# Family fights back when 3 gunmen storm their home **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [February 23, 2013, 10:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/family-fights-back-when-3-gunmen-storm-their-home/651203 "2013-02-23T22:07:04Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Labrador\_Deceiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/7c8e57/32.png) [@Labrador\_Deceiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Labrador_Deceiver)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2013, 1:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/family-fights-back-when-3-gunmen-storm-their-home/651203/41 "2013-02-26T01:16:22Z")
Other stories say they were armed. No idea if they’re accurate or not. ---
**Author:** ![Labrador\_Deceiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/7c8e57/32.png) [@Labrador\_Deceiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Labrador_Deceiver)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2013, 1:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/family-fights-back-when-3-gunmen-storm-their-home/651203/42 "2013-02-26T01:19:59Z")
> [@Snowboarder\_Bo](#): > > Are you claiming that a gun, by itself, without a person wielding it, is an effective deterrant? > > Or was there some other conclusion that should be drawn from your determination of “false” in response to the assertion that “a person must operate a gun for it to be effective”? If that’s what he means, then I will not argue. Most people don’t use the phrase “operate a gun” when they mean “holding a gun”, though. If that’s what was meant, then okay. It’s still rather silly to criticize a family for not owning a dog, or not having an alarm system set while the family is up and about, but that’s a whole other kettle of fish. ---
**Author:** ![April\_R](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/3da27b/32.png) [@April\_R](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/April_R)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2013, 1:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/family-fights-back-when-3-gunmen-storm-their-home/651203/43 "2013-02-26T01:29:54Z")
> [@panaccione](#): > > Why does anyone break into somebody’s homes considering the consequences? Because they’re stupid, and lack morals. > > Good on that, son. That’s one hell of a story he’ll have. Bet he has no problem finding a woman. 🙂 While what he did was extreme bravery under unbelievable pressure, I don’t see how that would be any particular turn on for a woman. :dubious: ---
**Author:** ![Enkel](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/df705f/32.png) [@Enkel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Enkel)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2013, 1:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/family-fights-back-when-3-gunmen-storm-their-home/651203/44 "2013-02-26T01:47:42Z")
It would be interesting to see any follow up articles about this incident. It really sounds like the kid was trying to rip off drug dealers and it went south on him. Why would a burglar push through a front door where they could be recognized by any survivors? The only reason to push through the front door is because the intruders expected a confrontation, but didn’t intend to kill anyone. After all, the kid isn’t going to be running to the police with an assault complaint when the assault was because he hadn’t paid off his drug shipment. That would definitely fit the pattern around here where the local-idiot figures he can get his drugs wholesale by selling to his buddies. The dealers sell them on spec and the local-idiot ends up drinking away the funds thinking that the dealer will be cool with getting paid a week late. ---
**Author:** ![aruvqan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/aruvqan/32/2891_2.png) [@aruvqan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/aruvqan)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2013, 1:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/family-fights-back-when-3-gunmen-storm-their-home/651203/45 "2013-02-26T01:53:27Z")
> [@Snowboarder\_Bo](#): > > I forgot to mention in my last post, but I don’t recall reading anything about the intruders having guns except in the headline. Did they actually have guns (or weapons of any kind)? To be honest, if someone pushes their way into my house, I don’t care if they are armed with cotton candy on sticks, I find them threatening and would tell my husband to drop, and I would shoot at the guys in the doorway. corrected the spelling from inturders to intruders in the quote. ---
**Author:** ![Snowboarder\_Bo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/snowboarder_bo/32/229_2.png) [@Snowboarder\_Bo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Snowboarder_Bo)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2013, 2:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/family-fights-back-when-3-gunmen-storm-their-home/651203/46 "2013-02-26T02:02:47Z")
> [@aruvqan](#): > > To be honest, if someone pushes their way into my house, I don’t care if they are armed with cotton candy on sticks, I find them threatening and would tell my husband to drop, and I would shoot at the guys in the doorway. > > corrected the spelling from inturders to intruders in the quote. I’m not at all questioning the appropriateness of the man’s response to the intruders’ actions. I am questioning the veracity of the news story. ---
