Home invasion scenario.....

[Nick]

i'd be interested to see statistics on the number of intruders that decide to attack the occupants of the home they are in rather than just flee the scene when they are discovered.

I'd imagine flight is the preferred option over 90% of the time!

 

[Randy]

Incredibly narrow set of circumstances. You're poor enough you can't live in a nicer area (as indicated by the break-in itself, as well as the expectedly slow response of the police department), but you apparently do have enough money that you own things a person is interested in taking and you've got enough money to purchase weapons, ammo and the required permits and registration.

This is essentially the NRA equivalent of the 'what would you do if you only had one day to live", which is a fun hypothetically but most people focus attention on checkups and preventative medicine such that the scenario will likely never play out that way.

 

[FILTHnFEAR]

Incredibly narrow set of circumstances. You're poor enough you can't live in a nicer area (as indicated by the break-in itself, as well as the expectedly slow response of the police department), but you apparently do have enough money that you own things a person is interested in taking and you've got enough money to purchase weapons, ammo and the required permits and registration.

This is essentially the NRA equivalent of the 'what would you do if you only had one day to live", which is a fun hypothetically but most people focus attention on checkups and preventative medicine such that the scenario will likely never play out that way.

In what way is someone breaking into my home a "narrow set of circumstances"?

I'm really glad you live somewhere that you don't have to worry about criminals, but some of us actually do. Nothing fun about this situation. Nothing hypothetical about it.

How wealthy do you have to be before someone can want to take something from you? Got a figure for me?

 

[Randy]

In what way is someone breaking into my home a "narrow set of circumstances"?

By definition, breaking into 'your home' is as narrow set of circumstances because nobody's house or living situation is exactly like yours. Posing the question as 'what would you do if somebody broke into 'your' (meaning the reader's) house' is different then 'what would you do if you were in my shoes and somebody broke into my house'; because the degree to which we've contemplated these scenarios and prepared for them prior to the night in question make a significant difference in what we would do.

Assuming the question was genuinely open-ended and based on real concerns and issues you're facing as a forum member and home owner(first of all, if that is the case, that was not a great way of framing your question), then fair game. Forgetting any of our feelings about guns, nobody here would want to hear your life endangered. If you know you're in a high risk area and you're already talking to your neighbors about it, take preventative action. Form a neighborhood watch, talk to the police commissioner about extra surveillance of the neighborhood, get a guard dog, reinforce your windows on the ground floor (if that's not enough, get bars), get a security system (not as expensive as you'd think) and/or get security cameras (way cheap, I bought some to spy on my pets when I'm not home). These are all options that significantly decrease the likelihood of a burglar gaining access to the inside of your home regardless of if you're packing a gun, effectively increase any chances you have if things go south and cost fairly little to implement.

That's the extent to which I'm willing to buy into your post being a genuine question to solicit advice. The way the actual post read in the context of the rest of your posts in here was more like you spoon feeding us a litany of qualifiers to walk us down the path where shooting a person is our only option, and then disingenuously offering it to us as a question. If the circumstances you outlined are real and you've thought about it this much but haven't taken measures to fix any of these condition, you're essentially asking us for validation of your choice to live in an insecure situation and shoot a person blindly at your first possible opportunity and I won't endorse that, so you're barking up the wrong tree.

 

[Nick]

In what way is someone breaking into my home a "narrow set of circumstances"?

I'm really glad you live somewhere that you don't have to worry about criminals, but some of us actually do. Nothing fun about this situation. Nothing hypothetical about it.

How wealthy do you have to be before someone can want to take something from you? Got a figure for me?

Its a narrow set of circumstances because how often does this actually happen to people?

Break ins occur, but how often does the offenders 'fight or flight' kick in when they are discovered, and 'FIGHT' is what they choose? Very rarely.

Also, how often are break ins conducted with the sole intention of doing harm to the home occupant? Very rarely.

 

[eaeolian]

If the circumstances you outlined are real and you've thought about it this much but haven't taken measures to fix any of these condition, you're essentially asking us for validation of your choice to live in an insecure situation and shoot a person blindly at your first possible opportunity and I won't endorse that, so you're barking up the wrong tree.

 

[The Q]

So what exactly did you mean by this, then? That you'd sharpshoot them with a bean bag?



No, you're wrong. It's not murder. Look up the definition. And actually think about it. If you think it is, we have a serious disagreement on logic.

Smaller caliber rounds can be just as lethal, so that statement makes no sense. Bullets are meant to kill, not wound, no matter what caliber.

1. Read my previous reply on sharpshooting. I've answered twice; you missed it probably, but the gist of it is that sharpshooting would be a reason to have firearms in the house, not to use it as a skill against an intruder.

