i got robbed!

[FredT]

I'd prefer a shotgun over a handgun for home defense just becuase of the spread. Something like a 9mm won't do much to a guy unless you shoot him in the head or heart or some other precise place. Otherwise, the bullet goes on through and he keeps on coming.

Birdshot on the other hand would spread out and smack the guy pretty good, chances are it'd get him in the face, chest, etc. and he'd either go down, or the other way. Nobodies gonna keep charging in that condition.

Plus, when it's late, you're tired, someone's broken into your house... who'se aim is going to be perfect? You don't want a bunch of bullets flying through walls either.

Ths is turning into a debate on ballistics.
Item 1. Effectivly all justifiable defensive fire by civilians is inside 10 yards, with 90% being inside 7 yards and over 60% being inside 3 yards. At 7 yards the pattern from a cylinder bore (open choke) 12 gauge is less than 4 inches in diameter. The concept of "pattern spread" from a smoothbore is a figment of Hollywoods imagination. Rifle the barrel and you'll get a fair spread, with a hole in the middle right where you don't want it. The shot string at 7 yards hits like a prefragmented slug. Few will survive a center of mass hit with a shotgun.

Item 2. Less than lethal rounds are a bit of a red herring by the unilateral civialian disarmament crowd. Shoot someone with one of those and in most states you just gave the crook the key to his new house, yours, once the lawyers finish with you. If you have to shoot, shoot to stop the threat. If that means center of mass several times so be it, but the idea is to stop the fight NOW with minimal damage to yourself. If there is only one version at the grand jury, so much the better.

Item 3. Is your defensive weaponry less than 1 second from deployment? If not what you have is a really bad club.

FT

FT

 

[RonDawg]

Less than lethal rounds are a bit of a red herring by the unilateral civialian disarmament crowd. Shoot someone with one of those and in most states you just gave the crook the key to his new house, yours, once the lawyers finish with you.

Are you referring to their use by civilians, or by qualified law enforcement personnel under the right circumstances and with proper tactics?

 

[RonDawg]

im sure i can get a safe open in such a stressful situation and taking anothers life i can deal with if that person is breaking into my home. it could quickly turn into a kill or be killed senario.

Since you TWICE posted that you wanted a handgun with "less than lethal" rounds, in my opinion your are NOT ready to take a human life. It sounds like you want the peace of mind of "well if I shoot the wrong guy, or for the wrong reason, at least he'll live." It's the WRONG reason to use such a weapon.

As far as your reaction to stress, until you've been in such a situation, you will have NO way of knowing how you'll react. It has been shown time and time again, particularly with law enforcement, that under a stressful situation, you will react EXACTLY as you have trained. If you haven't trained for it, then ????

 

[RonDawg]

Oh, and another thing (perhaps this should be in Whine and Cheese):

If your house or business is broken into, and the crook didn't victimize you through the use of force and/or fear at that time (often because you're not there to witness it), it is NOT A ROBBERY! Repeat, it is NOT A ROBBERY!

The proper term is a BURGLARY. Since the OP lives in CA, the exact section is 459 of the California Penal Code.

Few things drive me more crazy than to see a burglary on some cop show, and have the officers and dispatchers refer to it as a TWO-ELEVEN (referring to section 211 of the CA Penal Code, otherwise known as a ROBBERY). Especially when the crime didn't happen in California: being derived from the CA Penal Code, these numbers are by default CA specific. For some reason, many members of the Writer's Guild of America fail to grasp this.

For those who are wondering what the difference is:

ROBBERY: crook pushes you down, or sticks a weapon in your face, in order to retrieve property in your personal possession

BURGLARY: crook breaks in to your home or business and steals stuff, usually while you're not around

(Note these are generic terms, and will vary depending on each state's own laws. For example, many states require actual breaking and entering to have a burglary, whereas CA does not, only the intent to steal at the time of entry. That's how Winona Ryder got popped for burglary when in most states her crime would be mere shoplifting.)

I feel better now. Back to the original topic.

 

[TxHockeyGuy]

I'm pretty much going to be restating much of what has already been said, but I think it some things should be emphasized here. Less than lethal rounds can be lethal, they also may not stop the intruder. Given this I find them a very poor choice for home defense. Also, if you only wound your intruder they are more than likely going to find some ambulance chaser to come back and sue you. They will more than likely have a very different view and recollection (read lies) about the incident than you do and even if they don't win the lawsuit can you afford the thousands of dollars in legal fees? And if you think you're going to counter sue to recover those losses you need to think again.

Now onto what you should be doing in a shooting situation. In my concealed handgun class they made a few things very clear, and remember, this is the advise that is coming from the Texas Department of Public Safety.

1. You always shoot to stop the threat, that means center mass and it also means follow up shots until the threat stops coming.
2. The first person you should call after a shooting should be your lawyer, NOT 911. I was told I have no duty to call 911, a neighbor will surely be doing so.
3. When involved in a shooting and questioned by law enforcement your only statement regarding the incident should be "I was in fear for my life, I shot to stop, I want to speak to my lawyer.".

