Yes, that’s very true. If they are beyond the living room in my apartment then they’re in some shit because that’s right by my daughter’s bedroom.
My point is that if you hear someone downstairs, rather than going down there and putting yourself and your family in harm’s way by possibly spooking him, you can call the police and avoid the risk. In this scenario, you don’t have to arm yourself and initiate the violence. He hasn’t approached anyone in the house. By confronting him, you’ve already broken your first barrier of protection from harm.
I think not. If one watches a lot of TV/movies, they are led to believe that the “Death Wish”, “24”, etcetera, type of guy is quite common.
and i believe thats what Scumpup was saying. his family is in the house. he’s not taking chances when their safety is at risk. Now sure, if i hear someone breaking in or moving things I’d call 911 immediately (because I sleep with my cellphone on the nightstand) but if I surprise the guy by going out of the bedroom to see whats going on its a different story.
I keep my windows and doors locked at night, and there are motion lights near the sliding glass door in the kitchen which would be the easiest way for an intruder to enter. The front door is locked and its a heavy strong door.
I’m more concerned with someone trying to steal my jeep…because then they have to die. No one touches my jeep.
No
that it gives YOU some virtually infallable ability to read “tells” that you are willing to risk your life and the life of other on.
And even IF it did, its still a retarded point to make as to why someone else shouldnt use deadly force.
Because, you know, they might have Aspergers syndrom or sumptin.
Or not be as “manly” and martial arts trained as you :rolleyes:
You mean like thinking that the indomitable villains they face are quite common?
Please show me where I said anything about infallibility anywhere in this thread.
Regardless of which way you choose, people’s lives are at risk, including the hypothetical burglar.
Why didn’t you shoot to kill when you shot? Why did you fire a warning shot instead?
I am unclear of the relevance here.
Who said anything about being fabulously trained in martial arts? I’m just saying that one should try and keep a cool head and not fire blindly at someone. That doesn’t make me a ninja.
So you don’t have a cite to show that location of the wounds is codified in law? Didn’t think so.
I’m renting now, but when I buy a house when I retire I’m getting a dog. One that wil be trained to attack on command.
Or a jack russell terrier that will be trained to just make a racket to scare off the intruder. Or at least be a distraction while I get a blunt object to use, or a bow.
I don’t actually want a gun in the house and the wife is against it anyway. I do have a crossbow but it doesn’t work.
A burglar breaking in here would be an idiot anyway. theres nothing in here worth anything that can be carried out easily and surely not without making a helluva din.
Because it WAS a warning shot and I was in no emminent danger.
But it did get the message across quit well.
I never claimed it was codified in law. You’re the one who came up with that.
Location of wounds can be significant in forensic investigations in ascertaining what occurred during a fight. Guilt and innocence at murder trials is decided by non-lawyers. The notion that if it isn’t written down in black and white it doesn’t exist is a mindset owned by lawyers and sheltered entities.
So you read his tells and discerned that you didn’t need to kill him?
Yes, that’s true. Their presence on the front or back is not, alone, going to determine whether a shooting was justifiable. Ayoob, mentioned upthread, has addressed this in his books and articles. Hence my statement: if the shooting was justified, it won’t matter where the wounds are. If the shooting was unjustified, it won’t matter where the wounds are. Your own story about the crossbow makes a further point: if self-defense with lethal force is justified, it doesn’t matter what your weapon was.
I think the point was to display his own…tells in a very blatant way, so as to help the suspect read his…tells.
Right, but he made the choice based on available information.
mswas, for someone who claims an ability to read…tells, you seemed awfully quick to characterize gun owners as trigger-happy closeted would-be murderers just ITCHING for a chance to shoot someone. Maybe your…tell-reading abilities aren’t quite as polished as you think.
No, that’s just you projecting some nonsense that I never said.
Of course if the suspect had been a tell reading retard or had misread the tells, then mrwas would now be dead and not here to pontificate on the glory of tells.
Reading “tells”, and reading Tarot cards—both hokum. But especially so at night; no light to see by.
It’s funny considering that the common explanation for why Tarot cards and psychics are hokum is because of ‘Cold Reading’, otherwise known as ‘Reading Tells’.