While maybe not a good idea, really arrested?

[45_auto]

Around here, ringing the doorbell or knocking is a method BGs use to see if anyone's home. If no one answers, they proceed to go around the back to break in and burglarize the home. If someone answers they either make up a story designed to get the homeowner to let them in, or if they only want to take stuff from unoccupied houses they make up something else like asking where a certain address is.

Hard for me to imagine myself living in that type of environment. Why are you in that neighborhood? Do you have some strong sentimental attachment to your home that prevents you from moving? I believe that I would dump all luxuries (cable service, cell phone, etc) and sell everything beyond one gun, a cheap used car, and a few changes of clothes for my wife and I to get out of such a situation.

 

[Kleanbore]

...person at door ... waves gun at me and threatens to shoot me if I don't let him in. In which case I believe I would be justified to shoot immediately, which I would do through the security door.

Why would he threaten before shooting?

What makes you think that your gunfire would stop him timely?

 

[rodregier]

If "Plan A" involves relying on the discretion of LEOs or prosecutors, you need a new "Plan A".

The overall trends in N. America are towards a more, not less restrictive environment.

One of the very few exceptions are US states legislating for concealed and/or open carry plus "castle" laws.

 

[Kleanbore]

The overall trends in N. America are towards a more, not less restrictive environment.

One of the very few exceptions are US states legislating for concealed and/or open carry plus "castle" laws.

Let us not confuse firearm possession laws with use of force laws.

Nor should we confuse laws on the carrying of firearms with laws relating to their use or display.

 

[Kleanbore]

Around here, ringing the doorbell or knocking is a method BGs use to see if anyone's home. If no one answers, they proceed to go around the back to break in and burglarize the home. If someone answers they either make up a story designed to get the homeowner to let them in, or if they only want to take stuff from unoccupied houses they make up something else like asking where a certain address is.

It is one thing to answer a door, and quite another to place oneself directly in front of stand a short distance from it.

See this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9EZ5Retot5A​

 

[The_Armed_Therapist]

After reading a lot of responses...

I still maintain that what the guy did should not be a crime. Fireman sounds like a pansy. Just move on.

Nothing Kleanbore is saying convinces me that this guy deserves to be arrested and charged. Sorry.

 

[Arkansas Paul]

Nothing Kleanbore is saying convinces me that this guy deserves to be arrested and charged. Sorry.

You certainly have every right to feel that way.
However, most of us would disagree with you.

 

[Frank Ettin]

...I still maintain that what the guy did should not be a crime....

Who cares? Some people understand that reality is what goes on in the world. Others confuse what goes on in their heads for reality.

....Nothing Kleanbore is saying convinces me that this guy deserves to be arrested and charged....

Which only means that you don't understand the laws relating to the use of lethal force. That's not particularly good or anyone who has guns; but that's your problem, not ours.

 

[old lady new shooter]

Hard for me to imagine myself living in that type of environment. Why are you in that neighborhood? Do you have some strong sentimental attachment to your home that prevents you from moving? I believe that I would dump all luxuries (cable service, cell phone, etc) and sell everything beyond one gun, a cheap used car, and a few changes of clothes for my wife and I to get out of such a situation.

Until recently certain family responsibilities required me to stay here, but while I understand that this may be difficult for a person living in a more rural area to imagine, this neighborhood is relatively safe for Los Angeles County.

I still have some responsibilities here but could fulfill them by phone/email and visiting a couple times a year, so I am considering moving to Arizona, as although I thankfully actually feel OK in my house I feel vulnerable when I go anywhere and regular people aren't issued concealed carry permits here.

And for the record, I'm not into luxuries.

 

[old lady new shooter]

Why would he threaten before shooting?

He might or might not. Given the hypothesis I stated, one reason he might is that firing his gun could attract attention which is what he's trying to get away from, whereas if the stupid old lady lets him in he can quietly strangle her instead of shooting.

What makes you think that your gunfire would stop him timely?

It might or might not, but that's not a reason not to try to defend myself. Given my appearance at least I would have the element of surprise in my favor so I could likely fire first. Firing from the hip he would never see it coming. Actually the experience made me realize that's something it would be good to become proficient at.

 

[old lady new shooter]

It is one thing to answer a door, and quite another to place oneself directly in front of stand a short distance from it.

See this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9EZ5Retot5A​

That video is excellent like everything from Mr. Ayoob, I have seen it before.

As previously posted, I have security doors (on all my doors, not just the front door). A BG cannot push or kick his way in.

A side point: the video mentions cover but it's my understanding that most homes don't really have any cover except maybe for bookcases full of books, which typically would require being on the other side of a wall, which would mean you couldn't see the intruder unless the bookcase extended all the way to the doorway. Lath and plaster (or worse, wallboard) walls aren't cover.

