# Honest and accidental home invasion



## TurboHonda

I'm sharing this personal experience due to some discussion recently about having a plan of action. Shoot, Warn, Warn and Shoot, etc. 

Several years ago I was flying for a company that had clients and employees in several states. I frequently found myself away from home at all hours of the night. In one particular city, that we did a lot of business, I had a key to a company leased apartment. On this occasion I was opening the door to the apartment at 2:00 AM. I flipped the light switch that controlled a lamp, but the light didn't come on. I assumed the bulb was out, so I walked across the dark room to the opposite wall and flipped the ceiling light switch. DAMN! The light came on and revealed a room full of furniture that I didn't recognize. 

I raised my hands and froze in place. I don't know when I have been more terrified. There were two darkened bedrooms and a bathroom that I fully expected to receive gunfire from. 

Someone in my company had not renewed the apartment lease and failed to tell everyone and get the keys back. As it turned out, I had invaded the new tenets apartment during the time of their moving in and no one was there. All the furniture was there, but they had not moved all their belongings yet. No sheets on the bed and no clothes in the closet. 

I've thought about that incident many times since then. If the place had been occupied, what would they have done? Did they have a plan? Would they have righteously shot me without warning? It's made me think about what I would do in my own home.

Thoughts and comments are invited.


----------



## SailDesign

TurboHonda said:


> I'm sharing this personal experience due to some discussion recently about having a plan of action. Shoot, Warn, Warn and Shoot, etc.
> 
> <huge-ass snip>
> 
> Would they have righteously shot me without warning? It's made me think about what I would do in my own home.
> 
> Thoughts and comments are invited.


Hopefully, they would have ascertained whether you were armed before opening fire. Simply turning on a light to be sure of their target would have shown them you weren't.


----------



## SouthernBoy

And this is why people who chose not to be a victim and to arm themselves need a plan. One that is flexible and workable in their specific and unique circumstances. I live in a two-story single family house so I do have a little bit of a buffer. But my former house was a rambler (both of these houses have full basements) and that demands a different plan and approach to an invasion.

When I lived in an apartment, that presented still another set of circumstances to weigh when formulating a plan.


----------



## hillman

TH, I'm pretty sure I don't have to tell you that you were lucky. So if you ever have the urge to mutter to yourself "I never have any luck", you'll really know different. That 'someone in your company' needed a slap or two upside the head. Unless it was a woman of course... then your wife could volunteer to do the slapping.


----------



## SouthernBoy

hillman said:


> TH, I'm pretty sure I don't have to tell you that you were lucky. So if you ever have the urge to mutter to yourself "I never have any luck", you'll really know different. That 'someone in your company' needed a slap or two upside the head. Unless it was a woman of course... then your wife could volunteer to do the slapping.


Indeed he was lucky. Bet he mumbled a thank you to the man above.


----------



## Steve M1911A1

Speaking only from the aspect of most states' laws...

If you entered a home in error, particularly by using an ostensibly-legally-possessed key (even if you "shouldn't've had it"), the occupants have absolutely no legal right to offer you any sort of harm. The most that they could do is demand that you leave immediately, which order would require your immediate compliance.

If the occupants were stupid enough to shoot first and ask questions later, should you survive the attack you could see them sent to prison for attempted murder, or at least for criminal or negligent attack and great bodily harm.

One can't just shoot someone out of hand, merely because he appears in one's home without having been invited. Indeed, in many states, one can't legally shoot an unarmed burglar caught in the act, or even a burglar who is armed but never presents any sort of weapon.


----------



## Cait43

Sticky situation at best.......

Wisconsin law states:
* The person against whom the force was used was in the actor's dwelling, motor vehicle, or place of business after unlawfully and forcibly entering it, the actor was present in the dwelling, motor vehicle, or place of business, and the actor knew or had reason to believe that the person had unlawfully and forcibly entered the dwelling, motor vehicle, or place of business. *

Key words being the person had *unlawfully * and *forcibly * entered......


----------



## shaolin

In Ga you could be shot legally because Burglary is a violent felony and the home owner would be charged with nothing. Although in one reading of the law you must come in violently manner the law for Burglary is just enter with the intent on committing a theft or felony. The man's home is his castle and I don't know what your intent are and I couldn't let you go for a weapon. I might say freeze and if you moved any I would have shot you. Now I would have profiled you too. If you were in a suit then I would treat you differently than a man with a mask on but make no mistake about it you were lucky to escape unharmed.


----------



## jtguns

The only question I would ask, "you didn't change the locks".


----------



## SouthernBoy

Steve M1911A1 said:


> Speaking only from the aspect of most states' laws...
> 
> If you entered a home in error, particularly by using an ostensibly-legally-possessed key (even if you "shouldn't've had it"), the occupants have absolutely no legal right to offer you any sort of harm. The most that they could do is demand that you leave immediately, which order would require your immediate compliance.
> 
> If the occupants were stupid enough to shoot first and ask questions later, should you survive the attack you could see them sent to prison for attempted murder, or at least for criminal or negligent attack and great bodily harm.
> 
> One can't just shoot someone out of hand, merely because he appears in one's home without having been invited. Indeed, in many states, one can't legally shoot an unarmed burglar caught in the act, or even a burglar who is armed but never presents any sort of weapon.


None of this is true in my state. Here, anyone who breaks into someone's dwelling after dark is a burglar and burglary is one of five felonies for which a deadly response is justifiable.* It would be up to the homeowner to decide whether or not to shoot.

Now from my standpoint, if someone entered my home by using a key, it is probably going to be a neighbor who has a key and something worried them. It is not likely at all to be a burglar. Of course I wouldn't fire, unless I was threatened, in this case. If I had forgotten to lock a door and someone entered, my alarm would go off and that would probably scare the heck out of someone who entered in error. So I don't see something like this happening to me.

If someone came in just like described by the OP and I was home in my new apartment, I would put my plan into action. If I saw the person standing there, disoriented, and then turn around and leave, I would not open fire.

*"Speaking only from the aspect of most states' laws"*
I would bet that this is not the case in a lot of states. Granted it most likely is in some of them, but there are a fair number of them where their laws and customs are much like those in my home state.

* The other four are robbery, rape, arson, and murder.


----------



## SailDesign

Cait43 said:


> <snippage>
> 
> Key words being the person had *unlawfully * and *forcibly * entered......


And both are needed. However, using a key that was (quasi-)legally possessed does not count as "forcibly" in my books.


----------



## BackyardCowboy

Regardless of TH's having a key and belief he was there legitimately, Equally important would be the perception and fears of the (new) occupants.
Would they perceive it as "someone breaking in" and that their lives were in danger?
There's two sides to this story.
I'm just glad it turned out well for everyone


----------



## RK3369

None of this is true in my state. Here, anyone who breaks into someone's dwelling after dark is a burglar and burglary is one of five felonies for which a deadly response is justifiable.* It would be up to the homeowner to decide whether or not to shoot.

That's pretty much it here also. In my case, I have changed the locks on my place and only those invited or family have keys. I would not expect to have someone entering by using a key at that time of the morning however, if they were using a key, my expectation would be that I knew them. My shoot first, ask later or ask If I was in good cover would come at the expectation of someone breaking/kicking the door in and me hearing that happening. Even someone I knew who was trying to get in at 2 AM would be ringing my doorbell if they didn't have a key. I have no young family members who would be trying to sneak in the door at that time of the morning without being detected.


----------



## Tip

The fact a key was used is really irrelevant. A locked dwelling was entered without the permission of the dwellings legal occupants. Hades, in many states the door doesn't even need to be locked.

At the best it constitutes trespassing and at worst falls under breaking and entering and/or burglary in many states. HOWEVER, I believe in most states there is also an intent clause which might preclude B&E & Burglary charges. Boils down to whether trespassing is a "shootable" offense. 
In no case do I believe it to be a "shootable" offense with a challenge first. At which time I suspect OP would have likely become very compliant.


----------



## paratrooper

That's a situation or scenario that I've really never considered, or experienced. 

I've responded to calls where a drunk individual came home to the wrong house, doors were left unlocked, and he/she simply walked in. 

It was fortunate indeed, that no one was home at the time you entered. As far as what could have happened, it could have been most anything.


----------



## SouthernBoy

Tip said:


> The fact a key was used is really irrelevant. A locked dwelling was entered without the permission of the dwellings legal occupants. Hades, in many states the door doesn't even need to be locked.
> 
> At the best it constitutes trespassing and at worst falls under breaking and entering and/or burglary in many states. HOWEVER, I believe in most states there is also an intent clause which might preclude B&E & Burglary charges. Boils down to whether trespassing is a "shootable" offense.
> In no case do I believe it to be a "shootable" offense with a challenge first. At which time I suspect OP would have likely become very compliant.


