The Firing Line Forums - View Single Post

doctor_brevic · June 23, 2013, 05:30 PM

Original post:

I picked up a ruger american rifle in 30-06 a while ago for a good general purpose rifle. I plan to use it for hunting deer and elk but after having it and carrying it around a while I'm really starting to like the idea of using it for my primary (glock 23 backup) when confronting trespassers on the property when distances in field of view can be as much as 800-900 yards.

I've fitted it with a redfield "revenge hunter" 4-12 scope with mil dots out to 600 yards that have proven to be very accurately placed. Ordinarily I'd be on the side of people saying "how can you justify self defence at 600 yards?" but on the last day of deer season 2 years ago I learned how, on very well posted private property mind you, even while wearing more than the required square yardage of hunter orange in a well lit open area my father and I were fired upon by two trespassers with semi automatic rifles. 4 rounds were fired at us all landing within 10 feet of us over the course of about 30 seconds. The closest whizzed past my fathers ear. We didn't have a visual but I fired my .300 savage into the dirt to communicate that we were human beings after the first shot and STILL got 3 more. We didn't see them until they fled over a hill and out of view. I genuinely believe that our lives were deliberately being put in danger and I feel confident in my ability to convey that to a jury if ever put into the situation again so 600 yards can and sometimes is a distance at which one could justify a self defence application of a firearm.

Getting back to the point however, I confront trespassers on a fairly regular basis, maybe about 1 or 2 a month. Currently I carry a Ruger mini-14 with american eagle .223 in 20 round magazines. It's fitted with a 2.5-10 simmons. My question is as follows; for life threatening situations requiring the use of lawful lethal force between point blank ranges and 800 yards (keep in mind for the ranges of 0 to 50 yards I have the glock 23 so don't let those ranges alter your decision too much) would I be better off with the scoped ruger mini-14 in .223 or the ruger american in 30-06? Thanks in advance

Response:

I have some serious doubts about anyone's ability to convince a jury that a someone 600-800 yards out from the Defendant (because that's what the shooter will be) posed an imminent threat of death or serious bodily harm. I'm not sure how you plan to "confront" trespassers at that distance, but long and careful thought about this plan is warranted, to say the least. This plan sounds like a short trip to prison, maybe even death row.

Now let me put on my Moderator Hat for a moment. We do not advocate illegal activity at TFL. The odds of "confronting a trespasser" at 600 yards in a legal manner are vastly outweighed by the odds of such a confrontation happening in an illegal manner.

Accordingly, closed.

doctor_brevic
View Public Profile
Send a private message to doctor_brevic
Send email to doctor_brevic
Find More Posts by doctor_brevic
Add doctor_brevic to Your Contacts

Today, 09:52 AM #2
doctor_brevic
Member

Join Date: August 19, 2011
Posts: 71 Please allow me to reiderate before closing the post. I am in no way condoning shooting people without warning at 600 yards! 99.9 percent of the time the "confrontations" involve very civil conversation and end in a handshake. However when I am walking the long way (900 yards) to talk to them in person I am very vulnerable. I am not saying that this would be a likely scenario but it certaily is possible that I will be fired upon again upon approach. As for "cannot be justified" let me just say that I will not stand idley by while people shoot at me with automatic rifles on my own property at ANY range. If I am at 500 yards and I am under direct fire I WILL ABSOLUTELY fire a warning shot as I did before! In the event that I am still recieving life threatening fire then I would seek cover if available. Cover however is not available. I will then proceed to take MY LIFE into MY HANDS and if that means taking someone elses before they deliberately take mine then that is certainly moraly, if not legally justified. I understand that conveying this in a court would not be easy, but I'd sooner have a chance than die on the mountain. Please don't think of me as some rediculous person hunter or vigilante, I am just a man trying to get by. The previous incident WAS reported and I am in contact with law enforcement.

doctor_brevic
View Public Profile
Send a private message to doctor_brevic
Send email to doctor_brevic
Find More Posts by doctor_brevic
Add doctor_brevic to Your Contacts

Today, 09:58 AM #3
doctor_brevic
Member

Join Date: August 19, 2011
Posts: 71 "I have some serious doubts about anyone's ability to convince a jury that a someone 600-800 yards out from the Defendant (because that's what the shooter will be) posed an imminent threat of death or serious bodily harm."