**Author:** ![Snowboarder\_Bo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/snowboarder_bo/32/229_2.png) [@Snowboarder\_Bo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Snowboarder_Bo)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2013, 2:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/family-fights-back-when-3-gunmen-storm-their-home/651203/47 "2013-02-26T02:11:51Z")
> [@Labrador\_Deceiver](#): > > If that’s what he means, then I will not argue. Most people don’t use the phrase “operate a gun” when they mean “holding a gun”, though. > > If that’s what was meant, then okay. It’s still rather silly to criticize a family for not owning a dog, or not having an alarm system set while the family is up and about, but that’s a whole other kettle of fish. So your argument is that merely holding a gun can be a deterrent, but that isn’t the same as “operating” the gun, even tho both actions would take a person? Do I have that correct? To you, there is such a difference between wielding a gun without firing it and wielding a gun _and_ firing it that the word “operate” has no place in describing the former? You are aware that in the context of law, it doesn’t matter at all if a criminal act is committed with a gun that fires bullets or one that merely makes an appearance, right? Bank robbers don’t get lighter sentences because they didn’t fire their guns, etc. And you question whether the operative element at play in **filmore** ’s post is the human element, despite the fact that the entire post is about active defensive possibilities that specifically do not require the immediate presence of a person? Do I have that correct? Despite the clear and consistent (he mentions the concept multiple times in the brief 10 sentence post) subject matter of why a gun is possibly not the best defensive option, you think that he was merely talking about actually shooting, as opposed to wielding, a gun? ---
**Author:** ![Hottius\_Maximus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/3ab097/32.png) [@Hottius\_Maximus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hottius_Maximus)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2013, 2:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/family-fights-back-when-3-gunmen-storm-their-home/651203/48 "2013-02-26T02:12:52Z")
> [@filmore](#): > > This demonstrates the false sense of security from guns. A person must operate the gun for it to be effective. If the son had not been there or had been incapacitated, the gun would not have helped at all. > > If instead they had a dog and alarm system, likely the intruders would have not even tried or quickly fled. And even if they didn’t flee, the alarm will bring help quickly from the police or neighbors. Another advantage to an alarm is that you can have panic buttons in clear view in every room for easy access. You can’t do the same with guns. > > Guns can be used for home security, but it should be the last line of defense. The intruders should have had to go through other active defense systems. In many of these “saved by gun” stories, it doesn’t appear there were any such systems in place. If the family didn’t have a weapon than they would have been out of luck too. As for an alarm system, the father opened the door and that’s when the others forced their way in, hence an alarm system wouldn’t have done them any good. Even if they did have an alarm system, as the saying goes: When seconds count, the police are minutes away! ---
**Author:** ![levdrakon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/49beb7/32.png) [@levdrakon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/levdrakon)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2013, 2:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/family-fights-back-when-3-gunmen-storm-their-home/651203/49 "2013-02-26T02:16:12Z")
> [@aruvqan](#): > > To be honest, if someone pushes their way into my house, I don’t care if they are armed with cotton candy on sticks, I find them threatening and would tell my husband to drop, and I would shoot at the guys in the doorway. > > corrected the spelling from inturders to intruders in the quote. It’s important though. Being in possession of a gun during an assault makes you significantly more likely to be shot. The occasional feel-good story is nice, but the reality is if the intruders had guns, the outcome would probably have been different. [According to this study](http://ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/full/10.2105/AJPH.2008.143099): > [@](#): > > Conclusions. On average, guns did not protect those who possessed them from being shot in an assault. Although successful defensive gun uses occur each year, the probability of success may be low for civilian gun users in urban areas. Such users should reconsider their possession of guns or, at least, understand that regular possession necessitates careful safety countermeasures. Read More: [http://ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/full/10.2105/AJPH.2008.143099](http://ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/full/10.2105/AJPH.2008.143099) Or, as the saying goes, “if you have a gun, pray the intruder doesn’t.” ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2013, 2:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/family-fights-back-when-3-gunmen-storm-their-home/651203/50 "2013-02-26T02:23:32Z")
> [@Eonwe](#): > > Fair enough. And I certainly think this kid did “right,” based on available info. > > But being proud is one thing. Parading one’s pride, particularly when it’s pride in committing a (hopefully) difficult and unwanted act that one was forced into . . . that’s not an admirable character trait, IMO. I don’t think it’s pride in the act of shooting somebody. The pride is defending your family, even if it involved shooting somebody. ---
