Posted by KodiakBeer: I'm willing to kill to defend my family, home and possessions.
You are obviously willing to put yourself at risk to
try to do so.
Of course, if he or they get the upper hand, who then defends your family?
By the way, watch what you say about using deadly force to "defend possessions", and watch what you do. Know your state law, including the meaning of appellate decsions, and know that what you post can be used against you, should the occasion arise. Note: do not rely on a lay interpretation of the code.
And I ask (again) what data you can provide to show an armed homeowner is at a disadvantage?
I do not think that anyone on THR believes that an armed homeowner is at a disadvantage.
It is
the person who walks into the other person's ambush who is at a very extreme disadvantage. If the intruders are there to do real harm (rather than just taking valuables) and they try to attack a homeowner who is armed and ready in a defensive position, it is
they who will be at a real disadvantage.
Data? It has been provided several times now.
The reality is you can protect your property or you can hunker down and let them steal your property.
I can try to protect it and I can fail.
I cannot conceive of wanting to be permanently injured or killed in an attempt protect property of any kind.
The police will turn on the sirens to give him warning when it's time to go.
Really?
The police will use sirens on their way to a fire, an accident scene, or a medical emergency, or in a car chase.
I have seen police cars responding to vandalism, shoplifting, armed robbery, and burglary calls.
They do not use their sirens.
Why? You said it yourself.
When they arrive, they'll fill out a form. They're done. You lose.
Actually, the homeowner wins if no one in the family is injured and if he does not have the blood of an intruder on his carpet.
Even if he gets through the encounter uninjured, and even if his shooting of an intruder is ruled to have justified, he will likely wish that he had not done so.
Some of Massad Ayoobs' books relate what shooters who acted lawfully have gone through afterwards. Best to avoid that if possible.
In reality, a BG has zero motivation to engage in a gunfight. He's going to take what he already has and run with it. Which (in my opinion) is going to be the case 99% of the time. He doesn't want to die (or kill) for a few hundred bucks worth of loot.
On that, we agree, unless he or they are there for something much more diabolical.
So, if he doesn't want to harm me, I do not see any wisdom at all in giving him a very strong motive to shoot me by making him defend himself against me.
That is
exactly what going out and pointing a gun at him would do. At the very least, I would force him to take desperate action to avoid capture.
At least, there has been no indication that any of the burglars who have shot and killed homeowners in our large metro area in the last year or so had any other motivation.
There was a rape committed by a burglar the other day, however.