2. Again, we discussed this. It's killing - I'm not arguing the terms here. If killing doesn't bother you we have a serious disagreement on ethics, as I said before. Sure if it's legal to kill an intruder, you'll be acquitted depending on where you live - the question is whether you find the action shocking or you can shove it off as if it never happened.

3. This is a case I might be wrong, but I'd imagine that a 22LR causes much less damage compared to a 45 round or something from an assault rifle. Just because bullets are meant to kill it doesn't mean they can achieve that with the same capacity (read about why the 45 calibre was invented - I mentioned that before) or with the same success rate.

 

[7stg]

College Student Says She’s Glad Her Dad Gave Her The Gun She Used To Fight Off Armed Home Invaders | The Daily Caller

 

[Grief]

Says what statistics? Maybe if someone is a moron that wakes up and starts pulling the trigger, regardless of the situation. Not saying that you think that, but certain individuals in this thread appear to believe that.

They are one page back but here again are the stats that suggest that filling your house with guns and putting one next to your sleeping partner might not be a good idea:

FBI — Expanded Homicide Data Table 10

108 husbands murdered by wives
534 wives murdered by husbands
but only
94 people killed during burglary (and 27 of those by someone they knew)

So that leaves us with 67 stranger burglary homicides in a year per 316 million people.

Take out the planned high-value homes and the bad neighborhoods with high crime (both of which I would argue have an established need for enhanced security) and what are you left with in average houses in average neighborhoods?

But maybe someone has some better stats?

 

[FILTHnFEAR]

By definition, breaking into 'your home' is as narrow set of circumstances because nobody's house or living situation is exactly like yours.

That's the extent to which I'm willing to buy into your post being a genuine question to solicit advice. The way the actual post read in the context of the rest of your posts in here was more like you spoon feeding us a litany of qualifiers to walk us down the path where shooting a person is our only option, and then disingenuously offering it to us as a question. If the circumstances you outlined are real and you've thought about it this much but haven't taken measures to fix any of these condition, you're essentially asking us for validation of your choice to live in an insecure situation and shoot a person blindly at your first possible opportunity and I won't endorse that, so you're barking up the wrong tree.

I didn't post this to solicit advice. You're right, guard dogs and home security systems would help to prevent an individual gaining access to my home. But not everyone has those things. Several people have responded and not brought those options up, so obviously they don't have them. Yet they could still be presented with such a situation. I wanted to see what others here would honestly do if presented with a home invasion. Face to face. It does happen. Whether a high statistic or not. I don't want to shoot anyone. I would gain zero satisfaction from doing so, other than protecting my family. It seems that you and others here seem to have this view that gunning someone down would be enjoyable to me. It indeed would not be, trust me Randy.

Reactions so far have been pretty unrealistic. At least to me. Hiding until it's over? Physically confronting an intruder doesn't seem to have a favorable outcome. Maybe 50/50? I'd rather take the advantage of a firearm over just hoping they take what they want and leave.

2. Again, we discussed this. It's killing - I'm not arguing the terms here. If killing doesn't bother you we have a serious disagreement on ethics, as I said before. Sure if it's legal to kill an intruder, you'll be acquitted depending on where you live - the question is whether you find the action shocking or you can shove it off as if it never happened.

3. This is a case I might be wrong, but I'd imagine that a 22LR causes much less damage compared to a 45 round or something from an assault rifle. Just because bullets are meant to kill it doesn't mean they can achieve that with the same capacity (read about why the 45 calibre was invented - I mentioned that before) or with the same success rate.

No, killing someone would be something that I couldn't just shove off as though it was nothing, but I would feel justified. Again there is a big difference between murder and justified homicide. You seem to present the 2 as equal. I do not.

Smaller caliber rounds can kill very easily. To believe the contrary is a mistake. They can be very nasty. 22's have a tendency to ricochet around inside the body. I carry a 45 caliber 1911 with hollow points. So I already know why it was invented.

 

[Grief]

Reactions so far have been pretty unrealistic. At least to me. Hiding until it's over? Physically confronting an intruder doesn't seem to have a favorable outcome. Maybe 50/50? I'd rather take the advantage of a firearm over just hoping they take what they want and leave.

If you are accepting the stats I quoted your odds of facing a deadly home invasion each year are something in the order of one in five million. More people win the lottery and it might be more cheerful if we all think about that.

Without evidence your assertions quoted above are hard to give meaning to. The evidence is what makes things 'realistic'. What is the difference statistically speaking between the different potential responses?

But here's a better question. If the evidence told you that running away or hiding or even not having a gun at all was safer for your family would you do it? Is your family's safety more important than owning a gun?

 

[JeffKill]

Regardless of any statistics, there are a lot of sick people in this world. And a lot of them get enjoyment out of hurting others for no good reason. I really don't think there's anything wrong with preparing for the worst and hoping for the best.