Really? A poacher with a bolt action 7mm magnum scoped rifle that may want me dead is at 600 yards and he is incapable of "posing an immenent threat of death?" With all do respect sir I can hit a basketball at 850 with my 7mm. Stands the reason that they can do the same

doctor_brevic
View Public Profile
Send a private message to doctor_brevic
Send email to doctor_brevic
Find More Posts by doctor_brevic
Add doctor_brevic to Your Contacts

Today, 10:04 AM #4
Buzzcook
Senior Member

Join Date: November 29, 2007
Location: Everett, WA
Posts: 5,259 Glad neither you or your dad were hurt.

You say that you never saw the idiots that shot at you till after they started running away.
Well that's the problem with the concept of long range defense. It's pretty easy to hide yourself at that distance. Difficult to fire back when you don't know where your attacker is and relatively easy to take cover if you're not wounded.
To fire back at that distance exposes you to his fire. This is a case where discretion is the better part of valor, just get away.

Buzzcook
View Public Profile
Send a private message to Buzzcook
Find More Posts by Buzzcook
Add Buzzcook to Your Contacts

Today, 10:56 AM #5
Spats McGee
Staff

Join Date: July 28, 2010
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 3,569 Quote:
Originally Posted by doctor_brevic
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spats McGee
I have some serious doubts about anyone's ability to convince a jury that a someone 600-800 yards out from the Defendant (because that's what the shooter will be) posed an imminent threat of death or serious bodily harm.

Really? A poacher with a bolt action 7mm magnum scoped rifle that may want me dead is at 600 yards and he is incapable of "posing an immenent threat of death?" With all do respect sir I can hit a basketball at 850 with my 7mm. Stands the reason that they can do the same

Yes. The standard is usually "reasonable fear of death or serious bodily injury.

Quote:
Originally Posted by doctor_brevic
. . . .Original post: . . . .
We didn't have a visual but I fired my .300 savage into the dirt to communicate that we were human beings after the first shot and STILL got 3 more. We didn't see them until they fled over a hill and out of view. I genuinely believe that our lives were deliberately being put in danger and I feel confident in my ability to convey that to a jury if ever put into the situation again so 600 yards can and sometimes is a distance at which one could justify a self defence application of a firearm.

If you didn't see the shooter first, how do you expect to prove that your fear was reasonable?
__________________
A gunfight is not the time to learn new skills.

If you ever have a real need for more than a couple of magazines, your problem is not a shortage of magazines. It's a shortage of people on your side of the argument. -- Art Eatman

Spats McGee
View Public Profile
Send a private message to Spats McGee
Find More Posts by Spats McGee
Add Spats McGee to Your Contacts

Today, 11:12 AM #6
raimius
Senior Member

Join Date: January 26, 2008
Posts: 1,162 I'd say getting shot at multiple times falls squarely into the "reasonable man" definition for being in fear of your life.

One shot during hunting season might be a mistake. Three + after identifying yourself, not so much.

raimius
View Public Profile
Send a private message to raimius
Send email to raimius
Find More Posts by raimius
Add raimius to Your Contacts

Today, 12:16 PM #7
doctor_brevic
Member

Join Date: August 19, 2011
Posts: 71 good points. Correct I didn't see them until they fled, I had about a ten second window where I could have made the shots and dropped them but then I wouldn't be justified, it would have been into their backs and at that time they obviously weren't firing at us. My main concern is that often when I see the tresspassers they are well into a very wide open field of wild grass, no brush, no trees, no cover. I cant exactly take em by suprise and jump out of the bushes that arent there. In order for me to talk to them and tell them where the property lines are and figure out why they are where they are I have to come at them on foot from a long ways off. They're gonna see me coming, no doubt about it. Now, if they are indeed professional criminals or fugitives of justice or whatever plausible situation you would like to imagine that would lead them to shoot at me for whatever reason, I just want to clarify that just because you can't make eye contact or verbally communicate does not mean that you cannot positively identify and engage a target that is in fact, beyond a shadow of a doubt threatening your life. Some of the longest confirmed sniper kills in Iraq and Afghanistan superceed one mile. I'd say then that a dedicated and determined individual with the proper training and practice and equipment and motivation can be a threat to my life at 1000 yards. Am I wrong? please tell me I'm not some kind of nut job

doctor_brevic
View Public Profile
Send a private message to doctor_brevic
Send email to doctor_brevic
Find More Posts by doctor_brevic
Add doctor_brevic to Your Contacts

Today, 12:31 PM #8
doctor_brevic
Member

Join Date: August 19, 2011
Posts: 71 "If you didn't see the shooter first, how do you expect to prove that your fear was reasonable?"

