RRA Nat match AR, Rem 1187 12ga

Computer room desk pistol safe: Rock Island 2011

Shop: CZ75B

Highly situational- around the workshop it's usually any of several 5-shot revolvers. If I am going to hole up in the bedroom and wait for the cops it's a 12 gauge pump shotgun. If for some crazy reason I need to take things into the yard it will be the AR. Linda just gave me a Para-Ordinance LDA .45 Carry which is now the nightstand gun of choice, and when I have proper leather for it it may largely replace the revolvers.

Kleanbore said:

Yes it is, and among the elements of justification is immediate necessity.
Do you really think that would be prudent?
Of course, had they decided to depart, you would have had to watch them leave.

And while you were waiting, you were exposed to a number of serious risks. Best to stay inside.

Click to expand...

Sir, I guess you and I will have to differ on this and I don't want to sound arrogant here but If I see some unknown person on my property and in my judgement attempting to commit a crime or committing a crime it is an immediate necessity, to me, to confront the criminal with a firearm as long as I have or had a "reasonable belief" that deadly force may be needed to protect myself or my property. It may not be the most prudent thing for some people to do nor do I suggest that anyone do this if local laws prohibit it but I am not one to idly stand by and watch a criminal steal or attempt to steal from me or commit some other type of offense. If they walk away? I would still attempt to detain them. If I reasonably believed they actually committed a crime or attempted to commit a crime on my property the state statue on deadly force still applies. Would I use deadly force? I hope not and probably not but I would be fully prepared to do so if needed.
I am not a yahoo who advocates "shoot first and ask questions later" or one to needlessly or recklessly use a firearm. I have arrested plenty of bad guys in my long life and although I am 5 months shy of mandatory retirement and have had a nice desk job the last three years I am still fully confident in my abilities with a firearm and when confronting a criminal. Please excuse me if you or anyone else interpreted my original post on this thread as me being someone that would use a firearm without justification. That was surely not my intent as I respect the people on this forum and think that the discourse here is excellent. And sir, if you have time, please read this:
http://abcnews.go.com/TheLaw/story?id=5278638 It's an interesting insight into the Texas Deadly Force Statute and Castle Doctrine.

Primarily I would say a handgun, typically a semi-auto but on occasion a revolver.

My CC guns, G23 and LCP

IMHO, your primary defensive gun, is the one you carry most, the one that's with you the most of the time, no matter what is going on, under normal conditions. For me, that's my Sig P238 in .380 with Buffalo Bore Ammo.

I voted There are different........ Generally, my primary defensive weapon is my EDC, a 3 inch 1911, even while at home. However, in times of high stress, i.e. Stay in your homes-keep your doors and windows locked, that may change to a semi-auto shotgun, or my AR or even better for inside, a laser sighted PLR-16. Luckily, these times that happened only a few times while I lived in the Detroit area, have never appeared here, where I retired.

Kleanbore said:

Immediate necessity is not a prerequisite for justifying confrontation per se--only the use of force, or the threat of force.

Forget "had"--that's not "immediate".

But what you might consider reasonable is just part of it. What would others decide that a reasonable person, knowing what you knew at the time, have done?

You would have no legal right to do so unless you are a sworn officer within your jurisdiction, and then you would need a lawful reason. Trespass does not constitute a lawful reason.

No, it does not. The operative words are prevent and protect.

We are reminded of the Texas airline mechanic who, with complete justification, left the safety of his home armed with a shotgun to investigate noises indicating an immediate threat to his tangible, movable property at night. He was shot and stabbed, and he lost an arm. The question was not one of his abilities with a firearm, or of his confidence in those abilities.

The risks involved in leaving the safety of your home are serious and manifold. You could easily be shot by one whose presence had been unknown to you. You could be shot by a first responder who had been summoned by someone else. You could use deadly force and fail in your defense of justification because it was determined by others that your actions constituted the initiation of the confrontation--a confrontation that you could have avoided. You could be responsible for an unintentional discharge of a firearm. You could be charged with and convicted of illegally restraining the individuals. You could be shot by a trespasser, who may well be justified in doing so in self defense under the law.

All downside, no upside.

By the way, while the unfortunate Mr. Horn, mentioned in your ABC News link, believed that he had been justified in trying to protect property of others, he may well not have been. The case was dropped because of the testimony of an LEO witness who stated that he saw Horn fire in self defense. And Horn ended up a ruined man.

The next Grand Jury may well have decided differently.

Click to expand...

I respectfully disagree with you. The thought of allowing someone to come into my property with the sole intention of committing a crime while I stand by and do nothing is totally unfathomable to me and also to the majority of the people I know and probably a good number of people reading this. If it's not something you would do that's your decision and I respect that. If evil is brought into my life I will confront it. That is a conscious decision I made a long time ago as I refuse to be a victim if there is anything I can do to prevent it. To ignore it serves no purpose. Are there risks involved? I would be a fool to think otherwise but I am willing to take that risk and have in the past. I am pretty good at assessing a situation before getting involved. If it was something I thought might be to much for me to handle I'm smart enough to let it go or wait for backup.
Sir, the Texas Statute on the Use of Deadly Force to Protect Property and the Texas Castle Doctrine is clear to me. Your interpretation of same is, well. your interpretation. Without a doubt Joe Horn pushed the boundaries of the law but still was no billed by a grand jury. I used it as an example as to how many people interpret the applicable laws that were in play and how unique those laws are to the State of Texas. What another grand jury might do is a moot point. The City of Pasadena and Harris County are fairly conservative. You can multiply that x10 in my county of residence.
Let me make clear that I do not advocate the unjustifiable use of firearms. I can only speak for myself and what I might do depending on the situation presented. And with that I'm done......

A loaded one.