In Virginia, this would be burglary because the sun had set. Had the individual entered the home during the day, it would be classed as trespassing and that is not a felony. Therefore a different set of conditions would have to exist before deadly force could be applied.


----------



## SouthernBoy

SailDesign said:


> And both are needed. However, using a key that was (quasi-)legally possessed does not count as "forcibly" in my books.


Both are not needed here. The mere fact that someone entered your dwelling at night automatically constitutes burglary.


----------



## SouthernBoy

RK3369 said:


> None of this is true in my state. Here, anyone who breaks into someone's dwelling after dark is a burglar and burglary is one of five felonies for which a deadly response is justifiable.* It would be up to the homeowner to decide whether or not to shoot.
> 
> *That's pretty much it here also.* In my case, I have changed the locks on my place and only those invited or family have keys. I would not expect to have someone entering by using a key at that time of the morning however, if they were using a key, my expectation would be that I knew them. My shoot first, ask later or ask If I was in good cover would come at the expectation of someone breaking/kicking the door in and me hearing that happening. Even someone I knew who was trying to get in at 2 AM would be ringing my doorbell if they didn't have a key. I have no young family members who would be trying to sneak in the door at that time of the morning without being detected.


There are very real reasons for this here in the South. The South was settled mostly by people who came over from England. They brought with them English Common Law, which was put into practice in my state in 1607 and still rules to this day.


----------



## Steve M1911A1

Wow!
You guys should read and analyze your state's burglary laws more carefully.
Burglary has to involve _intent to steal or do harm_. It also has to involve _breaking_ in. In some states, it has to happen _at night_.

Mistakenly entering with benign intent is merely trespass, regardless of the time of day.


----------



## SouthernBoy

Steve M1911A1 said:


> Wow!
> You guys should read and analyze your state's burglary laws more carefully.
> Burglary has to involve _intent to steal or do harm_. It also has to involve _breaking_ in. In some states, it has to happen _at night_.
> 
> Mistakenly entering with benign intent is merely trespass, regardless of the time of day.


My information comes from an attorney, licensed to practice law in my state, who is well known to the gun culture here, and who has experience in this area of the law. He has held seminars on Virginia law and the use of deadly force and I have attended three of them.


----------



## shaolin

The intent to charge him with Burglary might be in the person making the entry but the act of self defense is in the home owners mind. I don't know why he came into my home do I take a chance and let him get one up on me is a question with too many variables to answer here. We could do what if all day long, but in GA the Burglar doesn't even have to enter the home to get shot. Our State Supreme court has handed down ruling to shoot to stop the commission of a forcible felony and even in the yard if he is heading towards the house and you think he is trying to enter your home you can shoot him. If I see a man with a crow bar walking toward my window at night and acts like he is going to pop open my window. I don't have to wait for him to enter and can legally shoot him through the glass. We have the 7 deadly sins in GA where you can shoot someone it gets tricky in defense of habitation but a man with a can of gas and a lighter doesn't have to start the fire before I can stop him from burning down the house with me in it.


----------



## shaolin

SouthernBoy said:


> My information comes from an attorney, licensed to practice law in my state, who is well known to the gun culture here, and who has experience in this area of the law. He has held seminars on Virginia law and the use of deadly force and I have attended three of them.


In my state of GA it's entering or remaining in a structure with the intent on committing a theft or felony. Doesn't matter time of day and doesn't require force. My question is how do I form the frame of intent in the mind of the actor? Granted if he used a key I would ask what are you doing here before I shoot and tell him not to move till the PD get there. A person that uses a credit card or bump key to open a cheap lock is still a burglar even though force is not involved. So are you telling me I can come to VA use a bump key to open a business up and take all their stuff and it's not burglary because I didn't use force or if I did it on a Sunday in the middle of the day because they are closed it's not burglary? Wow stores and homes while folks are working must get broken into all the time.


----------



## shaolin

VA Law:

§ 18.2-91. Entering dwelling house, etc., with intent to commit larceny, assault and battery or other felony.

If any person commits any of the acts mentioned in § 18.2-90 with intent to commit larceny, or any felony other than murder, rape, robbery or arson in violation of §§ 18.2-77, 18.2-79 or § 18.2-80, or if any person commits any of the acts mentioned in § 18.2-89 or § 18.2-90 with intent to commit assault and battery, he shall be guilty of statutory burglary, punishable by confinement in a state correctional facility for not less than one or more than twenty years or, in the discretion of the jury or the court trying the case without a jury, be confined in jail for a period not exceeding twelve months or fined not more than $2,500, either or both. However, if the person was armed with a deadly weapon at the time of such entry, he shall be guilty of a Class 2 felony.


----------



## Steve M1911A1

SouthernBoy said:


> ...Here, anyone who *breaks into someone's dwelling* after dark is a burglar...[emphasis added]


Please note what I have emphasized, in the sentence you wrote.
Your statement is, of course, correct.

But the story which began this thread specifically states that it was an _accidental_ trespass using an ostensibly-legally-possessed key.
There was no "break-in."

Even when an uninvited stranger is in your home, and even in Virginia, _you need to establish evil intent_ before you are permitted to respond with force of any kind.
Ask your attorney about that.


----------



## SouthernBoy

shaolin said:


> In my state of GA it's entering or remaining in a structure with the intent on committing a theft or felony. Doesn't matter time of day and doesn't require force. My question is how do I form the frame of intent in the mind of the actor? Granted if he used a key I would ask what are you doing here before I shoot and tell him not to move till the PD get there. A person that uses a credit card or bump key to open a cheap lock is still a burglar even though force is not involved. *So are you telling me I can come to VA use a bump key to open a business up and take all their stuff and it's not burglary because I didn't use force or if I did it on a Sunday in the middle of the day because they are closed it's not burglary? Wow stores and homes while folks are working must get broken into all the time.*


No not quite at all.

*"So are you telling me I can come to VA use a bump key to open a business up and take all their stuff and it's not burglary.."*
I believe that breaking into a business at any time of the day is consider robbery, not burglary.

I never spoke of businesses, just private dwellings. In those cases if someone breaks in during the daytime, they are considered to be a trespasser. Once nighttime enters the picture, they become a burglar.


----------



## SouthernBoy

Steve M1911A1 said:


> Please note what I have emphasized, in the sentence you wrote.
> Your statement is, of course, correct.
> 
> But the story which began this thread specifically states that it was an _accidental_ trespass using an ostensibly-legally-possessed key.
> There was no "break-in."
> 
> *Even when an uninvited stranger is in your home, and even in Virginia, you need to establish evil intent before you are permitted to respond with force of any kind.
> Ask your attorney about that.*


And I shall.

Postscript: I just sent him a PM on another site and will report his response.


----------



## shaolin

SouthernBoy said:


> No not quite at all.
> 
> *"So are you telling me I can come to VA use a bump key to open a business up and take all their stuff and it's not burglary.."*
> I believe that breaking into a business at any time of the day is consider robbery, not burglary.
> 
> I never spoke of businesses, just private dwellings. In those cases if someone breaks in during the daytime, they are considered to be a trespasser. Once nighttime enters the picture, they become a burglar.


Robbery is taking by force or threat of force from a person. You can't rob a structure. If I pick a lock of a home while you are at work that's burglary regardless of night. The night time makes the degree of burglary worse. I have a degree in law but I am in GA not VA so I don't claim to be an expert on VA law. I find it hard to believe and the code section for VA seems to be on my side that I come into a home during the day steal everything you have and only get charged with trespassing a misdemeanor. The code section doesn't say day or night but I will give you credit for being right as there are two types of Burglary in VA. There are Common Law Burglary and then there is a Statutory Burglary. I am quoting Statutory Burglary and you are quoting Common Law Burglary. The session with the Lawyer must have been on this type of Burglary.

In Virginia, there are degrees of burglary, described as "Common Law Burglary" and "Statutory Burglary."

Common Law Burglary is defined as: if any person breaks and enters the dwelling of another, in the nighttime, with intent to commit a felony or any larceny (Theft < $200) therein, shall be guilty of burglary, punishable as a class 3 felony; provided, however, that if such person was armed with a deadly weapon at the time of such entry, he shall be guilty of a class 2 felony.

