This is why I have a problem with all this HD talk.

[mnero]

THe follow up on this story is as follows: the guy had a run in earlier with some party goers who wanted to park in his spot(I guess the house throwing the party was pretty parked in) he chased them off. later his neighbor can't find a spot cause, well like I said there is a party near by and the jerks used his spot. He parks in his neighbors drive way and when he raised his hand to waive at his neighboor who was coming out of the front door the guy thought he was raising a weapon and shot him. THe guy was tired, already angry and it was dark; he did a very dumb thing, but HE WAS NOT CRAZY! He was frustrated and I understand that, I feel bad for the guy and even worse for his neighbor. Thank G*d he is gonna recover.

[Stevie-Ray]

I am not going to condem the entire subject matter and fruitful debate of lawful SD simply becuase (1) person made a very bad decision.

Game, set, and match, AFAIC.

[specs]

Like some of you, I live in the 4 miles out of town boonies. My house is at the end of a dead end road 1/2 mile off the county highway. In the daytime there is a beautiful view, so pretty that the area is called "Grandview". The problem is that we get a few "sightseers" each week well after dark until 10:00 or so. Nothing to see, no reason to be here, road is marked "No Outlet". They drive down here as if they own the place and then do a turn around and drive out the same way.

Point beiing that I always have a gun on my person, and also a P95 in the magazine rack next to the sofa. Paranoid? Don't think so. IDK if these late night tourists are just lost or looking for a victim, so I am always prepared.

[BGutzman]

For G*d sakes defend your families, but we are not served well, by obsessing on this subject. I fear too many people are sitting around, polishing their guns, just waiting for it to happen; itching for it to happen.

Not criticizing but I think your over reacting....

[fawcettlee]

Westminster?
A lot of guns there.

[mnero]

Westminster Md, yep plenty of guns; heck my collection alone would... Westminster England maybe not so many. I work in Baltimore city, as well.

[fawcettlee]

Yup. A LOT of guns in Westminster...Md that is.
You should be getting hazard pay for doing what you do out there.
I certainly don't want to see you.....professionally that is.
:-)

[therewolf]

I own a few guns; only the CCW under my thumb is loaded

normally,especially at home.

The problem here was faulty threat evaluation, plain and simple. The guy

made a very poor decision. Perhaps he should put up his gun once he is

tired, drunk, or angry.

I generally don't come to the front door with a gun. Generally speaking, I

don't want to shoot anybody, and they don't want to die.

So I can't tell you what to do, but what I do;

1)Not using or handling guns when my judgement is impaired, sort of

like driving-

2) Not keeping extra loaded guns around-

3) Situational awareness and careful evaluation of threats-I fully realize

that in my neighborhood, I'm at much higher risk of shooting a neighbor

or having a ND than being involved in an actual HD scenario.


All that said, what is with this insane pre-occupation people have with

whether or not somebody turns around in their driveway? Get a hobby, for

God's sake.

[mnero]

Good post wolfand Faw you are right, you don't want to see me profesionally; however, last I checked my records, you don't have any obligation to me

[SocialAnarchist]

I am a strong advocate of home and self defense. I believe it is my right to protect my life and my family's life.

I just as strongly believe that does not give me the right to shoot anyone that steps on my property, especially if they show no sign of aggression. The thought process that allows people to believe that ANYONE that steps on your property uninvited is there to do you harm, and thusly you have the right to shoot them, does NOT advance the rights of gun owners and DOES perpetuate the thought that gun owners are a bunch of blood thirsty crazies just waiting to pop a cap in someone's ass.

Face it, people will accidently pull into the wrong driveway, they will walk up to the wrong door, they will need help and go to the first house they see, or they may be door to door sales people. None of those reasons for someone being on your property gives you the right or a reason to shoot them.

[charles-smythe]

twice i was placed in a postion where I could have 'legal' shot someone...once i was holding a S&W model 55 (.45acp) about 3-feet from the intruders head as he came in my bedroom patio window (I lived on the second floor)...I restrained myself from shooting...he turned out to be a drunk 16-year old who thought he was climbing into his girlfriends window...he was so drunk that he was 1 building off...the other time I held a potential intruder at bay with a browing highpower 9mm...turned out to be my neighbors brother trying to get into her apartment (he was visiting her and forgot his key)...