 

[Officers'Wife]

After reading a lot of responses...

I still maintain that what the guy did should not be a crime. Fireman sounds like a pansy. Just move on.

Nothing Kleanbore is saying convinces me that this guy deserves to be arrested and charged. Sorry.

First off you are dealing with city people here so the logic becomes extremely twisted. (necessary disclaimer for legal department.)

So, what did the door knocker do that warranted an armed response? In my mind the owner's sign was enough to deny permission to enter the property (or at least attempt to do so by knocking on the door.) But even a reasonable jurisdiction is not going to find an armed response acceptable for simple trespass.

That said, even the reasonable person is going to assume if you have a tool in your hand there is a plan to use it. In a situation where the use would be a crime that same reasonable person would expect legal consequences for the action. While I admit the trespasser was a jerk in refusing to honor the restrictions of the property owner (or resident,) his crime would be at best a simple misdemeanor. The resident's action of emphasizing his restriction with a pistol barrel would (in a reasonable society) equally rude. Among city city the former crime could be explained away and the latter expanded in seriousness.

Please note- I will admit to have low qualifications to discuss the actions of reasonable people.

 

[ridgerunner1965]

wow what a crapstorm. i live in a very rural area, police response would be 30 min to 2 hrs.if they showed at all.

i have often answered knocks at my door armed.

since im so rural most people give a heads up before they come over. mostly just for the sake of not wasting a trip if im not home.people i know i can usually recognize the sound of their vehicles.

if someone showed up just out of the blue i would def be armed and on alert.

i would not brandish or point at anything.but they would see the gun.

so does that make me a criminal? id hope not.

i can promise yu if you show up unannounced and unknown at my house you will be met with firepower. however if you are not what i perceive as a bad guy.nothing bad will happen to you.

to me thats my right as a homeowner. not to mention the fact that you have been trespassing for several minutes before you even get to my house.

so yu city folk can say what you want but in my area if yu answer a unwanted knock at your door unarmed you are known as a idiot.

 

[Kleanbore]

i have often answered knocks at my door armed. ...

The first important question is whether that offers you much in the way of effective protection.

Should your visitor have gun in hand and intend to use it, the answer would be no.

if someone showed up just out of the blue i would def be armed and on alert.

Good.

The next issue is how best to go about safely answering the door.

 

[Haxby]

If the fireman, collecting for charity, says the guy pointed a gun at him, the guy is probably screwed.

 

[Old Guy]

If the fireman, collecting for charity, says the guy pointed a gun at him, the guy is probably screwed.

The answer to the responding Police... "Am I under arrest?" And that is your only words. Or you can go back to bed?

Why do people explain themselves to the Police? In your own home?

And if the majority of responders to this thread seem to think 7 minutes is a long time to respond to a 911 call? You live in La La land.

My two story wee Town House, allows me to see the top of the head of a stair climber first. A head that would suffer a 9mm invasion before a weapon could be aimed at me. With 16 rounds ready for launching, and big bright sights to assist in that landing zone.

 

[Carl N. Brown]

Once the homeowner established that the knocker was a charity fundraiser and he felt safe in walking out on the porch confront the guy, that was the time to put the gun away, show empty hands and use his finger to point to the sign. Going out on the porch gun in hand, using the gun as a pointer, is not a good idea. I would consider it an unnecessary armed confrontation and not something I would defend doing.

 

[Vern Humphrey]

Why would he threaten before shooting?

That's like asking why a convenience store robber would demand money before shooting the clerk.

What makes you think that your gunfire would stop him timely?

What makes anyone think gunfire would stop an attacker in a timely fashion?

 

[Kleanbore]

That's like asking why a convenience store robber would demand money before shooting the clerk.

Not really--a convenience store robber is there to commit robbery.

Someone at your door for purposes of forcible unlawful entry and other violent crimes may say "let me in or I'll shoot you", or he may not. I wouldn't count on it.

What makes anyone think gunfire would stop an attacker in a timely fashion?

One can only hope for the best--when the need for shooting as last resort has not been avoided. There are no guarantees.

But placing oneself right in front of a door when there is reason to believe that the person or persons on the other side may pose a very serious danger is not very prudent.

To believe (1) that one will be always able to shoot first and (2) that shooting first can be expected to prevent the other person from firing is not very realistic.

There are safer ways to answer a door.

 

[Vern Humphrey]

Not really--a convenience store robber is there to commit robbery.

Someone at your door for purposes of forcible unlawful entry and other violent crimes may say "let me in or I'll shoot you", or he may not. I wouldn't count on it.