Statutory Burglary is defined as: If any person in the nighttime enters without breaking, or in the daytime breaks and enters or enters and conceals himself in a dwelling house or an adjoining, occupied outhouse, or, in the nighttime enters without breaking or at any time breaks and enters or enters and conceals himself in any office, shop, manufactured home, storehouse, warehouse, banking house, church or other house, or any ship, vessel or river craft, or any railroad car, or any automobile, truck, or trailer, if such automobile, truck or trailer is used as a dwelling or place of human habitation, with intent to commit murder, rape, robbery or arson in violation of Virginia State code section 18.2-77, 18.2-79, or 18.2-80, shall be deemed guilty of statutory burglary, which offense shall be a class 3 felony. However, if such person was armed with a deadly weapon at the time of such entry, he shall be guilty of a class 2 felony.

Additionally, if any person commits any of the acts mentioned in the VA state code section 18.2-90 with intent to commit larceny, or any felony other than murder, rape, robbery or arson in violation of VA state code section 18.2-77, 18.2-79, or 18.2-80, or if any person commits any acts mentioned in 18.2-89 or 18.2-90 with intent to commit assault and battery, shall be guilty of statutory burglary, punishable by confinement in a state correctional facility for not less than one or more than twenty years, or, in the discretion of the jury or the court trying the case without a jury, be confined in jail for a period not exceeding twelve months or fined not more than $2,500, either or both. However, if the person was armed with a deadly weapon at the time of such entry, he shall be guilty of a Class 2 felony.

Finally, if any person break and enter a dwelling house while said dwelling is occupied, either in the *day or nighttime*, with intent to commit any misdemeanor except assault and battery or trespass (which falls under the previous paragraph), shall be guilty of a class 6 felony. However, if the person was armed with a deadly weapon at the time of such entry, he shall be guilty of a class 2 felony.


----------



## SouthernBoy

"Robbery is taking by force or threat of force from a person. You can't rob a structure. If I pick a lock of a home while you are at work that's burglary regardless of night. The night time makes the degree of burglary worse. I have a degree in law but I am in GA not VA so I don't claim to be an expert on VA law. I find it hard to believe and the code section for VA seems to be on my side that I come into a home during the day steal everything you have and only get charged with trespassing a misdemeanor. The code section doesn't say day or night but I will give you credit for being right as there are two types of Burglary in VA. There are Common Law Burglary and then there is a Statutory Burglary. I am quoting Statutory Burglary and you are quoting Common Law Burglary. The session with the Lawyer must have been on this type of Burglary."

Much of Virginia law is based upon case law. As for robbing a business, I did not make a definitive statement, I only said that I believed that to be the case. I am most pleased to be corrected if in error.

As for my comments about a burglar entering one's home, I never stated that theft had occurred, only that an intruder had entered a home. I am quite sure that if a trespasser entered my home during the day, let's say my open garage, and stole some tools, he just went from being a trespasser to a thief... I presume.

*"Robbery is taking by force or threat of force from a person."*
This is the definition I have always understood for robbery, which is why it is one of the felonies for which a deadly force response is justifiable.


----------



## TAPnRACK

Someone breaking into your home in MI is called "Home Invasion" and has 4 degrees... depending on if a felony is committed or if someone is present. Time of day is irrelevant. 

If someone breaks into a business we call those "Breaking & Entering".

Someone steals from a person it's a "Larceny" or "Larceny from Person".... depending on circumstances it can have additional degrees.

It's interesting reading all the different crime classes and degrees in other states. Which states have adopted the "Castle Doctrine" and which ones use something different regarding use of force when one is confronted in their dwelling.


----------



## pic

TurboHonda said:


> I'm sharing this personal experience due to some discussion recently about having a plan of action. Shoot, Warn, Warn and Shoot, etc.
> 
> Several years ago I was flying for a company that had clients and employees in several states. I frequently found myself away from home at all hours of the night. In one particular city, that we did a lot of business, I had a key to a company leased apartment. On this occasion I was opening the door to the apartment at 2:00 AM. I flipped the light switch that controlled a lamp, but the light didn't come on. I assumed the bulb was out, so I walked across the dark room to the opposite wall and flipped the ceiling light switch. DAMN! The light came on and revealed a room full of furniture that I didn't recognize.
> 
> I raised my hands and froze in place. I don't know when I have been more terrified. There were two darkened bedrooms and a bathroom that I fully expected to receive gunfire from.
> 
> Someone in my company had not renewed the apartment lease and failed to tell everyone and get the keys back. As it turned out, I had invaded the new tenets apartment during the time of their moving in and no one was there. All the furniture was there, but they had not moved all their belongings yet. No sheets on the bed and no clothes in the closet.
> 
> I've thought about that incident many times since then. If the place had been occupied, what would they have done? Did they have a plan? Would they have righteously shot me without warning? It's made me think about what I would do in my own home.
> 
> Thoughts and comments are invited.


Same thing happened to me, I walked into the wrong house , the door was unlocked,got all the way into the kitchen and realized I walked into the wrong house. Immediately turned around and left.
I Didn't have contact with anybody at the house. I was in n out. :smt170


----------



## PT111Pro

> Sail
> And both are needed. However, using a key that was (quasi-)legally possessed does not count as "forcibly" in my books.


Well that depends how the person gets that key in the first place. Back in Germany a nurse-aid in the doctors office took imprints from keys while especially older ladies that were known living alone where in the changing room awaiting treatment. Next time they were in the doctors office the boyfriend and his buddies searched the home of the ladies. Entrance? Key!

But renting an apartment/house and not changing immediately all the door locks is stupid. Sorry but that is what it is. Even if the former tenant gave the right amount of keys back to the landlord it is absolutely not sure how many of that apartment/house copy-keys still circling. Especially when teens where involved. They need every 2 weeks new keys because they lost theirs.

And entering a apartment 2 O'clock in the morning that you don't belong into - well - you have certainly something to pray and thank for the rest of your life for.

Some would like to ask every unwanted invasior by a private pow-wow how his/her childhood looked like if they are in bad need for drugs or what their excuses are. Or wait until a invasior shot the home owner to death, as certain proof for their violent intensions, before the homeowner can fire back.

My guns in the house are not for target practice and recreational shootings. There are there for home defense. If someone enters my home at 2 O'clock in the morning and had not announced him/her by phone or doorbell and asked to show, will end up with minimum 158gr led in the forehead.

But if the landlord is that irresponsible and don't changes the looks before the new tenant moves in, the new tenant that prepares to defend him/herself with a gun have to do it. That would be the minimum responsibility from any homeowner or apartment tenant that has a gun for self defense.


----------



## PT111Pro

Humm
As you can see I am very strong in opinion when it comes to home / apartment invasions. But...

I'm often on a business trip and stay in Hotels. I mean bad things happen in Hotels as we all know but a accidental mistake in a room number could lead to confusion.
I have a gun at the night stand in a Hotel too and there are reason why hotel staff have to enter the room and or other hotel guest mistaken because no one is real familiar with the area and almost everyone could be very fast in a bad situation.

That is for me a real dangerous place and therefore is that for me a real scary scenario.


----------



## Shipwreck

Steve M1911A1 said:


> Wow!
> You guys should read and analyze your state's burglary laws more carefully.
> Burglary has to involve _intent to steal or do harm_. It also has to involve _breaking_ in. In some states, it has to happen _at night_.
> 
> Mistakenly entering with benign intent is merely trespass, regardless of the time of day.


You have to realize that 90% of the time - if its at night - the home owner/resident would never likely know HOW the person got in. They would likely wake up and hear something - or, just see the person in. If it was earlier in the day - I can see someone being up and about - and then seeing and hearing the keys.

At night - the avg homeowner/resident would just know someone was in the residence. Sorry, but in TX, the home owner would not face murder charges, IMHO.

Anyway -yes, the original poster is very lucky.


----------



## Shipwreck

PT111Pro said:


> But renting an apartment/house and not changing immediately all the door locks is stupid. Sorry but that is what it is. Even if the former tenant gave the right amount of keys back to the landlord it is absolutely not sure how many of that apartment/house copy-keys still circling.


Yes, but it is the landlord's responsibility on this issue. A tennant can't simply go change the locks.

We own a place that we rent - We have changed the locks after 1 person moves out. However, I have rented many, many apartments over the years when I was younger. I took the keys and moved in. I don't know if the locks were ever changed.


----------



## SailDesign

PT111Pro said:


> Well that depends how the person gets that key in the first place. <snip>


Which is why I said "(quasi)-legally possessed....." <sigh>


----------



## SouthernBoy

Shipwreck said:


> You have to realize that 90% of the time - if its at night - the home owner/resident would never likely know HOW the person got in. They would likely wake up and hear something - or, just see the person in. If it was earlier in the day - I can see someone being up and about - and then seeing and hearing the keys.
> 
> At night - the avg homeowner/resident would just know someone was in the residence. Sorry, but in TX, the home owner would not face murder charges, IMHO.
> 
> Anyway -yes, the original poster is very lucky.