[steve54]

Personally, I don't believe that a case of simple trespass during daylight hours merits an immediate display of force, including brandishing a firearm. It indicates a lack of assessment by the householder and may easily lead to problems

Stand off from the trespasser, confront them and ask them to explain their presence on your property and reassess. In 99% of cases no further action would be necessary

[threegun]

Personally, I don't believe that a case of simple trespass during daylight hours merits an immediate display of force, including brandishing a firearm. It indicates a lack of assessment by the householder and may easily lead to problems

This doesn't include inside your home I hope.

[dajowi]

Here's two stories about two local men who shot and killed an intruder.

The wife and 8-year-old daughter were home alone," "They were in bed. Her husband had gone out for the evening. The wife heard a noise coming from the living room. She got up to investigate and discovered an individual passed out on the couch. She got her daughter, left the residence grabbed the telephone made a call to 9-1-1, and then she went looking for her husband.

The wife drove to a local tavern where she found him and brought him home and that's when the shooting occurred. The intruder was shot with a high powered hunting rifle. Both the men were drunk at the time of the shooting. Homeowner made conflicting statements to investigators.

A county grand jury returned manslaughter and homicide charges against the homeowner - trial still pending.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

The homeowner told police during the investigation, he saw a man, subsequently found to be a 40-year-old local, (and one time high school track star), in a ski mask running from his house. Taking a pistol with him, the property owner drove after suspect and eventually caught up with his pickup in a field near the house.

The property owner told police that the man tried to run over him with his truck, then got out of his vehicle and came at him with a shiny object in his hand that he thought was a gun. He shot the masked man, hitting him at least six times according to a coroner’s investigation, killing him.

The coroner found that the man was shot at least twice while he was on the ground. The shiny object in his hand was a wrench. Police found the home had been burglarized and that nothing was missing.

Grand jury decision found that there was not enough evidence to charge him with a crime.

The head of the sheriff office’s Criminal Division, said people often are not prosecuted in this county for shootings on their property. "In the past, there have been a number of cases where they did not indict," he said. "The county has historically not prosecuted people for shootings on their property. I’ve worked here for 23 years, and the shootings I can recall (of this nature) have not been prosecuted."

There are a lot of local residents who followed the case and talked to or knew the people involved who came to the conclusion that this was more of a murder than self defense. These guys were acquaintances, they were business rivals and the homeowner was well known.

With most people having firearms in their houses, and a large number of people with concealed weapons we have a low violent crime rate in the county. Many households don't lock their doors. People leave their cars running, doors unlocked while they go to the market or post office.

In any home self defense situation you need to do two things following the shooting.

#1 GET AN ATTORNEY
#2. DON'T SAY ANYTHING

[SocialAnarchist]

dajowi,

Both of the cases you posted seem clear cut to me. MURDER.

The first guy is passed out on the couch.

The second guy had fled the scene.

Unless you have a different definition of agressive action it seems shooting either of them was completely unnecessary. In fact shooting the guy on the ground is blatantly unnecessary.

[MLeake]

Going back to the original situation that started the thread, the homeowner didn't react badly to somebody he thought was just going to turn around in his driveway. The homeowner thought somebody he'd had words with earlier about parking on his property had come back.

Party at one neighbor's, not enough parking, people had been parking on the homeowner's property, and he'd had an argument with people he told to leave.

So a car pulled into his driveway, he thought it was them again.

Turned out to be another neighbor, whose own driveway was blocked by party-goers' cars. Homeowner not only didn't recognize the neighbor in the dark, but when the neighbor raised his hand to wave hello, the homeowner thought it was one of the guys from earlier, now back with a weapon and starting to point it.

Fatal over-reaction by the homeowner. Not smart to go outside for potential confrontation over parking. After first encounter, he should have just complained to the police.

But he didn't shoot at what he thought was somebody using his driveway for a turnaround.

Criticize for what was done, not for a pet peeve that didn't actually occur.

[markj]

Fatal over-reaction by the homeowner

Anger makes it hard to see what is real. When I boxed, I used to try and get them all upset, then I could work em and get a win. Angrier they got, better I could hit them. Same thing here? maybe, but at the very least he should have made sure of his target.

