Interesting scenario

Discussion in 'Concealed Carrying & Personal Protection' started by Kain, Jun 27, 2011.

  1. Kain

    Kain Member

    155
    0
    16
    One of my instructors regaled us with a story of a call he ran recently that I thought bears repeating here.

    A middle aged couple are sitting in their nice middle-class home one evening when they hear a commotion from elsewhere in the house. As the husband got up to go check it out, a disheveled man in his 50's wearing only his boxer shorts ran into the living room yelling "call 911" The intruder was empty handed and did not appear particularly threatening but also did not say anything else. The middle aged couple was very frightened and the husband grabbed his wife and ran into a bedroom and locked themselves in and called 911. They explained the situation to dispatch and a full spread was dispatched (Police, Fire, EMS)

    At this point the instructor stopped and asked us what we would do in the situation of the couple? Or what we would do as the first responders? Keep your response in mind as you read the rest.

    Police arrived to find the intruder standing between the couch and the wall looking somewhat unsteady. He seemed confused and mumbling to himself. He refused to comply with police commands to lay on the floor. As he was unarmed and did not appear threatening they chose not to taser him and instead just manually forced him into compliance. At this point Fire and EMS was allowed in to check out both the home owners and the intruder. The husband stated he would have shot the intruder, but the dispatcher told him to stay locked in the bedroom and wait unless the intruder attempted to enter the locked bedroom. The intruder when examined was fould to be a diabetic whose blood sugar had dropped to dangerous level causing a profoundly lowered level of consciousness. Upon application of D-50, the man became much more alert and stated that he did not remember breaking into the house or why he had stripped down. His clothes were found in the woods near the invaded home. The intruder was taken to the local ER and released while the husband was informed that had he shot the intruder he would likely have been charged with murder. No charges were filed, and the intruder stated he would replace the window he broke to gain enterance to the house as well as any other expenses incurred as a result of his actions.

    Just some food for thought. Just because you "can" dosen't mean you should.
     
  2. winds-of-change

    winds-of-change The Balota's Staff Member

    29,520
    503
    83
    I have not really thought out all scenarios for self defense. The thought scares the tar out of me right now as I have so much to learn. But I don't think I would have shot this person because he did not threaten my life and he did not appear armed. I would have hid as the homeowners did and waited for the next step. BUT I AM NOT SURE I TRUST MY JUDGMENT IN THESE SITUATIONS WHICH IS WHY EVEN IF I COULD CARRY, I WOULD NOT AT THIS POINT IN MY LIFE. I would have had my gun at the ready, though.

    I look forward to reading and learning from others more experienced than me and will graciously accept any corrections of my thought processes.
     

  3. Dillinger

    Dillinger New Member

    23,972
    1
    0
    That's an interesting point you raise Kain, and I agree with your final thought.

    In the scenario, merely breaking into the house in my situation would have had this poor bastard with two fur coated razor blades on his ***, so he probably would have been clearly identified as "not a threat" to me and mine.

    Therefor I don't think further self defense action would have been required, but we would have called 911 in an attempt to get some assistance.

    It's a good scenario and one that should be read by everyone here with their house in mind.

    JD
     
  4. rifleman1

    rifleman1 New Member

    2,007
    1
    0
    as a first responder i would have suited up in my turnouts and be ready for a combative patient, in a dangerous situation like this we are usally given orders to stage near by until the sheriffs or chp show up.as a home owner and father/husband i would account for my family and then evaluate what my options are,like where are we in relation to where the exits are do we have to pass by this man,or is the man between me and my children or wife this would change my mindset all together.i would not want to shoot an unarmed man but there are a lot of variables in a situation like this.personally i think it would just depend on the circumstances that you find yourself in in the moment.what happen to these people is not exactly what would of happend in everyones home,just do to floor plans,what is between me and my family and safety.
     
  5. Polygon

    Polygon New Member

    845
    0
    0
    I'm not going to shoot someone that isn't armed with some sort of weapon. I know I said in the other thread that if someone breaks into my home they have the option to leave or be killed. If I wasn't given that option or they refused to leave I would kill them, without question. I really didn't take this kind of situation into account. From reading the first half I would not have made him out to be an immediate threat. He clearly wasn't armed. I would have done exactly what they did. Lock myself in a room and call 911.
     
  6. Vincine

    Vincine New Member

    3,495
    0
    0
    Grab my phone, grab my gun, slip out the window, call 911.
     
  7. JonM

    JonM Moderator

    20,110
    19
    38
    I deal with mentally unstable people in my daily work. It can be from birth defect brain damage substance abuse medication error etc. Ive leqrned over the years to recognize the signs. Mentally unstable can be under the right circumstance extremely violent and exceptionally even superhuman strong.

    Having a firearm ready when dealing with a home invasion by someone under that effect is very wise.

    The first step.in any home defense is calling 911 if possible. Assuming a defensive position until help arrivew is second. Last resort is deadly force.
     
  8. ScottA

    ScottA FAA licensed bugsmasher Lifetime Supporter

    7,141
    0
    0
    Excellent case study. It would be helpful to have more such scenarios to compare notes on how we would react.
     
  9. Vincine

    Vincine New Member

    3,495
    0
    0
    I’m reminded of the incident where an oriental student, I think Japanese, who was walking up to a house to ask for directions or something, was told to ‘Freeze’ by the homeowner. Not being familiar with our culture and thinking ‘Freeze’ just meant frozen water; he didn’t understand he was being told to stop. He kept walking and was shot and killed by the home owner. I think the homeowner believed he was being threatened because of gang activity in the area, but I’m not sure.