The reason Virginia makes the distinction between a daytime and nighttime entry is due to the land. When Virginia was settled, the economy was almost completely agricultural so people would be out in the fields during the day, working their crops and/or their livestock. Someone entering their home or buildings around their curtilage would not likely encounter a family member so this person would not be a threat. In the evening and nighttime hours, the family members were most likely within the home and anyone entering these buildings would be a threat to them. All of this still exists to this day.

Now if a trespasser comes on my property or enters my home and I am present, then he is a threat to me and I would operate under the same guidelines as I would if I was involved in an extreme encounter anywhere.

The present discussion by a few folks on this thread seems to revolve around whether or not the issue of intent was present in the OP's post. We know from his story that it was not. However from the perspective of the homeowner, he has no way of knowing, as pointed out by Shipwreck in his post #33. The thing is an unauthorized entry by a person who is not supposed to be in the dwelling, a burglar for example, has already demonstrated intent by his entry.* In other words the onus is on him, not the homeowner, to prove otherwise.**

Gentlemen, this is a good discussion since it deals with real world cases. As long as we keep it above board and civil, much will be gained by posts such as this.

* This is purely subjective on my part as I have yet to hear from the attorney. But I believe this to be the case.
** I'm pretty sure this is correct.


----------



## PT111Pro

SailDesign said:


> Which is why I said "(quasi)-legally possessed....." <sigh>


SailDesign you have to explain to me what quasi legally is. I don't know that. The original poster did not have legally a key to that apartment. Not even close. What happen was, that the lease was dropped for reasons that is outside the new tenants business.
For me is it that way, there were keys hold back after the rent was dropped for reasons that are unknown. If I sell my vehicle and keep a key back is it than somehow quasi legal still to drive that car? NO? And why is it than quasi legal to go into a apartment that I don't pay the rent for?

It is understandable why the op entered the apartment but it is not an excuse.

And honestly if the new tenant has family in that apartment he don't need to do a pow-wow first with the burglars to find out the intention of the visit. No one enters illeaglly a apartment 2 O'clock in the morning and has a right of an free shot to do so.


----------



## pic

Caleb Gordley, Virginia Teen, Killed By Neighbor After Entering Wrong House


----------



## PT111Pro

pic said:


> Caleb Gordley, Virginia Teen, Killed By Neighbor After Entering Wrong House


Must be completely stoned. The parents should be held responsible. A teen so drunk and where are the parents? But I can forgive them when they promise to change their lives, becoming responsible for their kids and take real care on his brothers and sisters now.


----------



## SouthernBoy

pic said:


> Caleb Gordley, Virginia Teen, Killed By Neighbor After Entering Wrong House


I remember this case. Very sad but not the fault of the homeowner. I don't know if the homeowner had a plan in place and exercised it or not. I know that in my home, a two-story single family unit, I would easily be able to see someone inside who might be of a mind to ascend the stairs to the second floor.

This does raise the issue once again whether or not it is a good idea to shout out a warning. I am not fixed on either side of this argument so I don't pretend to have an answer.


----------



## SouthernBoy

PT111Pro said:


> Must be completely stoned. The parents should be held responsible. A teen so drunk and where are the parents? But I can forgive them when they promise to change their lives, becoming responsible for their kids and take real care on his brothers and sisters now.


I have never been so wasted that I didn't know where I was. I have been wasted enough that others had to take over and guide me to a safe, for me, place. I don't get drunk. Those days ended many years ago. And I have never had problems with alcohol (never done any illegal drugs, either). This makes it hard for me to imagine how someone could do something this stupid but when I think back to my teenage years and some of the things I saw and was party to, yes I can imagine kids doing this sort of thing.


----------



## pic

H


SouthernBoy said:


> I remember this case. Very sad but not the fault of the homeowner. I don't know if the homeowner had a plan in place and exercised it or not. I know that in my home, a two-story single family unit, I would easily be able to see someone inside who might be of a mind to ascend the stairs to the second floor.
> 
> This does raise the issue once again whether or not it is a good idea to shout out a warning. I am not fixed on either side of this argument so I don't pretend to have an answer.


+1
Excellent response in my opinion SB, we certainly as grown responsible men , do not in any imaginable way want to take a life unnecessarily.


----------



## SailDesign

PT - "Quasi" means "kinda" in real language. So the OP had the key legally, but only kinda in that someone had not renewed the lease and asked for the keys back. He had to key totally legally, but was not aware of a change in circumstances, which makes it a "kinda" legal thing.


----------



## SouthernBoy

pic said:


> H
> 
> +1
> Excellent response in my opinion SB, *we certainly as grown responsible men , do not in any imaginable way want to take a life unnecessarily.*


Absolutely spot on correct with this.


----------



## PT111Pro

SailDesign said:


> PT - "Quasi" means "kinda" in real language. So the OP had the key legally, but only kinda in that someone had not renewed the lease and asked for the keys back. He had to key totally legally, but was not aware of a change in circumstances, which makes it a "kinda" legal thing.


I call this a very dangerous communication drama. So the co worker didn't care to inform and didn't care if someone get harmed or even get shot.
I am absolutely sure I would have a talk to that kind of coworker. We both know, regardless how we approach that issue, that this scenario could have ended very bad.

I know what quasi means, kinda the same that quasi means in German language too, bot in that case there is no kinda legal issue. The OP entered the apartment in good faith but very illegal.


----------



## Steve M1911A1

I keep wanting to scream at you guys: "*intent, Intent, INTENT!*"

Why is a nighttime entry burglary, and a daytime entry merely trespass?
It's a remnant of English Common Law, based upon the fact that, during most of past history, the dark of night made visibility so impossible that there developed the presumption that a nighttime entry showed an *intent* to do evil that wouldn't be seen by the victim, or noticed by others.
When I learned about California law, long ago, there still was that distinction: Burglary was at night. Robbery (and trespass) was by daylight.

While it would be proper and prudent to arm oneself when one became aware of an intruder, one should not even consider firing a shot until the intruder's _intent_ has been decided. Even if shooting an intruder _of unknown intent_ is not murder in Texas, shooting an intruder who was later proven to have been in your home by innocent error (including drunkenness) would still be an indictable offense. Perhaps homicide or manslaughter?


----------



## SouthernBoy

Steve M1911A1 said:


> I keep wanting to scream at you guys: "*intent, Intent, INTENT!*"
> 
> Why is a nighttime entry burglary, and a daytime entry merely trespass?
> It's a remnant of English Common Law, based upon the fact that, during most of past history, the dark of night made visibility so impossible that there developed the presumption that a nighttime entry showed an *intent* to do evil that wouldn't be seen by the victim, or noticed by others.
> When I learned about California law, long ago, there still was that distinction: Burglary was at night. Robbery (and trespass) was by daylight.
> 
> While it would be proper and prudent to arm oneself when one became aware of an intruder, one should not even consider firing a shot until the intruder's _intent_ has been decided. Even if shooting an intruder _of unknown intent_ is not murder in Texas, *shooting an intruder who was later proven to have been in your home by innocent error (including drunkenness) would still be an indictable offense.* Perhaps homicide or manslaughter?


May I refer you to page 2, post #38?


----------



## Steve M1911A1

SouthernBoy said:


> May I refer you to page 2, post #38?


Yeah. Got it.

Under (old?) California law, that'd've been a "wobbler": Since the kid entered in a manner guaranteed to make the homeowner feel that there was felonious intent, the homeowner feared for his life; but it really was an honest (drunken, stupid, 'teenage) mistake.
Therefore it would've been up to the DA to decide whether to prosecute as a felony or a misdemeanor, or even not to prosecute at all.

In point of fact, both the 'teen and the homeowner made each his own mistake: The 'teen drunkenly entered in a seeming-covert manner, and the homeowner shot the kid before first discerning the kid's real intent.

Question for an Attorney: Does the decision whether or not to prosecute in this case involve the Theory of Competing Harms?


----------



## Tip

We all seem to be missing the point. 

Does one have to wait to be attacked by an intruder in order to ascertain his intent before defending oneself?

A residence WAS entered without the permission of the legal occupants. That makes the entry illegal no matter how it came about. Key or no Key. 
IF the legal occupants felt sufficiently threatened they have the right to defend themselves regardless of the intent of the person illegally entering the residence. They need not determine "intent" if they, in their minds, felt sufficiently threatened.
The discussion should not be centering on what the person might be charged with if arrested. The discussion should be centered upon whether there was reasonable cause for the legal residence to respond with deadly force in their defense.
If it were a 5 foot nothing, 80 pound, 90 year old grandma who looked up and saw a 6-2, 250 pound 20 year old in her house, uninvited, in the middle of the night would she be justified in responding with force? The answer is yes if she felt sufficiently threatened.
She should not have to ask "Pretty please, what are you doing here and why?"