[mnero]

Unfortunately the follow up story didn't come out till 3 or 4 days later, or I would not have started this thread He clearly over reacted, but once outside if he waits to be sure it may be too late, better to just let the police handle it or just ignore what is realy just a minor nuisance.

[MikeNice81]

Mnero
But this crowd seems a lot more dangerous then any normal one

Then you can easily point your browser in a different direction. You are not forced to come here and insult the posters of this sub forum.

So far (and I haven't read the whole thread) you have called or implied that the posters here are mentally ill and some how criminally idiotic. All of this because you've had bad experience in your job and read one article.

It sounds to me like you might want to seek a little help for your paranoia. The truth is that the average shooting involves a previously convicted criminal using an illegally owned gun. I hardly believe that deomgraphic information describes even 1% of posters on TFL.

[mnero]

What would I be paranoid about? I suggest you look up the clinical definition of that word, before employing it. I never suggested anyone was unstable or criminal; others suggested that about the guy who was the subject of this post(or at least he was supposed to be) turns out he was by the official accounts neither unstable or criminally minded, just upset and a bit to fast on the trigger. I realize it bothers some people to hear anyone question anything involving lawful gun ownership or the employment of such weapons; I can only say to such individuals that always supporting the NRA or always opposing any weapons restrictions or always objecting to any debate on the subject is just as narrow minded and unproductive as those who want to ban all weapons or arrest anyone who ever employed one. It is easy to attack the poster, much easier then addressing the issue here; which is "hypervigiliance"

I have read 1000's of articles on many subjects, I like most people have had many jobs and bad experiences on all of them, at times; you, by your own admission have'nt even bothered to read all of the thread and yet you mischaracterize me as paranoid and accusatory, the very things you say I have did to the posters herePerhaps you should look up hypocritical while looking up the clinical defintion of 'paranoid'

[2damnold4this]

This is the tactics and training forum. It isn't the forum where we debate reasonable gun control laws. This is the place we discuss home defense and its appropriate tactics and ramifications. This isn't the place we discuss gun control legislation. It's fine to say that people should be certain of a threat and not overreact in home defense situations. We should be careful not to attack the fact that we discuss home defense here.

[BGutzman]

I can only say to such individuals that always supporting the NRA or always opposing any weapons restrictions or always objecting to any debate on the subject is just as narrow minded and unproductive as those who want to ban all weapons or arrest anyone who ever employed one.

Im sorry but unless your 1000 articles is coming from the Brady Campaign I find it difficult to justify your statments, no insult intended.

The fact of the matter is there is nothing you can do with a gun that is not already regulated at some level and the requirements to own a gun are very clear. How many other things in life may require you to pass both state and federal background checks and in some cases may include some level of review of your previous mental health?

What more could you possibly want in the way of gun laws, the fact of the matter is we still live in at least a somewhat free society and you simply cannot regulate what a person is going to do.

For example we have lots of laws about murder but guess what those laws dont stop people from comitting murder.. The same is true about cars, how many laws do we have about speeding and drinking and driving and guess what..... people speed and drink and drive.

The answer is not more laws, more laws stop no one who is willing to violate those laws.

Further while driving your car and drinking are not actually spelled out rights in the "Bill of Rights" the right to keep and bear arms is a spelled out right and in my personal belief the duty of every honest citizen.

If you dont like guns thats fine but dont expect people who legally use and enjoy guns to agree with you. There are other forums for people who dislike firearms, this however is not one of those weakminded forums..

[chadstrickland]

I wonder how many admins are waiting to see when this thread gets out of hand ....wet noodle attack eminent I think

[mnero]

So we agree then, some gun laws make sense? Or perhaps I'm weakminded because, I agree with a few of the gun laws, not many, but a few. I have noticed how easy it is for some to throw around personal insults, while hiding behind the anonymity of the internet.

[chadstrickland]

I agree with some gun laws...I don't have a problem getting a background check for buying a rifle...we don't have waiting limits here...I dnt like the 3 month full auto stuff...and the magazine limits and bs stuff like that..but some restrictions are needed