Good question and I'm glad you asked it. The third round fired landed directly in front of me about two paces ahead. I actually got hit with a piece of wet dirt on my glasses hard enough to reposition them. The bullets were coming at us, some in front, some behind. the farthest was 8 or ten feet to our left, the closest was literally inches from my fathers head. Let me assure you that we were under fire and our lives were in danger. I'm only guessing but I believe they had semi automatic ak-47s (probably why they missed) at any rate. While I may have been lucky enough to be just outside of the effective and acurate range of their weapons, I was well within the lethal range of any rifle caliber, and these people were making an attempt on my life.

doctor_brevic
View Public Profile
Send a private message to doctor_brevic
Send email to doctor_brevic
Find More Posts by doctor_brevic
Add doctor_brevic to Your Contacts

Today, 01:00 PM #9
Frank Ettin
Staff

Join Date: November 23, 2005
Location: California - San Francisco Bay Area
Posts: 5,104 Quote:
...Let me assure you that we were under fire and our lives were in danger. ... these people were making an attempt on my life.

Or they thought they were on public land where they could do some target practice, and they were sloppy about picking a suitable backstop.

Shooting at any time without clearly identifying your target and establishing that it is appropriate to shoot at the target is irresponsible.

kraigwy provided the definitive answer here:
Quote:
Originally Posted by kraigwy
There is no way in hades can you justify 600-800 yards as self defense anywhere in this country.

No where in this country is deadly force condoned for trespassing.

If something was to happen, you can bet both in civil and criminal proceedings this "Ruger American Rifle, sniper" post will some how show up at trial...

So we're all done here, and we should not see this revisited by the OP.
__________________
Formerly known as fiddletown

