I partially agree with some of the above. When I was referring to “locked up” weapons I was speaking to those, other than the one you carry on your person, locked up when you’re not home. I agree, a personal protection gun does no good when locked up but precautions need to be taken with children and guns in the house. The first being education. It is my experience that children that understand the dangers and shoot from time to time are less inquisitive and will have less reason to “fool around” if they have access to a weapon, at their own home of the home of another. I don’t want to start a “kids and guns” shitstorm, that’s just my personal experience, and there will be others who differ.
As far as dispensing an intruder in my home, I stick with the motto “I’d rather be judged by 12 than carried by 6”. That may be a little crass and unappealing to some but I am not in the position to determine the motives of an intruder, or the means and ends by which that intruder may attempt not to be caught, identified, or arrested / convicted.
Agree with Hass on the dog. Good deterrent / alert system but not as a means to protect. I would go as far as to say some attorney somewhere, sometime, has successfully argued and won a case where an intruder was attacked / bitten by the family pet in protection mode…an won the suit. As far as the laws regarding purchasing of handguns with a carry or CCH in another state, I cannot speak to that.
In summary, the instructor who gave the first safety course I took in order to file my permit application told us if you are planning on owning a pistol for personal protection, you had better be prepared, willing, and comfortable with the concept of being able to pull the trigger on another human being, with the intent of taking a life, in defense of your own. He was a retired police officer.
My old roommate had this and I took it out to the range. In all honesty I hated it. The grips were uncomfortable (obviously can be changed though) and it just wasn’t a gun I would use for self defense or carry at all.
I found it more as a novelty.
---------- Post added at 12:13 AM ---------- Previous post was at 12:08 AM ----------
This is not correct. NY does have a castle doctrine and there is only a duty to retreat if you are outside of your home. If you are inside your home deadly force is authorized as long as the homeowner or resident is not the initial aggressor.
I was kidding, there is still a 8-12 month wait on that gun. I bought a Ruger SR40C and a crossbreed IWB holster. I’m skinny (140lbs 5’9, 30’’ waist)and no one can tell if I carry or not. If I chest holster it, its pretty obvious I have something.
This is completely false. Inside your home you have no obligation to retreat. You have every right to defend your home and it’s occupants by using deadly force. Like LZ pointed out, the case last year where the homeowner shot and killed that drunk who stumbled into the wrong house was a perfect example. NYS justification defense comes down to a reasonable and immediate fear for your life or the life of another, and that applies inside or outside of your home. Inside the home you can use a justification defense even to stop a burglary.
A person in possession or control of, or licensed or privileged to
be in, a dwelling or an occupied building, who reasonably believes that
another person is committing or attempting to commit a burglary of such
dwelling or building, may use deadly physical force upon such other
person when he or she reasonably believes such to be necessary to
prevent or terminate the commission or attempted commission of such
burglary.
Hell, a little while back a concealed carry permit holder was at an M&T in Amherst when it was robbed. He chased the guy into the parking lot and let loose several shots at the bank robber was he was trying to get away. Again, no charges filed. Though please, don’t do this. Even though no charges were filed he easily COULD have been charged, not to mention since he didn’t hit his target who knows where those bullets ended up. If I’m at some random place getting robbed and happen to be carrying the only way I’m pulling my gun is if all hell breaks loose and the robber starts shooting people. You want the money? Take it. Chances are it’s insured anyway.
Make sure you growl “Get off my lawn!” as he leaves. Don’t worry, if the gun jams when you cock it you can always yell cut and start the scene over. Bad ricochets have never happened either, so don’t worry about firing off shells full of steel balls more times than you need to.
Again, the laws differ, but even in NC you cannot use deadly force to protect your possessions. You absolutely cannot shoot someone for simply trying to steal something. Furthermore, shooting someone that is in retreat is a really bad idea. Someone running in the opposite direction of you is obviously not an imminent threat. I agree though, if the robber is pointing a gun at people threatening their lives, then that is the point at which you can use deadly force. Also anytime a person unlawfully enters your home or vehicle, that person is assumed to mean harm.
Well there is a big difference in ammunition types when it comes to ricochets and wall penetration. It’s said that an AR-15 could shoot through 3 houses worth of walls. That is part of what makes rifles a really bad choice for home protection. When you discharge a rifle inside your home for any reason, that’s a dangerous situation. On the flip side of that, a buckshot is unlikely to penetrate more than 1 wall. Handguns fall somewhere in between. A 9mm could easily end up lodged in your neighbors siding though.
