Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Glock Forum' started by GLOCK17OD, Jan 2, 2012.
If someone broke into your home and was unarmed what would you do.
Let's say the intruder wants to run away would you let him escape or fire on him
What will you do while your are in prison for shooting someone who is no longer posing a threat to you? Once the threat is gone you do not shoot...if you do you are now the aggressor and not the victim.
Not in Florida or any other state that has Castle Doctrine.
I live in Florida and could legally shoot them, but wouldn't. Killing someone is about the last thing I EVER wanna do, regardless of the situation. If it can be avoided, I will do whatever is necessary to avoid it.
If the intruder is moving away from me and out the door, then no.
I like my life too much to give it up just to teach a perp a lesson. I don't think I would do well in prison.
I agree I wouldn't kill a man u.less it was the only option
If the perp was in my home, it's lites out for him. No if's, and's or butts. As long as he is in my home he is a threat. NO one can tell me if I was in fear of my life. Bottom line is that he should have thought of the consequences before doing the deed.
Lastcast, Ranger Recon, Class of 67.
Hooah to you bro I agree with that as well. So I guess in Texas I would kill a man because of my family to make sure they don't cone back but if they were running away I wouldn't Chase them down
If intruder is unarmed and you are in complete control (and you better be),
what will be done then can only be ascertained by the moment of decision.
To me anyone who breaks into my abode is probably armed. That person
would have to lie on the floor and don't move till the cops arrive otherwise
he would be shot where he stands.
I think your title and question reflect immaturity. This is also unbecoming of a responsible gun owner.
And any of you who believe a castle doctrine grants you a signed death warrant for Any individual in your home unwelcomed, perhaps you should research.
A castle doctrine allows you to stand and fight a threat, rather than attempt to flee. An unarmed individual, especially one who is retreating, poses no viable threat.
That's where murder begins and justifiable homicide ends.
Ask the Oklahoma pharmacist, Jerome Ersland. You'd have to visit him in prison though.
+1. Once the threat is gone.. story is closed. You have to try ur best to avoid any killing as possible. Owning a firearm doesnt mean we are allowed to kill.
People like to talk about the castle doctrine and how much they love it, but we won't keep that right if, we as a whole, exhibit bloodthirsty behavior such as shooting a man in the back while he's trying to run away.
If someone breaks in and are unarmed, I myself will present my gun, knife, battle axe, penis, whatever I may get my hands on at the moment, and demand that they vacate immediately. If someone has FORCED their way into your home, and don't leave immediately, you have no option but to consider them a threat to you and your family. If they want to leave, I'll let them go in peace, and I'll be a good witness while talking to the police afterwards.
There will be no "held at gunpoint" going on in my home. They either will be subdued, or I'll let the police track them down later. I don't want a hostile person in my home any longer than is absolutely necessary. In my point of view, a man's back never has been, nor ever will be if I have my way, a valid target, except in the circumstance that they are dragging or carrying away a person. Possessions and things are replaceable, loved ones are not.
Yes, as was pointed out, they may come back. But the nature of criminals is a very cowardly one, and the chances of someone coming back to "finish the job" are really slim to none, especially when they've had a gun in their face once already. They know that if they come back their chances of walking out alive for a second time are almost non existent, and the regular criminal isn't out to die, they're out to make an easy buck.
I would never shoot a man in his back unless it was my only chance to end a hostile situation. But my question was just to this forum to see how many of you would let someone go or shoot him. I would let then go if they tried to leave with nothing more than they came in with, if they have a gun I'm gonna shoot as soon as he shows hostile intent with that weapon. And that's that. Immaturity is not involved in this case. Just a question so deal with it or go to another thread
Most of us here are much less vicious, and much more sensible than many people (like government and anti 2A) would like to believe.
You must be the self entitled know it all huh. I have dealt with guys like you before, to say I am immature is an outright reflection of your opinion and is not justified from a common question I have heard all over the place. But you go ahead and try to put me down for asking this oh so common question. Your the one who is making things personal instead of staying on topic. So whatever you think is unbecoming I don't give a crap. I am a shooter always have been, always will be. I don't know about you but I have the back bone to kill in sight any armed threat on my property. If you don't then don't take it out on my forum. If you want to act like an adult and stop with the personal attacks anytime soon that would be nice. But I'm sure you will reply to this and freak out on me. Anyway I'm gonna stick to topic while you hate
I am to bro. I would hate to have to kill a civilian to defend my home but I would if I had to. And that's all I was asking these guys lol. But the maintain objective was to put focus on the hard decision of shooting or not shooting. Not the act of doing it
First if they get past the dog and do make it in they must have wanted something really really bad to begin with . #2 if they do make it in and decide to leave and want to get with the dog again so be it I wanna watch round 2 ,if they continue to come after warning there will be a ringing going on in my house and it wont be the phone and I felt threated for my and my families lives is all they need to know .
Pistol whip or rifle butt him.
I would consider less lethal options if I had them and he didn't have a gun. But in Texas if you shoot someone you have to kill them. And I don't own a tazer lol.
If you shot someone in the back it would be proof and evidence that you were not defending yourself. The D/A would probably charge you with an unlawful killing, and it could go as high as murder-2.