I question the very premise of this thread.
The "premise" was not made clear.
I’m not about to go wandering around investigating noises and presenting myself as a target. If there’s a shootable threat in my house then let him come to me so I can engage at my maximum advantage.
Good thinking!
I thought it was pretty well settled that you don’t go looking to get yourself shot in your own house?
That is, of course what most people who know the subject advise, and yes, it has been discussed here at great length over the last ten years or so.
If you hear an unexpected noise, what are you going to do? Stay in your bedroom with your gun and call the police and hope they get there in time to keep whoever just broke in from killing, kidnapping, or raping your children in other rooms?
That is not acceptable to me.
Really? Putting yourself at an unnecessary risk of getting shot is somehow more acceptable to you?
If I called the police everytime "a noise woke me up" I would have been calling them probably once a month at least, maybe once a week. Yeah if something were to really happen they would come, but probably long after I really needed them.
Anyone who has kids, pets or other people living in the same household, dog(s) outside etc is going to be woken up now and then. It could be a raccoon or possum. If you call for police assistance everytime it does, they are going to get tired of it.
Again, this has been discussed ad nauseam, and no one recommends calling "every time you hear a noise". You
evaluate the noise first, and
then decide what to do.
From my reading of the Wisconsin law and more than a few scholarly articles by attorneys, someone just being in my home uninvited is presumed justification to use lethal force - no weapon needed, no verbal threats or even assault needs to happen, their mere presence is assumed to put the homeowner in fear for their life.
The law does provide such a presumption, but it is rebuttable, and it is incumbent upon the defender to use appropriate caution and judgment before trying to rely on that layman's interpretation of the law.
Interestingly, civil immunity applies.
If, and only if, you are an officer of the court, and it provides immunity only against remedies against you associated with accusations that you violated the Fourth Amendment.
If someone has done something to warrant your use of deadly force, they have committed a felony in your presence (against you, a third party). In my jurisdiction a citizen's arrest is quite lawful for felonies committed in your presence or view (and certain misdemeanors).
It may well be lawful, bit it is very dangerous, it creates serious liability, and it exposes the resident to the risk of unlawfully using excessive force.
The second main issue is safety.
That should be your
first issue, and trying to restrain someone by yourself is not safe at all. It is the province of the naive.
Assuming a noise is a bad guy is also an assumption.
Yes it is, and a number of people have found to their horror that that assumption was a bad one.
If there's a murderer in my house I don't plan to make it easier for them. Feel free to do otherwise.
Good thinking.
People seem to be thinking in terms of guns, flex cuffs, and flashlights. Think first in terms of security cameras, and you will be a whole lot better off.
Those who have engaged in indoor confrontations in FoF exercises in a shoot house, even one that one knows like the back of his hand, know very well that the defender who goes looking for the threat is very likely to lose just about every time.