June 23, 2013, 05:30 PM	#1
doctor_brevic Member Join Date: August 19, 2011 Posts: 74	Is that right? Original post: I picked up a ruger american rifle in 30-06 a while ago for a good general purpose rifle. I plan to use it for hunting deer and elk but after having it and carrying it around a while I'm really starting to like the idea of using it for my primary (glock 23 backup) when confronting trespassers on the property when distances in field of view can be as much as 800-900 yards. I've fitted it with a redfield "revenge hunter" 4-12 scope with mil dots out to 600 yards that have proven to be very accurately placed. Ordinarily I'd be on the side of people saying "how can you justify self defence at 600 yards?" but on the last day of deer season 2 years ago I learned how, on very well posted private property mind you, even while wearing more than the required square yardage of hunter orange in a well lit open area my father and I were fired upon by two trespassers with semi automatic rifles. 4 rounds were fired at us all landing within 10 feet of us over the course of about 30 seconds. The closest whizzed past my fathers ear. We didn't have a visual but I fired my .300 savage into the dirt to communicate that we were human beings after the first shot and STILL got 3 more. We didn't see them until they fled over a hill and out of view. I genuinely believe that our lives were deliberately being put in danger and I feel confident in my ability to convey that to a jury if ever put into the situation again so 600 yards can and sometimes is a distance at which one could justify a self defence application of a firearm. Getting back to the point however, I confront trespassers on a fairly regular basis, maybe about 1 or 2 a month. Currently I carry a Ruger mini-14 with american eagle .223 in 20 round magazines. It's fitted with a 2.5-10 simmons. My question is as follows; for life threatening situations requiring the use of lawful lethal force between point blank ranges and 800 yards (keep in mind for the ranges of 0 to 50 yards I have the glock 23 so don't let those ranges alter your decision too much) would I be better off with the scoped ruger mini-14 in .223 or the ruger american in 30-06? Thanks in advance Response: I have some serious doubts about anyone's ability to convince a jury that a someone 600-800 yards out from the Defendant (because that's what the shooter will be) posed an imminent threat of death or serious bodily harm. I'm not sure how you plan to "confront" trespassers at that distance, but long and careful thought about this plan is warranted, to say the least. This plan sounds like a short trip to prison, maybe even death row. Now let me put on my Moderator Hat for a moment. We do not advocate illegal activity at TFL. The odds of "confronting a trespasser" at 600 yards in a legal manner are vastly outweighed by the odds of such a confrontation happening in an illegal manner. Accordingly, closed. doctor_brevic View Public Profile Send a private message to doctor_brevic Send email to doctor_brevic Find More Posts by doctor_brevic Add doctor_brevic to Your Contacts Today, 09:52 AM #2 doctor_brevic Member Join Date: August 19, 2011 Posts: 71 Please allow me to reiderate before closing the post. I am in no way condoning shooting people without warning at 600 yards! 99.9 percent of the time the "confrontations" involve very civil conversation and end in a handshake. However when I am walking the long way (900 yards) to talk to them in person I am very vulnerable. I am not saying that this would be a likely scenario but it certaily is possible that I will be fired upon again upon approach. As for "cannot be justified" let me just say that I will not stand idley by while people shoot at me with automatic rifles on my own property at ANY range. If I am at 500 yards and I am under direct fire I WILL ABSOLUTELY fire a warning shot as I did before! In the event that I am still recieving life threatening fire then I would seek cover if available. Cover however is not available. I will then proceed to take MY LIFE into MY HANDS and if that means taking someone elses before they deliberately take mine then that is certainly moraly, if not legally justified. I understand that conveying this in a court would not be easy, but I'd sooner have a chance than die on the mountain. Please don't think of me as some rediculous person hunter or vigilante, I am just a man trying to get by. The previous incident WAS reported and I am in contact with law enforcement. doctor_brevic View Public Profile Send a private message to doctor_brevic Send email to doctor_brevic Find More Posts by doctor_brevic Add doctor_brevic to Your Contacts Today, 09:58 AM #3 doctor_brevic Member Join Date: August 19, 2011 Posts: 71 "I have some serious doubts about anyone's ability to convince a jury that a someone 600-800 yards out from the Defendant (because that's what the shooter will be) posed an imminent threat of death or serious bodily harm." Really? A poacher with a bolt action 7mm magnum scoped rifle that may want me dead is at 600 yards and he is incapable of "posing an immenent threat of death?" With all do respect sir I can hit a basketball at 850 with my 7mm. Stands the reason that they can do the same doctor_brevic View Public Profile Send a private message to doctor_brevic Send email to doctor_brevic Find More Posts by doctor_brevic Add doctor_brevic to Your Contacts Today, 10:04 AM #4 Buzzcook Senior Member Join Date: November 29, 2007 Location: Everett, WA Posts: 5,259 Glad neither you or your dad were hurt. You say that you never saw the idiots that shot at you till after they started running away. Well that's the problem with the concept of long range defense. It's pretty easy to hide yourself at that distance. Difficult to fire back when you don't know where your attacker is and relatively easy to take cover if you're not wounded. To fire back at that distance exposes you to his fire. This is a case where discretion is the better part of valor, just get away. Buzzcook View Public Profile Send a private message to Buzzcook Find