Who's counting on anything? You asked why a home invader would threaten before shooting -- and I showed an example of a criminal doing just that, albeit in a slightly different setting.

But placing oneself right in front of a door when there is reason to believe that the person or persons on the other side may pose a very serious danger is not very prudent.

I agree. Which is why I don't answer the door and stay out of the line of fire until I know who's out there. But this presupposes the guy on the other side doesn't shoot first.

 

[larryh1108]

I agree with the facts that brandishing a gun while answering the door is a bad idea as well as being illegal. I can see how some people don't agree with that but the law is the law, like it or not.

The day before this thread started, I also answered the door (rural setting, no one ever comes by unannounced) with a gun in my hand. It was behind my back so it was never visible. The person was "trying" to sell me something I had no interest in. They didn't want to leave so easily but the door was closed in their face. No gun was ever visible but it was there if needed. Rural is different than urban or suburbs when it comes to door knockers.

Around here, ringing the doorbell or knocking is a method BGs use to see if anyone's home. If no one answers, they proceed to go around the back to break in and burglarize the home. If someone answers they either make up a story designed to get the homeowner to let them in, or if they only want to take stuff from unoccupied houses they make up something else like asking where a certain address is.

So very true in urban or rural settings. It is a common tactic of burglars. They don't want to do their thing if someone is home. It raises the odds and penalties quite a bit.

Hard for me to imagine myself living in that type of environment. Why are you in that neighborhood? Do you have some strong sentimental attachment to your home that prevents you from moving? I believe that I would dump all luxuries (cable service, cell phone, etc) and sell everything beyond one gun, a cheap used car, and a few changes of clothes for my wife and I to get out of such a situation.

Seriously? This happens in all neighborhoods.... rich, poor, urban, rural, gated, etc. It is a common tactic. Your statement suggests that you cannot live anywhere and it makes no sense. Yes, it can happen in your neighborhood too and probably has. I guess it's time to move, huh?

 

[danez71]

Why would he threaten before shooting?

This is such a silly question. That its being asked from someone with your knowledge base is peculiar.


It matters not if the location is at a home, business, public restroom, or any other location,,,,, or even a vehicle.

It matters not if the person with the gun is wanting money, entry, sex, more cotton picked, or anything else.



The answer is because the person with the gun is wanting to get compliance from the other person.


And isn't it pretty much irrelevant why someone threats another with a gun in regards to self defense laws?

.

 

[Kleanbore]

The answer is because the person with the gun is wanting to get compliance from the other person.

Much more accurately, the answer would be "yes" if the person were trying to get compliance. Otherwise, they might well not do so.

If someone has in mind an immediate, tumultuous, and very violent entry accompanied by murder, they may or may not threaten first.

Do you really imagine that all home invasions start with "let me in"?

I could not count on it.

And isn't it pretty much irrelevant why someone threats another with a gun in regards to self defense laws?

Yes.

What brought that up?

 

[danez71]

Much more accurately, the answer would be "yes" if the person were trying to get compliance. Otherwise, they might well not do so.

No. That's hardly more accurate at all; unless you're changing the context.


The statement/example that you quoted, replied to, and asked the question of was:

...person at door ... waves gun at me and threatens to shoot me if I don't let him in.

(bolded by me)


The statement wasn't 'person at the door threatened to shoot me'. It was that the person at the door with a gun presented a choice 'let me in or I'll shoot you'.

In this context, the context that you were replying to and asked the question, is that the person with the gun is seeking compliance.

Yes.

What brought that up?

Your statement brought it up as it was made out of context.

Perhaps you were trying to raise the possibility that a threat could be made for another reason besides compliance.

However, that would be rather superfluous given that you agreed its pretty much irrelevant as to why someone threats another with a gun in regards to self defense laws.

 

[Kleanbore]

The statement wasn't 'person at the door threatened to shoot me'. It was that the person at the door with a gun presented a choice 'let me in or I'll shoot you'.

Alrighty, then. Why would anyone rely for a moment on the assumption that such a choice would be presented?

In this context, the context that you were replying to and asked the question, is that the person with the gun is seeking compliance.

Which could happen--or not.

But it is not a vey prudent idea to answer a door with gun in hand on the assumption that it will happen, is it? Someone who intends to come in and do evil may or may not "seek compliance".

Perhaps you were trying to raise the possibility that a threat could be made for another reason besides compliance.

No, not at all. The point is that a person wanting to gain entry for felonious purposes may issue no threat at all.

However, that would be rather superfluous given that you agreed its pretty much irrelevant as to why someone threats another with a gun in regards to self defense laws.

Off the subject, if there are no overt verbal threats.

Did you watch the Ayoob video?