This is just factually incorrect. If the criteria are met for the justifiable use of lethal force, it doesn’t matter whether the wounds are on the criminal’s front or back. If the situation did not meet the criteria for use of lethal force, it won’t matter either. If you have some statute specifying otherwise, please cite.
You know, I get it. Taking a life, any life, is not to be taken lightly. I was appalled when people celebrated over the execution of Ted Bundy, even though I can’t think of any reason to show clemency in that case. It’s a horrible, horrible thing to take someone’s life. If I were Batman and could use any of a dozen moves to incapacitate a criminal without killing him, I would.
On the other hand, Richard Speck apparently told his victims that he didn’t intend to harm them, that he only wanted their valuables. So there you have it, he clearly stated he didn’t intend to harm anyone. Good old trustworthy criminals. Fuck them. Again, if you don’t want to risk your life, don’t invade my home. Simple. Oh, I’m sure I’ll have to deal with the emotional trauma and all that, but again FUCK him for putting me in a situation where anything like that would have happened.
Invading someone’s home, especially when there’s a pretty good chance that the people are home, involves a certain level of crazy. You don’t reason with crazy. You don’t make assumptions about crazy, other than that you CAN’T make assumptions. You treat crazy like “if they are willing to do X and it’s clearly a major risk and illegal, they may be willing to do Y or Z if the opportunity/situation dictates.”
No its not. Its scary and loud. I almost shit myself the first time someone shot at me.
I have to agree with Shodan. My house is laid out in a way that a burglar could enter through the kitchen and the living room without coming near the bedrooms, but my sanctum-inner-sanctum is in the back where the most valuable and easy to carry things are. (PC’s, laptops, dvd players, iPods, etc.) If he’s near that area he’d have to move toward me or the bedrooms to get out, which means it’ll be Thunderdome…“2 men enter, one man leaves”.
Either way, any move that I even percieve as threatening will cause the use of force. Lethal force, most likely, because unlike Paul Muad’Dib (good joke BTW) I wouldn’t know what his intentions are or if he’s armed. I’d rather assume the worst and explain to the police how this guy had his guts punctured than be dead or hospitalized and my family beaten/raped/hurt in some way.
I know this sentiment has already been stated, but I just can’t see putting myself in any of these hypothetical situations where I might be shooting at some guy in the dark. If I were serious about protecting my family, and I mean really truly serious (fortunately I’ve never lived in an area that warranted worrying about it), I would install steel-core doors and steel frames in my bedrooms with big deadbolts and keep a shotgun up there. Upon hearing the house alarm go off, I would gather up my kids, throw them in my room, deadbolt the door, and call 911 while loading the shotgun. I would never dream of running downstairs in the dark at a possibly entrenched enemy hoping to hit him with a pistol shot. There’s absolutely no reason to put my life at risk over some stuff.
The fact that a lot of gun owners get hand guns for the purpose of home defense and then contemplate scenarios where you’d have to justify killing a guy over a Tivo really makes me question people’s motives and sanity. Sounds more like people want to be vigilantes, or maybe it has something to do with not feeling helpless as someone violates the order of society, but it doesn’t sound like protecting life and limb of self and family is the main focus.
I had occasion to watch a number of convenience store surveillance videos from robberies that ended up with dead clerks. About 20% of them involved the robbers getting the money, running out the door, and then, as an after-thought, coming back in to shoot the clerk who was cowering behind the counter. As so many here have said, I make no favorable assumptions about the intentions or mentalities of “fleeing” robbers.
Here is a case of “robbery” where the “robbers” even pledged that they would not harm their victims. No cause to shoot them, then, right? If you had had a gun, when would you have pulled the trigger? Hint: the minute those jackasses came in my door.
http://www.trutv.com/library/crime/notorious_murders/classics/carr_brothers/index.html
Yeah, he probably shit his pants. But it sure as hell got the point across and solved the problem, a BIG problem.
Maybe I’ll get motivated later and tell the whole big story here.
My house is my house. So I am supposed to barricade myself inside it and then cower in some barricaded bunker like a little girl? No thanks. People want to have control of their domain and their lives. I think that is perhaps a fundamental tenet of human nature.
You do know there are numerous cases in which people tried to sue the police for (fatal) non-response to a 911 call, and the courts held that the police do not owe any member of the public any particular duty of care or level of response? That was what clinched it for me – the cops will do what they can, when they care to. Okay, that’s not good enough for me, thanks.
Nope.
Not really.
If God himself swooped down, said “You’ll neither burn in hell or spend the rest of your life in jail if you had killed him, want to do that over and kill him?”
I’d probably take the offer.
I guess it depends on what your goal is. My goal would be to be alive for my children. If I look like a girl and feel like I don’t have control of my domain, fuck it so long as I’m still breathing when it’s all over.