    I’m not in favor of overreaching gun restriction, but I am in favor of gun regulation. I think it would be a good thing if a level of gun education including a test of various scenarios like those above, or at the very least exposure to them, was required before someone received a handgun license. The first time one is presented with a situation like those above in real life, shouldn’t be the first time someone has to think it through, especially considering all the stress a real life situation generates.

    As I poke around the internet I’m finding lots of programs and courses providing training on how to handle and use firearms but precious little on when to use firearms, except perhaps for those concerning the legalities.

    We require more training and education to be licensed to drive a car for christsakes and drivers only kill people by accident, usually. I know I’m looking for proper training, and I don’t even have my license yet. I wouldn’t mind if everybody who had a gun did.
     
  10. winds-of-change

    winds-of-change The Balota's Staff Member

    29,520
    503
    83
    Vincine, I understand what you are saying but as an adult, I know what I have in my hands when I hold a gun and I know what it's potential is. It is my responsibility to think these things through. I have admitted I am not ready to carry a concealed weapon as I'm not sure I'm ready to have to kill a human being. I am over 21 and able to buy a weapon, I should be smart enough to know my limitations and mature enough to educate myself. What I have learned along the way is I would NOT shoot someone who was stealing my car, my tv, my computer, etc. Even a criminal's life is not worth possessions in my eyes. Yes, I have worked for those things I own but there are the police and insurance policies to cover those things. I would only shoot someone who meant me or my loved ones physical harm. The more detailed scenarios I have yet to really think through. Those who choose to not think these things through thoroughly will pay the price and suffer the consequences of being too eager to shoot someone. Just like any other situation in life. We all know not to drink and drive but those who choose to do it (and get caught) pay the price. That was their choice and it will certainly change the course of their life. It is up to each of us as individuals and gun owners to educate ourselves on how to handle that gun. It is not up to the government or rules and regulations to try to mandate that we follow a set of rules. Sometimes you just have to use your head and take responsibility for yourself, your actions and the choices you make.
     
  11. PanBaccha

    PanBaccha New Member

    3,054
    0
    0
    Don't understand policeman's comment. Someone broke into your HOME and had the homeowner in his sudden anxiety reached for his firearm and shot the INTRUDER it would be classified as murder? Huh?? :confused:

    As for myself (only because I know myself) I would have pulled my weapon and forced the intruder to the floor. Then call 911.
     
  12. rjd3282

    rjd3282 New Member

    3,852
    0
    0
    Training is good but who pays for it? 2A says I have a natural right to arm myself and the government shall not infringe on that right. So if the government forces us to pay for our own training that is an infringement. It's all well and good if you have the money to do that but some people don't. So if it becomes a money issue we are basically saying if you are poor you don't have the right to defend yourself.

    Driving a car is not a right but a privilege. Speaking of that, there is damn little training and the test given by the government to acquire a license is a joke. CCW licensing, like drivers licensing isn't about public safety it's just another way for the government to stick their greedy little lunch hooks into our pockets.
     
  13. cpttango30

    cpttango30 New Member

    13,934
    4
    0
    I would have just picked up my son and beat the guy down with his head as a diamond head. Then called 911.

    I don't see how someone defending their home against an unknown intruder could be considered murder.

    Better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6.


    What are these regulation you wish to impose?
     
  14. rjd3282

    rjd3282 New Member

    3,852
    0
    0
    It's very easy to tell people to run or if the intruder is not armed you shouldn't use a weapon but not all of us are healthy enough for hand to hand combat and not all of us are able to flee. Now what?
     
  15. Vincine

    Vincine New Member

    3,495
    0
    0
    (Sometimes?)

    You, I, and those of us here take responsibility for our actions. I'm not adverse to receiving some protection from those who don't.
     
  16. Vincine

    Vincine New Member

    3,495
    0
    0
    Something requiring proof that one can handle a pistol safely and not shoot themselves or anyone else by accident, probably similar to hunter’s safety. Something that shows you can perceive a real threat from an imagined threat. Don’t police have to train to distinguish between good guys, bad guys & innocent bystanders? You guys think that’s too much to ask?
     
  17. Vincine

    Vincine New Member

    3,495
    0
    0
    Yeah, I don't know what to do about that one. Now I gotta get to work or I won't beable to afford anything.
     
  18. ScottA

    ScottA FAA licensed bugsmasher Lifetime Supporter

    7,141
    0
    0
    In aviation, we review case-studies very often. Initial training is constant testing of what-if and what will you do. Continuing Ed (for lack of a better term to call it) is probably 50% case studies. Just as with firearms, it is often a life or death situation you are faced with.

    It is an extremely beneficial type of training, and we all should embrace it. I can practice touch and go landings for hours to improve my skills, but it is when an instructor reaches over and pulls all the power and says "your engine just quit. What are you going to do?" that's when your critical thinking skills are challenged and your really learn.

    Although that type of training is not mandated, that is the type of training we should be seeking out. The scenario that the OP presented and other similar scenarios are a great way to exercise your critical thinking.
     
  19. Glasshartt

    Glasshartt New Member

    1,893
    0
    0
    Of course each state is different, but if the home owner could articulate that he felt that he, or his family, was in immediate danger, and that he was protecting himself, and/or his family, I do not see how it could be considered murder. That is just my opinion, and everyone knows what opinions are.
     
  20. Vincine

    Vincine New Member

    3,495
    0
    0
    :) I agree. This is what I meant by education & training beyond being taught which end of the gun to point.​