My friends 75 year old grandmother was just attacked in her home by 3 people about a month ago. They tied her up, smashed a vase over her head, and beat the hell out of her. I don't feel the situation would have been any better for her had she been armed, but when something like this happens to someone you know, it hits a little closer to home.

I currently only keep 1 pistol in my house. I have an alarm, and hope that it would be enough to scare away a common burglar. If not, I would at least give fair warning before neutralizing a threat on my own. Will it ever happen? Probably not. Could it happen? Yes.

 

[Explorer]

I think one could reasonably conclude that the OP had his conclusion, asked for data to back it up, and then the data didn't go the way he expected.

Therefore, the data was wrong.

 

[asher]

I don't know what's remotely unrealistic about hiding from an intruder until they leave and trying to avoid confrontation.

 

[Spaced Out Ace]

I don't know what's remotely unrealistic about hiding from an intruder until they leave and trying to avoid confrontation.

Maybe because bedrooms are where the "good shit" is... ie, jewelry/gold, shit that'd get them more than a couple bucks from their dealer/local pawn shop.

 

[FILTHnFEAR]

I think one could reasonably conclude that the OP had his conclusion, asked for data to back it up, and then the data didn't go the way he expected.

Therefore, the data was wrong.

The data was wrong? Not really. This thread is pretty much peoples opinions on what their reactions would be in a ....ed up situation. That's all I wanted to hear. Different people's responses. Some people put their hopes in hiding and hoping the threat goes away, some would have preventative measures, some would use firearms(gasp), others have sharpened pencils and go fo the ankles. That still makes me laugh, Explorer, thanks.

I don't know what's remotely unrealistic about hiding from an intruder until they leave and trying to avoid confrontation.

Just hiding from an intruder, cowering in the corner while they loot my home or worse is not an option for me. Just waiting to see what they might do(I've stressed this a few times in this thread) is not an option for me. That's not going to happen. If that's acceptable to you, ok. Different strokes, man.

Maybe because bedrooms are where the "good shit" is... ie, jewelry/gold, shit that'd get them more than a couple bucks from their dealer/local pawn shop.

Regardless of any statistics, there are a lot of sick people in this world. And a lot of them get enjoyment out of hurting others for no good reason. I really don't think there's anything wrong with preparing for the worst and hoping for the best.

My friends 75 year old grandmother was just attacked in her home by 3 people about a month ago. They tied her up, smashed a vase over her head, and beat the hell out of her. I don't feel the situation would have been any better for her had she been armed, but when something like this happens to someone you know, it hits a little closer to home.

I currently only keep 1 pistol in my house. I have an alarm, and hope that it would be enough to scare away a common burglar. If not, I would at least give fair warning before neutralizing a threat on my own. Will it ever happen? Probably not. Could it happen? Yes.

Thank you. I don't care about all these "statistics" that everyone here keeps quoting. Statistics can reflect whatever people want them too. Is it extremely likely that someone is going to come into my home and try to murder, beat, or rape, someone. No, but the fact remains, whether those here want to admit or realize, that is is possible. No one expects terrible things to happen to them, until it does. Better to be prepared for the circumstances than not.

 

[FILTHnFEAR]

College Student Says She’s Glad Her Dad Gave Her The Gun She Used To Fight Off Armed Home Invaders | The Daily Caller

Whoa there man, hold on. People here don't want to hear those kinds stories. Doesn't fit their, "guns never help" mentality.

 

[Grief]

Whoa there man, hold on. People here don't want to hear those kinds stories. Doesn't fit their, "guns never help" mentality.

There's no mentality about it, that's the thing. I would absolutely fill my house with guns if it could be proven to have a positive safety benefit. I'm using the data to 'prepare for the worst', so taking the least-less-safe course of action. Here's some stats on a conservative website that give a rate of accidental death from guns at around 10 times greater than deaths from home invasions. It's absolutely not 'guns never help.' It's more a question of why, when all the events/stories are collected together, the big picture seems to be that in the scenario posited in the OP guns seem likely to make you less safe?

But to consider the story about the students you refer to, here's the critical thinking approach I would take to see if it had any relevance to me:

Where did it take place? Nowhere I've been or am planning to go. So I'm unlikely to meet those assailants.

What was their motive? It's unknown entirely.

Is the victims demographic, location, security measures anything like my own? Not really.

How does this story impact on my personal safety? It doesn't.

Need I take action or change my behavior as a result? No.

Guns are a part of American culture. It's legal and fine if you want to have them. I'm not against guns and will probably go out and do some firearms training myself later this year. I might even buy one if I can find a safe place to keep it. But I'll understand that just like drinking, smoking or even driving, gun ownership carries a level of risk. And I probably wouldn't keep it in my home.