View Single Post
Old June 23, 2009, 09:04 AM   #16
pax
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 16, 2000
Location: In a state of flux
Posts: 7,520
Quote:
Think through the possibilities: If the burglar is still there and I show up before the police, I am facing the possibility of a confrontation with injury or death. If the burglar has gone and I go in before the police, I am messing up the crime scene and hindering the investigation. There is just nothing to be gained by going in ahead of LE unless you so value your inventory that you are willing to kill or be killed in trying to protect it.

I am not saying that the burglar is the good guy. I am saying that your brain may be more valuable than your gun in such situations.

Part of that employee training I mentioned in the first paragraph is that I tell employees that I can replace anything that a burglar steals or wrecks, but that they are unique, and loved by someone, and therefore irreplaceable.
TailGator,

That was a beautiful post.

Here's something else, written by a friend of mine for Concealed Carry Magazine earlier this year ...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Don Stahlnecker

Implicit in the question, "When do I have to shoot?" is the idea that you are going to avoid shooting whenever possible--which is good, because avoidance is almost always the best course of action, both during the encounter and for the legal battle after the encounter. Our hypothetical Tom is about to be in a shootout, and the problem is that a shootout always entails a high level of risk. For the shooting to be justified, Tom's own life must be in danger. To put it bluntly, the aggressor will have the same opportunity to shoot Tom as Tom has to shoot the aggressor. And regrettably, one very likely outcome of a gunfight is that both participants will end up killing each other. If we acknowledge that Tom's primary goal is to stay alive and, even better, uninjured, then we must note that Tom's odds are not good in a shootout. But if Tom was able to contrive such an advantage in this gun fight, if he found a way to give himself such an upperhand that he could shoot the aggressor without any real risk to himself, then Tom would be at risk from the legal system which will have to wonder, "If you were in such a position of safety, if you were not in danger, why did you have to shoot?" Either way, this course of action leaves Tom at great risk.

A solid principle of tactics is to follow the course of action which accomplishes the goal with minimal risk.
pax
__________________
Kathy Jackson
My personal website: Cornered Cat
pax is offline  
 
Page generated in 0.09580 seconds with 8 queries