**Author:** ![Labrador\_Deceiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/7c8e57/32.png) [@Labrador\_Deceiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Labrador_Deceiver)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2013, 3:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/family-fights-back-when-3-gunmen-storm-their-home/651203/51 "2013-02-26T03:16:18Z")
> [@Snowboarder\_Bo](#): > > So your argument is that merely holding a gun can be a deterrent, but that isn’t the same as “operating” the gun, even tho both actions would take a person? Do I have that correct? To you, there is such a difference between wielding a gun without firing it and wielding a gun _and_ firing it that the word “operate” has no place in describing the former? You are aware that in the context of law, it doesn’t matter at all if a criminal act is committed with a gun that fires bullets or one that merely makes an appearance, right? Bank robbers don’t get lighter sentences because they didn’t fire their guns, etc. > > And you question whether the operative element at play in **filmore** ’s post is the human element, despite the fact that the entire post is about active defensive possibilities that specifically do not require the immediate presence of a person? Do I have that correct? Despite the clear and consistent (he mentions the concept multiple times in the brief 10 sentence post) subject matter of why a gun is possibly not the best defensive option, you think that he was merely talking about actually shooting, as opposed to wielding, a gun? WTF are you rambling about? I said that I had no problem with the phrase “operating a gun” if he, in fact, meant that wielding a gun was included. What is it you have a problem with? ---
**Author:** ![filmore](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/7993a0/32.png) [@filmore](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/filmore)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2013, 3:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/family-fights-back-when-3-gunmen-storm-their-home/651203/52 "2013-02-26T03:32:36Z")
> [@Hottius\_Maximus](#): > > If the family didn’t have a weapon than they would have been out of luck too. As for an alarm system, the father opened the door and that’s when the others forced their way in, hence an alarm system wouldn’t have done them any good. Even if they did have an alarm system, as the saying goes: When seconds count, the police are minutes away! Not necessarily. If there was a panic button near the door he may have been able to activate it. Also, there could be panic buttons scattered throughout the house so that the mom or son could active them from where they were. That’s the advantage of an alarm. You can put panic buttons where ever you want and even kids can use them. You can’t really do the same thing with guns since you’d have to deal with the problems of having loaded weapons in every room. And back before when I said operate the gun, I meant a person needs to actually be involved for the gun to do anything. Without a person, the gun is just an inert hunk of metal. It’s not going to call for help or do anything to fend of the attackers all by itself. If someone’s home defense begins and ends with gun ownership, that’s not a good plan. A gun won’t wake you up as an intruder silently enters your bedroom. A gun won’t do anything to an intruder who breaks in when you’re not home. A gun doesn’t care who is operating it. If the intruder grabs the gun first, he can shoot the homeowner. If security is the main concern, then there should be more systems in place than just a gun. ---
**Author:** ![Snowboarder\_Bo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/snowboarder_bo/32/229_2.png) [@Snowboarder\_Bo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Snowboarder_Bo)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2013, 3:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/family-fights-back-when-3-gunmen-storm-their-home/651203/53 "2013-02-26T03:43:10Z")
> [@Labrador\_Deceiver](#): > > WTF are you rambling about? I said that I had no problem with the phrase “operating a gun” if he, in fact, meant that wielding a gun was included. What is it you have a problem with? I’m just not sure how you were able to read a post that was entirely about the need for an active human presence for defense/deterrence vs. defense/deterrence minus an active human presence and somehow conclude that the post was entirely about firing a gun. I’m trying to understand your point of view and how you read **filmore** ’s post and only came away with “well, showing a gun isn’t _operating_ a gun, so your post is wrong”. I mean, here it is two posts later, including one from me which explains what **filmore** ’s post was about, and you are still couching your reply in “if he, in fact meant wielding a gun was included.” ISTM that your focus was, and possibly still is, only on the word “operating”, even tho it’s clear that you took that one sentence completely out of context from the rest of the post, _including the sentence that directly followed it_. ---
**Author:** ![Peremensoe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/ce7236/32.png) [@Peremensoe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Peremensoe)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2013, 4:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/family-fights-back-when-3-gunmen-storm-their-home/651203/54 "2013-02-26T04:02:19Z")
> [@Snowboarder\_Bo](#): > > And I think the story and it’s quotes are being (possibly deliberately) somewhat deceptive. The son was a 21 year old man, and I doubt if any of his friends are 8-10 year old boys, as the quote from the father seems to imply. There’s no specification of anyone’s age except the 21yo. To the father of a 21yo, a man apparently near his son’s age could easily be “a young boy,” at least in some dialects. Round here one can be identified as a “boy” well past age 21. ---
**Author:** ![scratch\_llll](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9fc348/32.png) [@scratch\_llll](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/scratch_llll)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2013, 5:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/family-fights-back-when-3-gunmen-storm-their-home/651203/55 "2013-02-26T05:21:45Z")
Quote: Originally Posted by filmore This demonstrates the false sense of security from guns. A person must operate the gun for it to be effective. > [@Labrador\_Deceiver](#): > > False. > > Like alarms and barking dogs, a gun can scare an intruder away before it is fired. Or, are you also claiming that a dog must bite for it to be effective? He did not say the whole post was wrong. He quoted those two sentences and said they were. Operating a gun is firing it much like operating a motor vehicle is driving it and not sitting inside making vroom noises. He was pointing out one can hold a gun without firing it and it will indeed be effective as a deterant. Speaking of not reading, the article in the OP clearly states the intruders were armed and nowhere that they were under the sons age. Also a nice job of blame the victim with inuendo about drug deals. Overall a great job of comprehension boardwise. ---
