Do any self defense rules ever “change”

[middleground]

I don’t post a lot, and this post does involve some amount of “shtf” discussion. If THR isn’t the place for this, I apologize in advance.

So I’ve read several posts where folks had unknown bad guys/drunks/random people banging on their front doors, and trying break through into the house.

It seems like the sensible approach is to call 911, arm yourself, and maybe tell the person in question that they should leave because you dialed 911 and armed yourself.

I feel like I’ve read that shooting through a door at an unknown/unseen target is completely unacceptable, and could very likely lead to the shooter going to jail. If nothing else, shooting at an unseen target breaks one of the 4 rules.

If the bad guy manages to break down the door, heaven forbid, its now time to defend yourself, your family, and your home.

Now here’s my question, finally.

Let’s say some local natural disaster takes place in your area. Hurricane, big ice storm, earth quake etc. Local law and order is disrupted. You can call 911, but the police are probably too busy to respond. Maybe the phones don’t even work. If you wait until your door is broken down, your home is now probably much less secure then it was before. Even if the bad guys run off, you now have no front door…or at least no lock.

Can anyone here speak to whether events like hurricanes, blizzards, or earthquakes sort of loosen the standards for self defense?

I am not trying to incite chest thumping, but if any Law Enforcement Officers, Lawyers, or anyone in the know could chime in I would appreciate it.

-MG

 

[BullfrogKen]

I would imagine if a disaster hit of such proportion that civil order was disrupted and police service too preoccupied to respond, you'd need to do what was necessary.


I don't advocate warning shots, but that might be one situation where it might be enough to bring about the reaction you want.

 

[JoeSlomo]

Can anyone here speak to whether events like hurricanes, blizzards, or earthquakes sort of loosen the standards for self defense?

IMO the standards for self defense don't change, however, the standards of behavior may change for the criminal element as they see disaster as a greater opportunity to get away with nefarious acts.

 

[jeepmor]

If push came to shove as you describe, I might lodge a bullet in a known wall timber to make a point before I'd shoot through the door at someone.

America is due another large scale disaster with the Cascadia fault that has recorded 4-6' changes in land elevation. The time frame of the events has this one about due.

 

[cbrgator]

In a natural disaster like that, the laws don't get relaxed per government rules. The laws stand as they are. Now, in a situation like that, enforceability becomes a factor. If there is no law enforcement presence and survival is at issue, right and wrong get grayer. I would say that in the wake of a natural disaster, act in compliance with the law but do what is necessary to your survival. If you truly believe you must act a certain way to survive, do so in good faith, not because you might get away with it.

 

[middleground]

Thanks for the replies, its good to get other peoples take on this.

 

[Fred Fuller]

We had a long discussion on a somewhat similar topic a couple of years ago. That one involved NC law, which is... somewhat thorny to put it mildly. You might find it interesting though- see http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=380939 .

I don't know if it will apply to your situation or not. Some other states have "violent and tumultuous entry" provisions in their statutes and/or case law, yours might be one of them.

It's vital to understand both blackletter law and case law on self defense in your jurisdiction. Only then can informed decisions be made about what to do and when. It's important to know the legal standards of conduct in your state/jurisdiction, and to be able to clearly explain why you found it necessary to exercise lethal force on another individual, as well as why you felt that decision to be justified.

The law does change, Most of the time those changes are glacially slow however. I wouldn't bet on special exceptions for a given individual or situation being made on a circumstantial basis just because whatever happened, happened in the aftermath of a natural disaster or some other similar circumstance.

And many of the changes in the law that happen as a result of some sort of formal declaration of a state of emergency can make things MORE restrictive, not less. For example, there has been a good deal of spittle sprayed on monitors in some quarters over the decision of authorities in Stokes County and the town of King, NC to declare a state of emergency over the weekend just passed (see http://www.wxii12.com/weather/22487153/detail.html , http://www.digtriad.com/news/most_popular/article.aspx?storyid=137018&provider=top ).

Such restrictions under a formal state of emergency are nothing new in NC, they have been in place for years, the information is part of the training that goes along with receiving a NC CCH permit.

Thus, it might well be a good idea to fully explore what changes if any take place in your area under a declared state of emergency...

hth,

lpl

 

[wishin]

Yes, they can. Although not the "rules", but the means.

I don't know how many other states have a similar provision of "Emergency Powers", but Georgia has one that suspends or limits the sale, dispensing, or transportation of firearms during states of emergency. There is a revised bill in the works to eliminate this statute here. Although such a law wouldn't necessarily effect a GFL holder, if you lost your CC weapon in a disaster, purchasing a new one under current law would be illegal should an emergency be declared.

More reason to have more guns.

 

[griz]

A lot of our "rules" are based on the assumption that their are trained proffesionals (Police) to sort out the the borderline situations. That's why "call 911" is such universal advice, it's usually just not my job to figure out if the guy on my porch actually needs to talk to his wife on the phone and there's no way I can relay the info to her because the dog just had a litter of kittens and.....

So when that safety net isn't there, yes, you will have to take on some more resposibility for making those decisions. But I still don't like the idea of shooting through doors unless I could easily explain how I knew the guy on the other side is a direct threat.

 

[scoutsabout]

A door can be repaired enough to hold, if you are even slightly handy.

Warning shots just tilt your hand.

Issue a "cease and desist" command. Then, if they break down the door, light 'em up with the 870.

 

[Double Naught Spy]

Let’s say some local natural disaster takes place in your area. Hurricane, big ice storm, earth quake etc. Local law and order is disrupted. You can call 911, but the police are probably too busy to respond. Maybe the phones don’t even work. If you wait until your door is broken down, your home is now probably much less secure then it was before. Even if the bad guys run off, you now have no front door…or at least no lock.

I really don't see how some sort of disaster changes a thing in this case. Somebody is beating down your door and you call 911. It doesn't matter if there has been a disaster or not, there is little chance of the police arriving in time.

Here is Donna Jackson's story.... http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=490633&highlight=donna+jackson and you can pan down to find the link to the 911 recording.

Here are others where being on the phone with 911 only meant the incident was recorded for the police to listen to later as the occupants still had to shoot people...
http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=443428&highlight=911+call+door+intruder
http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=392213&highlight=911+call+door+intruder
http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=157396&highlight=911+call+door+intruder
http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=300875&highlight=bohemian+911+call

There are many others that can be found where folks call 911 while somebody(ies) break into a home and the occupant shoots them on entry, or hides within the home and shoots the intruder upon being discovered...all recorded on 911. For some reason, the reassurance by the dispatcher that help is on the way does little to stop the progress of the intruder. In fact, it does seem to stop any.

The only difference I see between regular events and events after a disaster is that the bad guys can count on the cops to not show up at all after a disaster.

So with a disaster or without, the door/window gets kicked in and the homeowner is left with a security issue.

 

[JDoe]

Let’s say some local natural disaster takes place in your area. Hurricane, big ice storm, earth quake etc. Local law and order is disrupted. You can call 911, but the police are probably too busy to respond. Maybe the phones don’t even work. If you wait until your door is broken down, your home is now probably much less secure then it was before. Even if the bad guys run off, you now have no front door…or at least no lock.

How do you know it is a bad guy? After Katrina the authorities were going door to door banging on doors and busting doors down to check if people were inside the house.

Another question is how do you know it is a good guy banging at your door?