----------



## BackyardCowboy

Okay, time to throw in a monkey wrench:

Does this constitute Home Invasion?

Police: Man baked potato, raked leaves during break-in


----------



## Shipwreck

Steve M1911A1 said:


> I keep wanting to scream at you guys: "*intent, Intent, INTENT!*"
> 
> Why is a nighttime entry burglary, and a daytime entry merely trespass?
> It's a remnant of English Common Law, based upon the fact that, during most of past history, the dark of night made visibility so impossible that there developed the presumption that a nighttime entry showed an *intent* to do evil that wouldn't be seen by the victim, or noticed by others.
> When I learned about California law, long ago, there still was that distinction: Burglary was at night. Robbery (and trespass) was by daylight.
> 
> While it would be proper and prudent to arm oneself when one became aware of an intruder, one should not even consider firing a shot until the intruder's _intent_ has been decided. Even if shooting an intruder _of unknown intent_ is not murder in Texas, shooting an intruder who was later proven to have been in your home by innocent error (including drunkenness) would still be an indictable offense. Perhaps homicide or manslaughter?


I lock my doors ALL the time. I never leave my doors unlocked. If I hear someone already in my house at night, or walk around a corner and find someone standing there in the day time - there is going to be a serious problem. Their intent was to enter my house uninvited. End of story. Why should I wait for them to get the drop on me or give them time to attack me (remember the 21 foot rule)?

I'm not saying I'm just gonna pull a gun and start shooting right away... But if there is ANY furtive motions, I might feel like I have no choice. It is my life and my family's life I have to protect.

Add to that my career field... I have quite a few people who hate me and would love to do me harm. I've also had death threats in the past. And, word gets back to me periodically what some of the people in the jail say about me....

Their intent was to enter my home if such a situation ever happened (I hope it never does)... Sorry Steve - I'm not playing 20 questions when I find an intruder. And, the realistic situation is even more dangerous at night - regardless of how the law is written in your state...


----------



## paratrooper

I simply cannot imagine a situation where I might enter the wrong house by mistake. It just won't happen.

If someone enters mine by mistake or by design, it will be one of the worst days (or nights) of their life. I'm not saying that they will get shot, but I will instill the worst fear of all fears in them, if only for a few minutes.


----------



## Steve M1911A1

...But then, there are those states (California among them) the laws of which demand that you retreat, even within your own home, until you cannot reasonably retreat any further.

While I now live in what attorneys say is a "stand your ground" state, I still would not shoot someone who is _visibly unarmed_ but who has broken into my home (even at night).
Hold at gunpoint? Certainly. Shoot out of hand? Not if he stands still and continues to appear unarmed.
Kill if he advances on me? Absolutely. Kill as he begins to present what may be a weapon? Definitely.

I expect a trespasser or burglar to follow my orders when he is caught. If he doesn't, I might kill him, depending upon the circumstances.
If he advances on me? I'll kill him. If he retreats and tries to escape? I'll let him get away, and I'll give a good description to the responding officers.

I strongly suggest that killing or seriously harming someone, for whatever reason, is a life-changing experience. Never for the better. Always for the worse.


----------



## pic

paratrooper said:


> I simply cannot imagine a situation where I might enter the wrong house by mistake. It just won't happen.
> 
> If someone enters mine by mistake or by design, it will be one of the worst days (or nights) of their life. I'm not saying that they will get shot, but I will instill the worst fear of all fears in them, if only for a few minutes.


I remember as a high schooler we were up in my friends attic listening to music til we had to be back to school. I needed to use the bathroom, my buddy told me to go down the stairs and the bathroom was to the right or left.
But what happened was I went Down the wrong set of stairs ending up in the wrong apartment. It was a double house.
The elderly lady told me I was in the wrong house. My INTENT was to use THE BATHROOM,lol. 
The 16 year old Virginia youth crawling through the window drunk out of his mind could be completely different then the next situation,
We need to make grown up assessments in regards to taking a life in a situation that will be different from case to case. 
A great determinate is "INTENT" . 
*Shipwreck*,,do you ever forget to lock your doors? if you had an elderly man with dementia or a type of illness standing in your doorway without any intent to cause you harm?
Would you shoot this person to death based on your state law that may or may not protect you. INTENT ALONG WITH CIRCUMSTANCES CAN CIRCUMVENT ANY STATE WRITTEN LAW 
If laws are written in black n white. A big mistake would be relying on a piece of paper.
We should not forget the human factor that most certainly WILL be involved every time A life is taken, thanks,
Pic


----------



## pic

Shipwreck said:


> I lock my doors ALL the time. I never leave my doors unlocked. If I hear someone already in my house at night, or walk around a corner and find someone standing there in the day time - there is going to be a serious problem. Their intent was to enter my house uninvited. End of story. Why should I wait for them to get the drop on me or give them time to attack me (remember the 21 foot rule)?
> 
> I'm not saying I'm just gonna pull a gun and start shooting right away... But if there is ANY furtive motions, I might feel like I have no choice. It is my life and my family's life I have to protect.
> 
> Add to that my career field... I have quite a few people who hate me and would love to do me harm. I've also had death threats in the past. And, word gets back to me periodically what some of the people in the jail say about me....
> 
> Their intent was to enter my home if such a situation ever happened (I hope it never does)... Sorry Steve - I'm not playing 20 questions when I find an intruder. And, the realistic situation is even more dangerous at night - regardless of how the law is written in your state...


Bringing your career field into play after you've shot someone, would be a great piece of material for any defense attorney to pick apart. 
" (lawyer)so mr shipwreck you feel at times your life could be in serious danger while you're sitting in your own home?" (Lawyer) mr shipwreck may I ask how many guns do you own and keep at the house ? And how many are loaded, ready for action? Mr shipwreck, do feel that because of your occupation, you may have a little paranoia? But reasonably so, your occupation is a dangerous occupation.. One more quick question, how many times has your house been broken into? Also ,shooting that man in your kitchen that posed no harmful INTENT maybe was a product of your profession and the paranoia that comes with it. Could your judgement possibly have been compromised?

:smt1099 no personal
attack, just making a point, :smt023


----------



## pic

Page 2: Parents Cry Murder After Drunk Teen Killed in Home Invasion - ABC News


----------



## BackyardCowboy

pic said:


> Mr shipwreck, do feel that because of your occupation, you may have a little paranoia? But reasonably so, your occupation is a dangerous occupation.. :smt1099 no personal attack, just making a point, :smt023


If they're out to get you, it's not paranoia. (Esp if they've been sending you 'love' letters.


----------



## SouthernBoy

Steve M1911A1 said:


> ...*But then, there are those states (California among them) the laws of which demand that you retreat, even within your own home, until you cannot reasonably retreat any further.*
> 
> While I now live in what attorneys say is a "stand your ground" state, I still would not shoot someone who is _visibly unarmed_ but who has broken into my home (even at night).
> Hold at gunpoint? Certainly. Shoot out of hand? Not if he stands still and continues to appear unarmed.
> Kill if he advances on me? Absolutely. Kill as he begins to present what may be a weapon? Definitely.
> 
> I expect a trespasser or burglar to follow my orders when he is caught. If he doesn't, I might kill him, depending upon the circumstances.
> If he advances on me? I'll kill him. If he retreats and tries to escape? I'll let him get away, and I'll give a good description to the responding officers.
> 
> I strongly suggest that killing or seriously harming someone, for whatever reason, is a life-changing experience. Never for the better. Always for the worse.


In the later 1970's, I wrote a report on "Self Defense in the Home" and my research turned up six states that require you to do this. What surprised me was that one of the was South Carolina. I also found a case in Massachusetts where a mother, home alone with her children (her husband traveled a lot in his job), retreated with her children to her basement with handgun in hand and when the burglar appeared at the top of the steps with a large kitchen knife, she shot him. She was tried and convicted and served time in prison for her defensive actions because there was a basement door through which she could have escaped.

*"I strongly suggest that killing or seriously harming someone, for whatever reason, is a life-changing experience. Never for the better. Always for the worse."*
All of the people I know, and have known, are just fine with what they have had to do against an adversary. But I imagine this can vary from individual to individual and the circumstances at hand.


