Armed Homeowner thwarts home invasion by teens (TX)

dev_null · September 4, 2009, 11:19 PM

http://www.statesman.com/news/conten...sanmarcos.html

"...police 'do not anticipate filing charges against the resident' who shot the suspects, but ... will turn the case over to the Hays County district attorney's office for review after completing the investigation."

From this article, sounds like a justified shoot. Unfortunately, two teenagers brought about their own ends by their actions, another is in the hospital, and a fourth looking at some serious time.

besafe2 · September 4, 2009, 11:40 PM

Looks good to me.

dabigguns357 · September 5, 2009, 10:29 AM

so much for bringing a pellet gun to a real gun fight.

ndbbm · September 5, 2009, 10:35 AM

God bless the second amendment!

obxned · September 5, 2009, 10:53 AM

No mention of masks - were the 4 goblins planning on completing the festivities with a homicide?

Uncle Buck · September 5, 2009, 11:57 AM

Sorry to seem crass, but I am glad they are providing "grief Counselors" to the students at the school. I am sure the other kids that hung out with these home invaders and burglars will need some grief counseling to help them understand why their friends were shot doing something illegal.

I remember my grief counselor... She slapped me side the head and said "get over it!" Wonderful lady.

pax · September 5, 2009, 12:25 PM

Doesn't look as if this thread is going to develop into a true discussion. Unless someone rescues it soon with a discussion of tactics and training, I'll be closing it.

pax

Skans · September 5, 2009, 12:42 PM

Before you close this thread, there is one point that really does deserve some attention. Notice that there were THREE bad guys who were actually inside of the victim's house. Would a shotgun have been sufficient? Maybe. How about a revolver with 5 or 6 shots? Or a 1911 with 7 shots?

This scenario presents a darn good reason to have as many rounds as you can sqeeze inside of your HD handgun. I prefer at least 20. It will take me close to 12 rounds, under presure, to get good hits on each of them. If there was one more, I'd feel outgunned with even 20 rounds.

jgcoastie · September 5, 2009, 06:09 PM

Quote:

This scenario presents a darn good reason to have as many rounds as you can sqeeze inside of your HD handgun. I prefer at least 20. It will take me close to 12 rounds, under presure, to get good hits on each of them. If there was one more, I'd feel outgunned with even 20 rounds.

Didn't the article say there were 4 intruders? Anyhoo, the ammo thing is why everyone should have at least one spare mag at their ready disposal.

For bump in the night scenarios, I always grab my G22 (.40, with a Glock light/laser combo on the rail), my Surefire Z2, and a spare mag. The spare mag gets stuck in the waistband of my skivvies, no mag holders provided on boxers these days, though someone may someday. Might we see "tactical underwear" in tacticool gun magazine ads someday soon, sporting magazine pouches in the elastic waistbands?

dev_null · September 5, 2009, 06:18 PM

Pax (et al) -- part of the difficulty is that there isn't much info in terms of details on the homeowner's actions; however, I was hoping that some ideas about dos and don'ts might come out of the discussion (should've said so in my FP).

So, other than "be prepared," "bring enough gun," and "bring enough ammo," what else can we learn from this?

Anyone? Buehler?

raftman · September 5, 2009, 07:06 PM

Certainly more detail would have been useful.

The article does say one of the home invaders did have a real gun, while a couple of the others had pellet guns. The outcome is 2 attackers killed, one injured, and a fourth fled and was arrested thereafter. None of the residents/owners of the home were injured.

Given that, what I wonder is, is this because the homeowner was just that much more competent a shooter than than the attackers (particularly the one with the real gun)? Given the age and descriptions of the attackers, it's very unlikely they were at all competent with their weapons. Were they all shot before they had the ability to discharge their own weapons? It doesn't say whether if any of the attackers fired any shots.

Or, did the attackers simply bring their weapons for the intimidation factor, in hopes that having weapons would make the homeowner(s) compliant will all demands but had no actual intention of shooting/killing anyone.

Or maybe it's both.

JonathanZ · September 5, 2009, 07:18 PM

Quote:

Before you close this thread, there is one point that really does deserve some attention. Notice that there were THREE bad guys who were actually inside of the victim's house. Would a shotgun have been sufficient? Maybe. How about a revolver with 5 or 6 shots? Or a 1911 with 7 shots?