I mean, seriously, your house ain’t shit in the grand scheme.
Wait, WHY wouldnt you be alive no matter what?
I thought the burgular was some income challenged person that would never hurt a fly and was guaranteed to be unarmed while he borrowed your obviously surplus TIVO.
Cite? I mean, you say it’s a fact, right?
I never said that. There are lots of people here saying that you never know what to expect, and that you need to treat every burglar as a crazy, armed, psychopath. I’ll buy that. Great. So you’re going to… run downstairs with a hand cannon to face off against a potentially crazed, armed, psychopath, in the dark, possibly in a defensive position? F that noise, as they say.
Cuckoorex: You want me to cite that people buy guns for home defense? Or that gun owners contemplate scenarios where they’d have to shoot people for stealing a Tivo? I think evidence of both are in this very thread, unless I’m mistaken.
Your right, I did imply that you did. Sorry.
But other folks seem to act like these criminals are like big wild animals on a safari.
If you just leave em alone and let them do their thing all will be fine :rolleyes:
The implication that all (or a majority, or even a plurality of) gun owners do both. Yes, I do want a cite.
I’m a gun owner, and I’m pretty sure my take on the situation couldn’t be described the way you do.
However, if I had family in a room which I didn’t have an overlook of, I would definitely go to confront the intruder.
You’re right, I retract the implication that this attitude is typical. My apologies, and thanks for keeping me honest 
As a “shoot their asses” under reasonable circumstances advocate, let me offer my own data point.
I’ve never belonged to the NRA. I’ve never owned a gun. Only fired em a few times in my life.
Nobody can claim I am some gun owning/gun use chomping crazy with an intellectual conflict of interest.
I’ve interacted and even been acquainted with a few criminals. None of them have favorably impressed me with their intelligence or sanity. In fact, when dealing with a known criminal (and an intruder is almost certainly a criminal), it’s safest to bet that he will do the dumbest, most harmful, craziest thing possible in any stressful situation. It’s also a good bet, but by no means a certainty, that someone engaging in criminal activity is also under the influence of alcohol, illegal drugs, or both, which will alter his judgment, and not for the better.
And I don’t HAVE to assume that he won’t harm me. I assume, in fact, that the vast majority of people do NOT want to harm me, and wish to peacably live their lives. These people demonstrate this by not intruding in my home. If I am alive to regret that I have injured or killed someone, I am still alive. The intruder CHOOSES to intrude on my home, and he CHOOSES to take certain risks when he does so. If he does not want to get shot, or stabbed, or be hit by a cast iron skillet, then all he has to do is STAY OUT OF OTHER PEOPLE’S HOMES unless he has their permission to enter. Is that so hard to understand? If one engages in risky conduct, one should be willing to accept the risks and dangers of that conduct.
Quite possibly. I am not saying that everyone should shoot intruders on sight. I am just saying that intruders should not expect that everyone will roll over and allow them to take what they want.
I am not a samurai, or a ninja, but I do live in Texas. I don’t know if I’d chase a burglar out my door, no matter what I’m wearing, but I wouldn’t lose much sleep if I killed an intruder, whether he was wearing my briefs or not.
To sum up:
I don’t urge anyone else to shoot or otherwise harm intruders. If they feel that they could not live with themselves afterwards, then that’s their conscience. However, I do not feel compelled to live by their moral system.
I don’t think that intruders have or should have a reasonable expectation of safety when they intrude.
Intruders have shown, by intruding, that they are very likely not going to wish me a good day and leave me goodies. I do not believe in Santa Claus, the Easter Bunny, the Tooth Fairy, or any other benevolent intruders.
Anyone caught stealing my briefs will be shot. And I will stick their heads on a spike on my front lawn, as an Example to Others.
Neither am I. I’ve already said I don’t own a firearm, and if I did it wouldn’t be in the house anyway. (I don’t live on post so technically I could keep it in the house, but I would keep it in the arms room on post at my unit if I did)
I’m not a crazy person. But my house is my home. If you’re in it uninvited in the middle of the night you’re a threat. I don’t care if you just want the dvd player. Its mine, and you’ll have to take it by force. If I put an arrow in your chest or a sword in your gut and you die, oh well. shouldn’t have been taking my stuff.
(Gawd, I can see that on the news…"Wierdo runs burglar through with shortsword…details at 11).
How many burglars are unlawfully or lawfully killed while committing a crime I wonder.
To be clear, I don’t think it’s never appropriate to shoot an intruder, but just because they are in your house doesn’t mean it’s appropriate to shoot them. People have tells, you just need to trust your instincts. I think that generally the law should favor the home-owner in these cases.
I just wanted to make that clear.
Purely anecdotal: