Your example has nothing to do with meeting an unknown threat with lethal force. We're talking about shooting a person. Killing them. Not some defenseless woman with a shoe.
If I shot every single person I found in my house after midnight that I thought might be an intruder, I would have shot my best friend twice, my roommate's friend once, and my friend's mother more times than I can count. They come through the front door, the back door . . . hell, I've had people try and crawl through my window next to my bed at 5 in the morning. My co-worker came home from a trip one time, and there was a homeless person in his kitchen cooking food! Not everyone that's trying to get into your house is a criminal. Go back and read rod's post again, he makes some very good points on this subject.
Look. You want to be funny about it, make some John Wayne statement how you're gonna dust any idiot who thinks they can get away with breaking into your house, no questions asked, fine. But don't make fun of people who actually prefer not to shoot their friend just because they're drunk and they want to crash on your couch.
What exactly do you think you need to do in order to determine whether or not someone in your house is a threat or not? Do you honestly think you need to "interview" him? How about shining a light in their eyes, as Sage suggested? Or racking a shotgun (keeping things on-topic)? Is it really so difficult to take the extra brain power during this kind of situation?
Let's take your story about your mother hitting the burglar with a shoe. but, to keep it relevant, let's change the shoe to a handgun. Which would make more sense; should she (a) put her hand out of the window, point the handgun down, and unload on the guy while he's still climbing up, or (b) tell the dumb SOB that she has a gun, the cops are on their way, and he needs to get the heck out of there? Which one do you think would be easier to defend in court if she ended up using lethal force? And most importantly, does she give anything up defensively by choosing option (b)?
If I shot every single person I found in my house after midnight that I thought might be an intruder, I would have shot my best friend twice, my roommate's friend once, and my friend's mother more times than I can count. They come through the front door, the back door . . . hell, I've had people try and crawl through my window next to my bed at 5 in the morning. My co-worker came home from a trip one time, and there was a homeless person in his kitchen cooking food! Not everyone that's trying to get into your house is a criminal. Go back and read rod's post again, he makes some very good points on this subject.
Look. You want to be funny about it, make some John Wayne statement how you're gonna dust any idiot who thinks they can get away with breaking into your house, no questions asked, fine. But don't make fun of people who actually prefer not to shoot their friend just because they're drunk and they want to crash on your couch.
What exactly do you think you need to do in order to determine whether or not someone in your house is a threat or not? Do you honestly think you need to "interview" him? How about shining a light in their eyes, as Sage suggested? Or racking a shotgun (keeping things on-topic)? Is it really so difficult to take the extra brain power during this kind of situation?
Let's take your story about your mother hitting the burglar with a shoe. but, to keep it relevant, let's change the shoe to a handgun. Which would make more sense; should she (a) put her hand out of the window, point the handgun down, and unload on the guy while he's still climbing up, or (b) tell the dumb SOB that she has a gun, the cops are on their way, and he needs to get the heck out of there? Which one do you think would be easier to defend in court if she ended up using lethal force? And most importantly, does she give anything up defensively by choosing option (b)?


Comment