More Posts by Buzzcook Add Buzzcook to Your Contacts Today, 10:56 AM #5 Spats McGee Staff Join Date: July 28, 2010 Location: Arkansas Posts: 3,569 Quote: Originally Posted by doctor_brevic Quote: Originally Posted by Spats McGee I have some serious doubts about anyone's ability to convince a jury that a someone 600-800 yards out from the Defendant (because that's what the shooter will be) posed an imminent threat of death or serious bodily harm. Really? A poacher with a bolt action 7mm magnum scoped rifle that may want me dead is at 600 yards and he is incapable of "posing an immenent threat of death?" With all do respect sir I can hit a basketball at 850 with my 7mm. Stands the reason that they can do the same Yes. The standard is usually "reasonable fear of death or serious bodily injury. Quote: Originally Posted by doctor_brevic . . . .Original post: . . . . We didn't have a visual but I fired my .300 savage into the dirt to communicate that we were human beings after the first shot and STILL got 3 more. We didn't see them until they fled over a hill and out of view. I genuinely believe that our lives were deliberately being put in danger and I feel confident in my ability to convey that to a jury if ever put into the situation again so 600 yards can and sometimes is a distance at which one could justify a self defence application of a firearm. If you didn't see the shooter first, how do you expect to prove that your fear was reasonable? __________________ A gunfight is not the time to learn new skills. If you ever have a real need for more than a couple of magazines, your problem is not a shortage of magazines. It's a shortage of people on your side of the argument. -- Art Eatman Spats McGee View Public Profile Send a private message to Spats McGee Find More Posts by Spats McGee Add Spats McGee to Your Contacts Today, 11:12 AM #6 raimius Senior Member Join Date: January 26, 2008 Posts: 1,162 I'd say getting shot at multiple times falls squarely into the "reasonable man" definition for being in fear of your life. One shot during hunting season might be a mistake. Three + after identifying yourself, not so much. raimius View Public Profile Send a private message to raimius Send email to raimius Find More Posts by raimius Add raimius to Your Contacts Today, 12:16 PM #7 doctor_brevic Member Join Date: August 19, 2011 Posts: 71 good points. Correct I didn't see them until they fled, I had about a ten second window where I could have made the shots and dropped them but then I wouldn't be justified, it would have been into their backs and at that time they obviously weren't firing at us. My main concern is that often when I see the tresspassers they are well into a very wide open field of wild grass, no brush, no trees, no cover. I cant exactly take em by suprise and jump out of the bushes that arent there. In order for me to talk to them and tell them where the property lines are and figure out why they are where they are I have to come at them on foot from a long ways off. They're gonna see me coming, no doubt about it. Now, if they are indeed professional criminals or fugitives of justice or whatever plausible situation you would like to imagine that would lead them to shoot at me for whatever reason, I just want to clarify that just because you can't make eye contact or verbally communicate does not mean that you cannot positively identify and engage a target that is in fact, beyond a shadow of a doubt threatening your life. Some of the longest confirmed sniper kills in Iraq and Afghanistan superceed one mile. I'd say then that a dedicated and determined individual with the proper training and practice and equipment and motivation can be a threat to my life at 1000 yards. Am I wrong? please tell me I'm not some kind of nut job doctor_brevic View Public Profile Send a private message to doctor_brevic Send email to doctor_brevic Find More Posts by doctor_brevic Add doctor_brevic to Your Contacts Today, 12:31 PM #8 doctor_brevic Member Join Date: August 19, 2011 Posts: 71 "If you didn't see the shooter first, how do you expect to prove that your fear was reasonable?" Good question and I'm glad you asked it. The third round fired landed directly in front of me about two paces ahead. I actually got hit with a piece of wet dirt on my glasses hard enough to reposition them. The bullets were coming at us, some in front, some behind. the farthest was 8 or ten feet to our left, the closest was literally inches from my fathers head. Let me assure you that we were under fire and our lives were in danger. I'm only guessing but I believe they had semi automatic ak-47s (probably why they missed) at any rate. While I may have been lucky enough to be just outside of the effective and acurate range of their weapons, I was well within the lethal range of any rifle caliber, and these people were making an attempt on my life. doctor_brevic View Public Profile Send a private message to doctor_brevic Send email to doctor_brevic Find More Posts by doctor_brevic Add doctor_brevic to Your Contacts Today, 01:00 PM #9 Frank Ettin Staff Join Date: November 23, 2005 Location: California - San Francisco Bay Area Posts: 5,104 Quote: ...Let me assure you that we were under fire and our lives were in danger. ... these people were making an attempt on my life. Or they thought they were on public land where they could do some target practice, and they were sloppy about picking a suitable backstop. Shooting at any time without clearly identifying your target and establishing that it is appropriate to shoot at the target is irresponsible. kraigwy provided the definitive answer here: Quote: Originally Posted by kraigwy There is no way in hades can you justify 600-800 yards as self defense anywhere in this country. No where in this country is deadly force condoned for trespassing. If something was to happen, you can bet both in civil and criminal proceedings this "Ruger American Rifle, sniper" post will some how show up at trial... So we're all done here, and we should not see this revisited by the OP. __________________ Formerly known as fiddletown