This scenario presents a darn good reason to have as many rounds as you can sqeeze inside of your HD handgun. I prefer at least 20. It will take me close to 12 rounds, under presure, to get good hits on each of them. If there was one more, I'd feel outgunned with even 20 rounds.

I do not believe a 6 shot revolver would have been sufficient if all 4 of the intruders had real firearms. I do however believe a 7 or 8 shot 12 gauge would do the job because it's much easier to shoot a long gun accurately and a shotgun will also have a greater ability to instantly stop someone with just a single shot.

Tactical wise, if there was no one else in the house was it a smart move of the guy to open the door because he heard something outside his bedroom? He exposed himself to someone pointing a gun at him which could have more easily resulted in him being shot and killed. Personally I would grab both my shotgun and my pistol and hole up in my bedroom. Maybe there were other members of the household, but the article doesn't say so.

FJ4JAKE · September 5, 2009, 07:23 PM

Ok.. I can understand the police taking the gun that the home owner used.. as eveidence. But why would they take he other 3 guns from the guy? If they were not used in the shooting, they were not eveidence. Now the guy is defenseless... That makes no sense at all....

Double Naught Spy · September 5, 2009, 07:54 PM

Quote:

Ok.. I can understand the police taking the gun that the home owner used.. as eveidence. But why would they take he other 3 guns from the guy? If they were not used in the shooting, they were not eveidence. Now the guy is defenseless... That makes no sense at all....

You have misinferred what was stated which was...

Quote:

He said officials obtained a search warrant to collect evidence from the Chestnut Street residence, which is standard procedure, and that officials took four guns from the home.

No statement was made that they took 4 guns from the guy or that the guy was left defenseless. How do you ascertain that he is now defenseless?

Try counting the number of guns involved in the incident and then maybe you would better understand what went on. You have the homeowner's gun that was used to shoot three of the intruders. That is gun #1. Then you have...

Quote:

Three of the four youths appeared to be holding weapons, police say. One had a handgun, and the other two had pellet guns that looked like handguns, police said.

Those would be guns 2-4. Any questions?

pvt.Long · September 6, 2009, 05:41 AM

God bless texas

I just hate the legal system that gets involved. I would have used a tarus judge loaded with 410 buck. Right next to my bible.

Brian48 · September 6, 2009, 08:11 AM

I can see all nitwit family members of the deceased punks coming out now saying they were "good boys", just misguided or fell into the wrong crowd.

God Bless Texas and the 2A.

Matt19 · September 6, 2009, 01:58 PM

Play stupid games, win stupid prizes. Good shoot.

pax · September 6, 2009, 02:06 PM

And that's a wrap.

pax

September 4, 2009, 11:40 PM	#2
besafe2 Senior Member Join Date: March 29, 2008 Location: NC Posts: 117	Looks good to me. __________________ "Blessed be the Lord my strength,which teacheth my hands to war and my fingers to fight". Psalm 144:1 KJV Be safe: Paul

September 5, 2009, 10:53 AM	#5
obxned Senior Member Join Date: May 30, 2007 Location: OBX, NC Posts: 1,128	No mention of masks - were the 4 goblins planning on completing the festivities with a homicide? __________________ “If we lose freedom here, there is no place to escape to. This is the last stand on Earth.” Ronald Reagan I'm a proud member of a North Carolina *Committee of Safety*

September 5, 2009, 11:57 AM	#6
Uncle Buck Senior Member Join Date: June 21, 2009 Location: West Central Missouri Posts: 2,592	Sorry to seem crass, but I am glad they are providing "grief Counselors" to the students at the school. I am sure the other kids that hung out with these home invaders and burglars will need some grief counseling to help them understand why their friends were shot doing something illegal. I remember my grief counselor... She slapped me side the head and said "get over it!" Wonderful lady. __________________ Inside Every Bright Idea Is The 50% Probability Of A Disaster Waiting To Happen.