----------



## SouthernBoy

pic said:


> Bringing your career field into play after you've shot someone, would be a great piece of material for any defense attorney to pick apart.
> " (lawyer)so mr shipwreck you feel at times your life could be in serious danger while you're sitting in your own home?" (Lawyer) mr shipwreck may I ask how many guns do you own and keep at the house ? And how many are loaded, ready for action? Mr shipwreck, do feel that because of your occupation, you may have a little paranoia? But reasonably so, your occupation is a dangerous occupation.. One more quick question, how many times has your house been broken into? Also ,shooting that man in your kitchen that posed no harmful INTENT maybe was a product of your profession and the paranoia that comes with it. Could your judgement possibly have been compromised?
> 
> :smt1099 no personal
> attack, just making a point, :smt023


I know people who keep firearms at the ready at all times while in their homes. Do I think they're paranoid? Of course not. Do I think they're prudent and have good reason for this? Yes I do. I do this to a degree... sometimes more so and sometimes less.

Just in the past several weeks, we've had two break-ins very close to my home. In one case, the teenagers tore through a rear door, went through the house looking for money, jewelry, and guns, then left through the front door, all during the middle of the afternoon. That one was close. Whenever I am home by myself and the garage door is open, I lock the interior garage door into the house and keep one of my sidearms close by. These are not the first break-ins... only the most recent. Granted they don't happen often, but they happen.

The chances of something bad happening to me is quite small. But I would be a fool and an idiot if I didn't conduct myself in a prudent manner and considered extremes along with the normal. Evil doesn't suffer fools and fools who ignore evil are nothing more than fodder for those who would do them harm.


----------



## PT111Pro

Why would anyone even shoot at home-invaders? 

It is a strange discussion. If you will start to talk about it: - what you want to protect? Has your underwear in a drawer more value than the life of a burglar? What do they steal that has more value than a human life? Well it is an unfair question. Right out of the liberal good doers drawer.
I say that underwear has more value than that burglar drug heads life, because any given underwear has a purpose, a burglar don't. Now many will disagree with me even being very strong on me for that statement. And they are right. But it was not my decision to break in a home. Right?

Underwear can and should be replaced but not a burglar. But when you start to see everything in revelation to a value point, than honestly me, you and you are worthless for society and why on earth should the insurance or someone pay for your health? What does the society gain because of you trhat no one else healthy can do? So is it even worth to protect you and if yes that why?

So in my opinion is this the wrong approach. Its a liberal issue that values things against people and comes to the wrong conclusion. Otherwise we could also ask, why we should spend money on investigating a murder, find the murderer, chase him/her through the entire nation and imprison that person. Dos anyone haf an Idea how much that cost? Would that make the killed alive again? So is it worth it?
Can you unrape a women by bringing a rapist in prison?

So why do we do that? If a weapon ban makes us safer why does the military have weapons than? Why do we and even the british police carry weapon when the opposite is true? Why does police squat teams teaming up in front of a bank robbery? And why do they shoot the robbers while leaving the bank? Is the life of the robbers not more than just that little money? Are you really sure that the gangsters in that bank want to shoot someone? Do you have prove that goes further than a threat? So why is it OK for a bank but not for me as a home owner? And why is it OK to shoot someone that escapes the bank but I cannot shoot someone that actually breaks in?

I had 2 home invasions and 2 burglaries in my lifetime. One in Europe and 3 in the USA. What those people do is taking your peace of mind away. Children not going to bed without fear. You feel like raped even when you were not home. Many things are destroyed that a insurance or money can't replace. My Family book is gone, americans don't even know what that is. It is a book of the history of a family with pictures and life stories from your ancestors, some pictures hand painted because the first entrance was in 1759. How can you ever replace that? I bet that this burglar don't even know what they had there, couldn't read anyway and they don't even really know their parents and destroyed that book anyway. 
Does anyone know the feeling when you wake up in the middle of the night and you hear definitely they are invaders in the house and they just to open the door of your children room? 

Does anyone imagine what feeling that is, coming home from work, and someone turned your place apart and all your privacy is now public? Any idea how that feels?

Does anyone imagine how long it's takes until this burglarized or invaded family goes to bed in peace, how long it takes until children go to bed and not crying all night long?
How long does it take until you sleep at night in peace?
I tell you. The peace is gone. It stays present the rest of your life. It becomes fading but it will never go away again. After the second home invasion it will stay present and is not even fading anymore. Burglars and invasors not taking underwear away and stealing a TV. They come and take your peace away and that for the rest of your life.

That is the reason why I shoot to kill that animal that breaks my door or window.
And if you don't like that altitude, than don't break into my home.


----------



## Shipwreck

pic;351617
[B said:


> Shipwreck[/B],,do you ever forget to lock your doors? if you had an elderly man with dementia or a type of illness standing in your doorway without any intent to cause you harm?
> Would you shoot this person to death based on your state law that may or may not protect you. INTENT ALONG WITH CIRCUMSTANCES CAN CIRCUMVENT ANY STATE WRITTEN LAW
> If laws are written in black n white. A big mistake would be relying on a piece of paper.
> We should not forget the human factor that most certainly WILL be involved every time A life is taken, thanks,
> Pic


Yes, my doors are ALWAYS locked. Other than that, I'd be a fool to publicly state anymore than I already have in specific scenarios on the public internet. However, I stick by my earlier post.

I am a bit surprised at the wide range of opinions on this thread. Similar topics like this come up on other gun forums a lot. But some of the posts here are a bit different than what I've seen before.


----------



## pic

Just remember we are discussing from the original poster when there is no INTENT to attack , harm , burglarize etc.

What I think we are determining together here is when to pull the trigger in a situation when a person has accidentally entered your home.

What about a situation at nighttime , relatives are there, we might be playing cards . ,somebody enters your home. Do we just shoot the bastard dead.
"Hey I don't know you, bang bang.


----------



## PT111Pro

pic said:


> Just remember we are discussing from the original poster when there is no INTENT to attack , harm , burglarize etc.
> 
> What I think we are determining together here is when to pull the trigger in a situation when a person has accidentally entered your home.
> 
> What about a situation at nighttime , relatives are there, we might be playing cards . ,somebody enters your home. Do we just shoot the bastard dead.
> "Hey I don't know you, bang bang.


Exactly.I shoot if someone invades my home. Period. So don't try my home, is healthier for you that way.


----------



## pic

PT111Pro said:


> Exactly.I shoot if someone invades my home. Period. So don't try my home, is healthier for you that way.


Are you equaling an invasion , with a person who mistakenly entered your home, and that person realizing their honest mistake they made , then apologizes whole heartedly.
Do you gun them down?

I could understand holding them if possible and let the police ascertain the truth of the matter


----------



## SailDesign

pic said:


> Are you equaling an invasion with a person who mistakenly entered your home, and then realizing what they have done apologizes whole heartedly. Do you gun them down?
> 
> I could understand holding them if possible and let the police ascertain the truth of the matter


I believe in Texas they shoot first and ask questions after...


----------



## PT111Pro

@ pic # 64
Like I said. If you break my door or window you get shootg. Period.
Now it's a little different, because i own my home and there is no reason out there to enter my home accidently.
I have a Sign on my 2 doors. One in the front one in the back that warns you from being shoot.

For me is that the scenario.
Even a rented apartment I have a right to change a door lock. Even my son was allowed to change it on college campus when it was against the campus rules. It had to be done by a locksmith and when he moved out the old lock had to be put back in by a locksmith. We payed that as a safety due. People have fire extinguishers and smoke detectors but going to bed with a old doorlock and no idea what drug head occupied that apartment before. This is very stupid.
I feel much more a problem in Hotels during traveling. There is a gray zone that is not so simple to answer.

The responsibility that is not even discussed is the coworker that let him go in an apartment that he knew how it could end. What had the OP done to that coworker that he get not informed? In a far space you could even complain about attempted murderer by his coworker.


----------



## PT111Pro

SailDesign said:


> I believe in Texas they shoot first and ask questions after...


Sail did you read the post #60?
It has nothing to do with Texas. It has something to do with refusing to be a victim. Glad for you you never had to experience an invasion.


----------



## PT111Pro

> Shipwreck
> I am a bit surprised at the wide range of opinions on this thread. Similar topics like this come up on other gun forums a lot. But some of the posts here are a bit different than what I've seen before.


I just say it like it is. Do you think that a liberal judge would hold something against me what he would not do if I don't say it here? A background in police and military would be enough to blame the heck out of me anyway by any liberal.

Well - you know. If you have a gun you shoot. If you don't want to shoot than you better have no gun at all. My trainers in police and military always said (and I agree) that the most dangerous gun in the world is the own gun that is loaded but not used in a emergency matter. It will be always used against you.

Talking about stopping power of a gun and ammo is just bull. That stuff is not made to stop anyone. The question is only kill in an instant or in slow motion. HP rip the inner organs apart and kill in an instant, a FMJ bleeds you inside to death in slow motion. At least with a FMJ the perp would have a chance in a hospital if s/he comes into the Emergency Room in the next 30 minutes.