Some of the above may sound very cruel, but those are simply the facts of life. It sounds like RonDawg is with law enforcement and possibly also FredT. While they will probably never say you shoot to kill I'm sure they will say you shoot to stop, and you do NOT shoot to wound. Is that the same thing as saying you should shoot to kill? Well, I'll leave that up to you. The simple fact of the matter is that under a stressful situation you need quick and easy accesss to a gun, which in my opinion means no safes or locks of any kind, and that you need to go for the highest percentage shot you can, center mass. Straying from those reccomendations in my humble opinion is a recipe for disaster.

 

[FredT]

Are you referring to their use by civilians, or by qualified law enforcement personnel under the right circumstances and with proper tactics?

Civilians, LEOs have their own rules of engagement that are similar, but not identical to the rules civilians use. They also have immediate access to lethal if LTL fails.

FT

 

[FredT]

Be aware that rules for defensive shootings vary greatly state to state. TX allows use of deadly force to protect property, but only after sundown. CA the law seem to be the crook has to already have a knife in you, at least as applied in some counties. If your state has a CCW permit system that actually works getting one is the best way to learn what is and is not the law in YOUR state. As CA, Illinois, and a lot of the NE US do not seem to have a CCW laws that work people in those states are operating under delusions the rest of us have thrown off.

Reality is a hard teacher. Boy, was Katrina and the aftermath REAL!

 

[ShallowDiverDave]

If someone breaks into my house in the middle of the night, I'm not going to ask him if he plans to kill anybody, I'm going to assume that he is willing to (call me crazy for making this assumption, but I'd be a bit scared at this point). Therefore, I AM GOING TO DECIDE WHO'S LIFE WILL END on this occasion, namely, his and not my family members. I flat out don't want to take the risk of my family getting harmed. Now, there are probably exceptions to this reaction, like a large group of bandits entering. I'll give this senario some thought.

 

[Bruce3]

ok RonDawg you win! its a burglary not a robbery

Oh, and another thing (perhaps this should be in Whine and Cheese):

If your house or business is broken into, and the crook didn't victimize you through the use of force and/or fear at that time (often because you're not there to witness it), it is NOT A ROBBERY! Repeat, it is NOT A ROBBERY!

The proper term is a BURGLARY. Since the OP lives in CA, the exact section is 459 of the California Penal Code.

Few things drive me more crazy than to see a burglary on some cop show, and have the officers and dispatchers refer to it as a TWO-ELEVEN (referring to section 211 of the CA Penal Code, otherwise known as a ROBBERY). Especially when the crime didn't happen in California: being derived from the CA Penal Code, these numbers are by default CA specific. For some reason, many members of the Writer's Guild of America fail to grasp this.

For those who are wondering what the difference is:

ROBBERY: crook pushes you down, or sticks a weapon in your face, in order to retrieve property in your personal possession

BURGLARY: crook breaks in to your home or business and steals stuff, usually while you're not around

(Note these are generic terms, and will vary depending on each state's own laws. For example, many states require actual breaking and entering to have a burglary, whereas CA does not, only the intent to steal at the time of entry. That's how Winona Ryder got popped for burglary when in most states her crime would be mere shoplifting.)

I feel better now. Back to the original topic.

 

[Bruce3]

ok you kind of go in two different directions saying that a less than lethal round can kill but than you say a less than lethal round is "as useful as a one legged table" if a less than lethal round can kill and also have possibility to stop some one i see no difference than real ammo other than i can tell the officer "i really didnt mean to kill him" "look rubber bullets" . a gun in the safe would be an option not necessarily the first.

First of all, there's no such thing as a handgun "with less than lethal rounds." Unless it's handgun firing blanks, or simunitions. And at close enough range, to the right body part, a blank can even kill. It happened to a Hollywood actor many years ago while "fooling around" on the set, who was stupid enough to put a blank-loaded handgun to his head, get the attention of his costars, then pull the trigger. While it didn't have a projectile, it did still have gunpowder, and the concussion force of that gunpowder igniting was enough to kill him.

As far as simunitions, I don't think you intended to play paintball with the burglar, now did you?

Second, a handgun with "less than lethal rounds" is about as useful as a one legged table. The point of a handgun is personal protection, meaning the ability to use it should things go that bad. As TXHockeyGuy pointed out, if you can't reconcile yourself to taking a human life, you have NO business carrying a firearm as personal protection.

In law enforcement, when we deploy "less lethal" force options, we ALWAYS have an officer standing by, ready to use the "lethal" version should the "less lethal" one fail to work, which has happened.

Third, if it's locked in a safe, if you were in justleesa's position and woke up to find a burglar in your house, could you get to it in time? Could you remember the combination under such a stressful situation?