September 5, 2009, 12:25 PM	#7
pax Senior Member Join Date: May 16, 2000 Location: In a state of flux Posts: 7,520	Doesn't look as if this thread is going to develop into a true discussion. Unless someone rescues it soon with a discussion of tactics and training, I'll be closing it. pax __________________ Kathy Jackson My personal website: Cornered Cat

September 6, 2009, 05:41 AM	#15
pvt.Long Senior Member Join Date: March 7, 2009 Posts: 433	God bless texas I just hate the legal system that gets involved. I would have used a tarus judge loaded with 410 buck. Right next to my bible. Last edited by pvt.Long; September 6, 2009 at 05:44 AM. Reason: adding

September 4, 2009, 11:19 PM	#1
dev_null Senior Member Join Date: June 23, 2002 Location: Austin TX Posts: 615	Armed Homeowner thwarts home invasion by teens (TX) http://www.statesman.com/news/conten...sanmarcos.html "...police 'do not anticipate filing charges against the resident' who shot the suspects, but ... will turn the case over to the Hays County district attorney's office for review after completing the investigation." From this article, sounds like a justified shoot. Unfortunately, two teenagers brought about their own ends by their actions, another is in the hospital, and a fourth looking at some serious time.

September 5, 2009, 10:29 AM	#3
dabigguns357 Senior Member Join Date: May 3, 2008 Location: Ona,West Virginia Posts: 1,215	so much for bringing a pellet gun to a real gun fight.

September 5, 2009, 10:35 AM	#4
ndbbm Member Join Date: November 26, 2008 Posts: 37	God bless the second amendment!

September 5, 2009, 12:42 PM	#8
Skans Senior Member Join Date: November 20, 2008 Posts: 11,132	Before you close this thread, there is one point that really does deserve some attention. Notice that there were THREE bad guys who were actually inside of the victim's house. Would a shotgun have been sufficient? Maybe. How about a revolver with 5 or 6 shots? Or a 1911 with 7 shots? This scenario presents a darn good reason to have as many rounds as you can sqeeze inside of your HD handgun. I prefer at least 20. It will take me close to 12 rounds, under presure, to get good hits on each of them. If there was one more, I'd feel outgunned with even 20 rounds.

September 5, 2009, 06:18 PM	#10
dev_null Senior Member Join Date: June 23, 2002 Location: Austin TX Posts: 615	Pax (et al) -- part of the difficulty is that there isn't much info in terms of details on the homeowner's actions; however, I was hoping that some ideas about dos and don'ts might come out of the discussion (should've said so in my FP). So, other than "be prepared," "bring enough gun," and "bring enough ammo," what else can we learn from this? Anyone? Buehler?

September 5, 2009, 07:06 PM	#11
raftman Senior Member Join Date: May 4, 2009 Location: Oregon Posts: 1,890	Certainly more detail would have been useful. The article does say one of the home invaders did have a real gun, while a couple of the others had pellet guns. The outcome is 2 attackers killed, one injured, and a fourth fled and was arrested thereafter. None of the residents/owners of the home were injured. Given that, what I wonder is, is this because the homeowner was just that much more competent a shooter than than the attackers (particularly the one with the real gun)? Given the age and descriptions of the attackers, it's very unlikely they were at all competent with their weapons. Were they all shot before they had the ability to discharge their own weapons? It doesn't say whether if any of the attackers fired any shots. Or, did the attackers simply bring their weapons for the intimidation factor, in hopes that having weapons would make the homeowner(s) compliant will all demands but had no actual intention of shooting/killing anyone. Or maybe it's both.

September 5, 2009, 07:23 PM	#13
FJ4JAKE Junior Member Join Date: July 16, 2009 Posts: 3	Ok.. I can understand the police taking the gun that the home owner used.. as eveidence. But why would they take he other 3 guns from the guy? If they were not used in the shooting, they were not eveidence. Now the guy is defenseless... That makes no sense at all....

September 6, 2009, 08:11 AM	#16
Brian48 Senior Member Join Date: December 21, 2001 Location: Boston, People's Republic of MA Posts: 1,616	I can see all nitwit family members of the deceased punks coming out now saying they were "good boys", just misguided or fell into the wrong crowd. God Bless Texas and the 2A.

September 6, 2009, 01:58 PM	#17
Matt19 Senior Member Join Date: March 20, 1999 Posts: 315	Play stupid games, win stupid prizes. Good shoot. __________________ In life, you'll have your back up against the wall many times. You might as well get used to it.-Bear Bryant.

September 6, 2009, 02:06 PM	#18
pax Senior Member Join Date: May 16, 2000 Location: In a state of flux Posts: 7,520	And that's a wrap. pax __________________ Kathy Jackson My personal website: Cornered Cat