The decision is private and everyone have to make his own before god. It is a Yes or No question that has to be answered long before the incident happen.

I'll hope I'll never have to be in that position. I would hate to live with a dead body on my neck. But I would shoot immediately for sure. So don't try my home, it's better for me and healthier for you.

Never forget, a gun that is loaded will be used against you if you don't use it. The most stupid thing is, when Hollywood shows a person that threatens someone else with a gun and this someone runs off. Don't forget that is Hollywood it is a movie and has nothing to do with the reality out there. Or is here someone that thinks he can scare a person uploaded with drugs and alcohol, stuffed with adrenalin to the ceiling with a threat? Why does the perep in a movie run away? It's easy to answer. He get paid to do so. It said so in the Book that he does. That is the reason. 
It's strange, 20 years ago the people still knew what the difference between Hollywood movies and the reality is.

I'm not saying shooting is right. I am not saying not to shoot is right. I'm saying the decision have to be made way earlier than when it's happen.

My question is still, what has the OP done to his coworker to be send in harms way? Is that not attempted murderer, because I would say the survival rate of that action here in the south would be not higher than may be 35%.


----------



## pic

N


PT111Pro said:


> I just say it like it is. Do you think that a liberal judge would hold something against me what he would not do if I don't say it here? A background in police and military would be enough to blame the heck out of me anyway by any liberal.
> 
> Well - you know. If you have a gun you shoot. If you don't want to shoot than you better have no gun at all. My trainers in police and military always said (and I agree) that the most dangerous gun in the world is the own gun that is loaded but not used in a emergency matter. It will be always used against you.
> 
> Talking about stopping power of a gun and ammo is just bull. That stuff is not made to stop anyone. The question is only kill in an instant or in slow motion. HP rip the inner organs apart and kill in an instant, a FMJ bleeds you inside to death in slow motion. At least with a FMJ the perp would have a chance in a hospital if s/he comes into the Emergency Room in the next 30 minutes.
> 
> The decision is private and everyone have to make his own before god. It is a Yes or No question that has to be answered long before the incident happen.
> 
> I'll hope I'll never have to be in that position. I would hate to live with a dead body on my neck. But I would shoot immediately for sure. So don't try my home, it's better for me and healthier for you.
> 
> Never forget, a gun that is loaded will be used against you if you don't use it. The most stupid thing is, when Hollywood shows a person that threatens someone else with a gun and this someone runs off. Don't forget that is Hollywood it is a movie and has nothing to do with the reality out there. Or is here someone that thinks he can scare a person uploaded with drugs and alcohol, stuffed with adrenalin to the ceiling with a threat? Why does the perep in a movie run away? It's easy to answer. He get paid to do so. It said so in the Book that he does. That is the reason.
> It's strange, 20 years ago the people still knew what the difference between Hollywood movies and the reality is.
> 
> I'm not saying shooting is right. I am not saying not to shoot is right. I'm saying the decision have to be made way earlier than when it's happen.
> 
> My question is still, what has the OP done to his coworker to be send in harms way? Is that not attempted murderer, because I would say the survival rate of that action here in the south would be not higher than may be 35%.


Do you have children who are allowed in your home? They have friends also Do you , or would you shoot your own children or their friends just because you think you can? 
I imagine you would identify who the the accidental trespasser is beforehand, it may be your wife, kids, family. You talk as if you're an executioner,lol. 
Realistically put your mind in the scenarios that you are referring to.
You have , hopefully not ,,condemned mankind to be the enemy.. Liberal is non-relevant in this decision, do you agree?
Pic


----------



## PT111Pro

No. My childrens when they came home I knew because I knew their vehicles. And beside the point is I knew where they went and when they came home. We had telefone back than. Friends in the house after bed time? Are U kidding me? Bedtime means the lights are off in the house. What do you mean whoi should run in my house after that. I owned a real home with kitchen, dining, living, bed and bathrooms.I didn't live on a bus station where everyone comes and goes day and night how they please. 
If my sons brought friend in, they asked for permission to do so. It is my house and my sons live there. If they don't like it they better find their own place and make their own rules.
It's all about raising kids the responsible way. I run my home so they run now theirs. In my book 6 year old children not running the show in our homes and never did.

If you have childrens and they use your home like a bus station is it your problem not mine. 
Than you should become a professional bus conductor instead. LOL.


----------



## PT111Pro

> pic
> Liberal is non-relevant in this decision, do you agree?


No!
Because if there where no liberals that turn wrong to right and right to wrong we wouldn't have this discussion at all. At the moment liberals come up with all kind of scenarios to implement that there are situations where the victim of a robbery is the guilty one and the aggressor the innocent. It will become the next 3-5 years very important in the US. You just don't know it yet.
Wrong is that someone send another in harm way without getting punished for it. Not even mentioned anymore in any discussion. I could not even tell you what I would do to a coworker that try to kill me that way. 
Wrong is also that people have to discuss in what rare cases a home invasion would be quasi legal. I like this term because Sail taught me that.

I would say that 20 years ago this entire discussion would have a complete different twist to it but since we have to be liberal or else situation, we talk about if's and when's like they would be real...
So no, Liberalism is an issue in this discussion and will become the next 10 years even more dominant, even in which direction you build your toilet in the home will be a political correct issue. You just don't know it yet.


----------



## TurboHonda

Thanks for all the comments. At a minimum, they have validated the fear and uncertainty that I experienced on that occasion. 

It's indisputable that my entry into that apartment was logical and innocent. I had stayed there on many, and even recent, occasions. I was one of only a few people that was authorized to use it. I had a key on my key ring and always made sure that housekeeping was notified after I had left. Somewhere, in the stable of administrative block fillers, the decision was apparently made to cut some costs. I'm sure they had no idea what a dangerous situation they had created. Even after I explained it to them, they didn't appear to understand. 

But, all of that would be after-the-fact information to someone who was rudely awakened (or interrupted) at two in the morning. Someone who sleeps near a weapon probably has a plan for such an incident. That plan may be based on "their understanding" of state law or it may just be based on what they've always believed. Either way I imagine the execution of their plan would be pretty rapid. 

That's why I just raised my hands and froze. Once I realized the place was not mine, I was praying it didn't belong to some of you guys.


----------



## BackyardCowboy

TurboHonda said:


> Once I realized the place was not mine, I was praying it didn't belong to some of you guys.


Nope, wasn't mine. The Doberman's home 24/7


----------



## PT111Pro

> TurboHonda
> That plan may be based on "their understanding" of state law or it may just be based on what they've always believed.


No sir based on experiences. I'll think its a mind set up, way before it happen. And I am not sure if everyone that sleeps with a weapon also shoots. I read also here some opinions that out of hollywood. Some want a pow-wow with smokes and drinks first, others wanna know the childhood of an intruder or want to understand why an intruder does what s/he does, may be there is something that's in need to be understood, the next wanna play cards and always when they play card they don't shoot.
But you wouldn't even go in my home because of the sign on the door and a pit bull barking inside. That leaves not much room for a mistake anyway. A crawling dog makes everyone that has good intentions think first. The bad ones try the dog and loose.

But you didn't tell us why your coworker wanted you dead. No one can tell me s/he did not know what s/he was doing or s/he did not care for a second what happen to others.
So tell me what did you do to her?


----------



## TurboHonda

PT111Pro said:


> *But you didn't tell us why your coworker wanted you dead. *No one can tell me s/he did not know what s/he was doing or s/he did not care for a second what happen to others.
> *So tell me what did you do to her*?


Haha! You're giving me too much credit. It wasn't really like that at all.


----------



## pic

H


PT111Pro said:


> No. My childrens when they came home I knew because I knew their vehicles. And beside the point is I knew where they went and when they came home. We had telefone back than. Friends in the house after bed time? Are U kidding me? Bedtime means the lights are off in the house. What do you mean whoi should run in my house after that. I owned a real home with kitchen, dining, living, bed and bathrooms.I didn't live on a bus station where everyone comes and goes day and night how they please.
> If my sons brought friend in, they asked for permission to do so. It is my house and my sons live there. If they don't like it they better find their own place and make their own rules.
> It's all about raising kids the responsible way. I run my home so they run now theirs. In my book 6 year old children not running the show in our homes and never did.
> 
> If you have childrens and they use your home like a bus station is it your problem not mine.
> Than you should become a professional bus conductor instead. LOL.