**Author:** ![Snowboarder\_Bo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/snowboarder_bo/32/229_2.png) [@Snowboarder\_Bo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Snowboarder_Bo)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2013, 6:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/family-fights-back-when-3-gunmen-storm-their-home/651203/56 "2013-02-26T06:13:46Z")
> [@scratch\_llll](#): > > Quote: > Originally Posted by filmore > This demonstrates the false sense of security from guns. A person must operate the gun for it to be effective. > > He did not say the whole post was wrong. He quoted those two sentences and said they were. Operating a gun is firing it \*\*much like operating a motor vehicle is driving it \*\*and not sitting inside making vroom noises. He was pointing out one can hold a gun without firing it and it will indeed be effective as a deterant. In fact, this is wrong. If you are drunk and sitting in your car, even with the key in your pocket, you are guilty of operating a motor vehicle while under the influence. Try it and let me know what the judge thinks of your argument that you were not operating the vehicle. Speaking of comprehension, at no time did I say or imply that **LD** asserted that the entirety of **filmore** ’s post was wrong. But he did take those two sentences entirely out of context (as I said in my previous post, which you can scroll up and re-read if you need to; I’m not retyping it here). ---
**Author:** ![scratch\_llll](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9fc348/32.png) [@scratch\_llll](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/scratch_llll)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2013, 6:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/family-fights-back-when-3-gunmen-storm-their-home/651203/57 "2013-02-26T06:24:30Z")
> [@Snowboarder\_Bo](#): > > I’m trying to understand your point of view and how you read **filmore** ’s post and only came away with “well, showing a gun isn’t _operating_ a gun, so your post is wrong”. “So your post is wrong”, you misquoted him as if he had said the whole post was. But nevermind. I now understand that you are never wrong. ---
**Author:** ![Snowboarder\_Bo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/snowboarder_bo/32/229_2.png) [@Snowboarder\_Bo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Snowboarder_Bo)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2013, 7:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/family-fights-back-when-3-gunmen-storm-their-home/651203/58 "2013-02-26T07:04:21Z")
> [@scratch\_llll](#): > > “So your post is wrong”, you misquoted him as if he had said the whole post was. > But nevermind. I now understand that you are never wrong. I am wrong frequently, but not now. **LD** was acting as if there was no other part of **filmore** ’s post, responding as if there was no context at all other than those first two sentences. And now you are quoting me out of context, in order to try and defend **LD** ’s taking **filmore** out of context, partially by claiming that I was quoting **LD** when in fact I was paraphrasing. Did you have a comment about the incident raised in the OP, btw? ---
**Author:** ![Labrador\_Deceiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/7c8e57/32.png) [@Labrador\_Deceiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Labrador_Deceiver)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2013, 11:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/family-fights-back-when-3-gunmen-storm-their-home/651203/59 "2013-02-26T11:42:25Z")
> [@Snowboarder\_Bo](#): > > I’m just not sure how you were able to read a post that was entirely about the need for an active human presence for defense/deterrence vs. defense/deterrence minus an active human presence and somehow conclude that the post was entirely about firing a gun. > > I’m trying to understand your point of view and how you read **filmore** ’s post and only came away with “well, showing a gun isn’t _operating_ a gun, so your post is wrong”. > > I mean, here it is two posts later, including one from me which explains what **filmore** ’s post was about, and you are still couching your reply in “if he, in fact meant wielding a gun was included.” ISTM that your focus was, and possibly still is, only on the word “operating”, even tho it’s clear that you took that one sentence completely out of context from the rest of the post, _including the sentence that directly followed it_. Are you insane? I posted a clarification of my fucking post, and you’re still clinging to this phantom idea that I did anything other than misunderstand his first post. Take a pill already. This is now the 3rd time I’ve said I have no problem with his statement. Lets see if you continue to go off the rails. ---
**Author:** ![twickster](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/ec9cab/32.png) [@twickster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/twickster)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2013, 1:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/family-fights-back-when-3-gunmen-storm-their-home/651203/60 "2013-02-26T13:28:31Z")
I’m going to send this over to GD, where the mods know how to moderate debates. **twickster** , MPSIMS moderator [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/family-fights-back-when-3-gunmen-storm-their-home/651203.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/family-fights-back-when-3-gunmen-storm-their-home/651203.md?page=4)