For that reason, it’s important to understand where in your home you choose to stand your ground. You want to make sure that you’re not going to be shooting anywhere near or in the direction of a room where the rest of your family may be locked and hiding during an incident. Nothing would be worse than trying to shoot an intruder and accidentally shooting your kid through the wall.
Again, there is nothing wrong with having a plan. My wife and I are now realizing that we don’t even have a fire emergency plan, let alone a plan for a break-in or other event at our house.
I’m just saying you’re a dumb shit if you think firing off a warning shot is a reasonable idea. :tup:
Here is how it should play out.
You wake up to sounds in your house.
You wake up your wife and tell her to call 911.
You quietly and quickly walk over to your closet, retrieve your shotgun, chamber a round, and flick off the safety.
Depending on your house is laid out, you walk to the bedroom door and maybe into the hallway.
If you can, flick on lights that will illuminate the intruder but not yourself. I.E. if you bedrooms are upstairs flick on lights for the stairwell or downstairs landing while you stay upstairs.
If it’s just a shitty theif he’ll be gone as soon as he realizes someone else in the house is awake.
If he hasn’t left already call out that you’re armed and will shoot on sight and the cops are on their way.
If the intruder heads towards you rather than away from you then he made his choice. Squeeze the trigger, reload, then reevaluate the threat. Is he down? No? Squeeze, reload. Now?
Well, that’s a solid plan. Basically the same as i would do. Still somewhat undecided on warning shot. I see where you’re coming from, though, and it’s a good point to consider. I still contest that shooting a buckshot down an empty hallway isn’t the worst idea in the world. I don’t think it’s as bad of an idea as you think it is, though.
I agree that a verbal warning should be more than enough to send an intruder packing. let’s hear the exact reasons why the warning shots are a bad idea.
I’m not at all married to my ideas, but don’t just say that it’s stupid without giving reasons. Also keep in mind that I mentioned that I know that bullets can penetrate walls pretty easily, and that I would never do it without knowing that where I am firing isn’t going to cause collateral damage.
---------- Post added at 09:17 AM ---------- Previous post was at 09:13 AM ----------
I would think that home protection would be the only time you would want to use it. It’s way too big and heavy to carry, and yeah completely un-enjoyable as a recreational range shooter. Still though, firing a buckshot out of that thing would do some damage.
Best case scenario: You have extra holes in your own shit that nobody else is going to pay for, repair, replace. But the intruder knows your not bluffing. How nice of you to help him get a clear understanding of the mortality of the situation.
Worst case scenario: Bad ricochet kills someone. Your gun jams on the reload and the intruder kills you, rapes your wife, and eats your dog.
The only time you are legally allowed to fire a weapon near a residence is when you feel your life is in immediate danger. If you have time to fire a warning shot you’re admitting the threat is not immediate and you will end up charged.
Close, I think you want 35.15 for personal defense. It does notate 35.20 in 2(c).
Read 2(i).
§ 35.15 Justification; use of physical force in defense of a person.
1. A person may, subject to the provisions of subdivision two, use
physical force upon another person when and to the extent he or she
reasonably believes such to be necessary to defend himself, herself or a
third person from what he or she reasonably believes to be the use or
imminent use of unlawful physical force by such other person, unless:
(a) The latter’s conduct was provoked by the actor with intent to
cause physical injury to another person; or
(b) The actor was the initial aggressor; except that in such case the
use of physical force is nevertheless justifiable if the actor has
withdrawn from the encounter and effectively communicated such
withdrawal to such other person but the latter persists in continuing
the incident by the use or threatened imminent use of unlawful physical
force; or
(c) The physical force involved is the product of a combat by
agreement not specifically authorized by law.
2. A person may not use deadly physical force upon another person
under circumstances specified in subdivision one unless:
(a) The actor reasonably believes that such other person is using or
about to use deadly physical force. Even in such case, however, the
actor may not use deadly physical force if he or she knows that with
complete personal safety, to oneself and others he or she may avoid the
necessity of so doing by retreating; except that the actor is under no
duty to retreat if he or she is:
(i) in his or her dwelling and not the initial aggressor; or
(ii) a police officer or peace officer or a person assisting a police
officer or a peace officer at the latter’s direction, acting pursuant to
section 35.30; or
(b) He or she reasonably believes that such other person is committing
or attempting to commit a kidnapping, forcible rape, forcible criminal
sexual act or robbery; or
(c) He or she reasonably believes that such other person is committing
or attempting to commit a burglary, and the circumstances are such that
the use of deadly physical force is authorized by subdivision three of
section 35.20.