I respect living with a strict set of rules. I might even be as strict or stricter then yourself. 
But I know rules sometimes are broken with or without intent. 
I believe things are not always as they appear my friend.
I am in the belief of not just protecting my family by shooting someone dead, I am also protecting my family by not shooting an innocent person. My objective is to maintain my status as a provider for my family. 
Providing for my family from a jail cell would be difficult 
Thanks 
Pic


----------



## PT111Pro

No that has nothing to do with being strict. It has something to do with raisingf cghildrens. I was raised this way, my dad was raised that way, all the people that really have family and influence rais their childrens this way anyway just tell you different.
A child that has no respect from mine and yours will never acept a yours. A child that never hears a no will never say yes. There are rules in living together and they have to be kept.
Old rules I know but true even when some social worker want for political reasons to destroy the families and tell you different. Look what the real people that have influence doing, they have no space for liberalism in raising children. Just look for yourself.
That is the way it is.
And honestly who rally want to live in a bus station?


----------



## PT111Pro

Well pic. It's your home and your rule.
And by the way, we just have established that Taurus build no god weapons anyway.
So nothing really happen if I pull the trigger. Right? I may defend the home with a Taurus PT 92 hand-firearm, a Ruger american 30-06 or a Remington 308 Win or with a old Benelli 12 gauge.
So nothing will happen, those weapons don't work, everyone here in this forum know that. Right?


----------



## SouthernBoy

TurboHonda said:


> That's why I just raised my hands and froze. Once I realized the place was not mine, I was praying it didn't belong to some of you guys.


No worry from me if you did this. I would have assessed the problem, the police would have already been called if time had allowed, and things would have been sorted out. No rounds from my side would have entered your frame with such a response on your part.


----------



## pic

PT111Pro said:


> Well pic. It's your home and your rule.
> And by the way, we just have established that Taurus build no god weapons anyway.
> So nothing really happen if I pull the trigger. Right? I may defend the home with a Taurus PT 92 hand-firearm, a Ruger american 30-06 or a Remington 308 Win or with a old Benelli 12 gauge.
> So nothing will happen, those weapons don't work, everyone here in this forum know that. Right?


Not sure if we just established a Taurus is not good. I thought we already established that a long time ago , lol (tease).
I'm sorry to hear about the material losses you've incurred that have a very special meaningful value, to you , and your family. 
I'm sure if the situation ever arises, you'll make the correct decision despite the anger of your past experiences involving the break-ins.

I know we've had discussions on this forum that most situations will have it's own uniqueness of facts or events leading up to a deadly encounter. If we do live in a state where the laws are specific, that's a plus, but never a guarantee.

Remember the question here is about an HONEST ACCIDENTAL entering in your house.
I believe there are factors that may influence a reaction, like your past break-ins , the neighborhood we live in. The deck may be stacked against someone making the proper decision based on certain factors.
I would be careful about certain signage that you have posted around your premises. 
Lawyers can have a field day depending on the verbage written on the sign.

I personally never owned a Taurus, but I wouldn't want to be shot by one,lol.
Pic


----------



## PT111Pro

Pic
I have no anger. I just refuse to be a victim. It is the oposite. I hate to pull a weapon on a human being. But it is not my choice it is theres. Give me any reason why anyone should be mistacenly in my house. I told before, I see a gray dangerous area in a Hotel. There where everyone comes and goes, no one really know who is who and why they are there is it different. Room numbers can be mistaken.

So how do you determine if someone enters your home accidental or not. I don't really get the picture but it seems to me that you have an open house and you have to assume that the someone that you accidentally meet in your home is brought in by family members, but no one really knows. Right? So it could happen that your wife thinks it's a guest of the son, the son thinks is a guest of Mom and you pay utilities and food for people that you don't know live here. WoW.

So do I have the right picture? Your children coming home or not, from somewhere no one knows really and brings people with them in the middle of the night (while the home is already dark and you are in bed) that no one really know or you never have seen before? You are a very brave man - I can tell you.

OK but then make sure you don't have any weapon in your home. You never know who is in your home and under what circumstances your children picking up strangers. That can become very fast very ugly if that stranger filled with drugs or drunk becomes hand on your weapon. No I understand all that accidental shootings that I read about. 

It could be a cultural issue. We europeans don't live in open houses where everyone comes and goes as they please and we don't meet people that we don't know in our homes. Just have the picture staying in line on your bathroom. " Sorry sir do you belong here or did you just came in to use the bathroom?" People that stay over night are very close people and very seldom friends. I know we are very old stylish have a sense of ownership and the responsibility that comes with that, and think we should control who is running our place. 
Even children don't bring just friends over without asking for permission. That is a no no in a middle stand home in europe. It is not even thinkable in Europe that you call someone after 8:00 pm on the telephone. That would be not polite. Young people when they are home, they texting but really after 8:00 pm is the home a castle. 
It is a cultural issue I guess. But well - I talked yesterday to my friends about that issue. 
My neighbor Tim here in Texas, I would hesitate just to show up on his home after dark for no reason and I call him a friend. 
Michael a close friend that I served in the military with said, if someone shows up after dark on my doorsteps they have to have a reason but should have called me first by phone. He wants to be called first before showing up any time of the day anyway. 
Steve and Ronda told me the same. Ronda said she hate it when someone just showed up. She tells even her daughter to call first before showing up. Ronda said visitors after dark just showing up is a cultural no no in Texas too and childrens or even adult kids not bringing any friends without asking for permission, and after dark is not even a subject. 
Bernice said just entering a home any given day is a no no in Texas. She would throw anybody out of the home that has no manners and enters the house without permission, and such friends would be not long friends anyway. 
Summary:
That was what everyone that I asked here in Texas told me. Children even teens and tweens bringing friends over after permission and not at night time anyway.

I don't know where you live and what social level you are in, but in Texas where I live with friends that are blue colored, and office people, is it clear. No one enters uninvited the neighbors or a friends home. Texans call before they visit friends and don't enter any home just like that. 
So it must be very different where you live, your children must have permission to do what ever they please.

But tell me how do you determine if someone accidentally enters your home at 2:00 am? Do you hold with intruders a paw-wow or do you just assume that this is a somebody that you never saw before but may be it is a friend of a friend of your son or daughter that has no place to go at night and lives here now. Why else should they be in a place like yours at night when everyone is in bed?
Well - still a bus station and you're right. Bus stations have no castle ruling.


----------



## hillman

I like that story, PT. It has a kind of Mark Twain flavor. The summary is a good touch too, and does what it is supposed to do.


----------



## pic

If you read over again above, I am very strict probably stricter then yourself.
I have never had a break-in or home invasion as yourself.. 
I'm very methodical and conscientious at the same time.
People do not come n go here. But I do see a situation where it could be ok for people with young adult children who live at home, possibly work nights. 
That adult child could be a law enforcement officer
Some parents may have raised their children to trust their judgement as to bring a friend home. 
Not trusting your young adult children's judgement may be a product of their environment, their upbringing ,or their parents rules. Sometimes trusting your young adult children is a part of growing. 
I grew up in a European neighborhood, my observations of the very strict families came IMO mostly out of fear and mistrust the parents had as a personal issue.
The kids left the house as soon as possible because of their parents fear thus creating a sheltered upbringing


----------



## Shipwreck

pic said:


> If you read over again above, I am very strict probably stricter then yourself.
> I have never had a break-in or home invasion as yourself..
> I'm very methodical and conscientious at the same time.
> People do not come n go here. But I do see a situation where it could be ok for people with young adult children who live at home, possibly work nights.
> That adult child could be a law enforcement officer
> Some parents may have raised their children to trust their judgement as to bring a friend home.
> Not trusting your young adult children's judgement may be a product of their environment, their upbringing ,or their parents rules. Sometimes trusting your young adult children is a part of growing.
> I grew up in a European neighborhood, my observations of the very strict families came IMO mostly out of fear and mistrust the parents had as a personal issue.
> The kids left the house as soon as possible because of their parents fear thus creating a sheltered upbringing


I have no adult children. And no one has a key to my home... So, anyone in my house did so forcefully...


----------



## pic

Shipwreck said:


> I have no adult children. And no one has a key to my home... So, anyone in my house did so forcefully...


I very much understand your situation, which creates your conclusion "They did so forcefully". 
Then tell me how an unintentional and honest entrance to your home could happen?
Because it could happen, MURPHYS LAW

Maybe a mechanism in the lock failed, you forgot to lock the door, How about a freaky tornado twister blew out the windows n door, you conclude its a home invasion because you were sleeping hard (took a sleeping pill that night), neighbor comes to check up on you, and you shoot him dead in the doorway,lol.
Hey , I'm on your side. But we also need to process the situation quickly, as not to shoot an innocent man and protect our life also
:smt1099


----------



## SouthernBoy

Steve had asked what the attorney I know might have to say about this discussion; the topic of intent. I surmised that intent was already shown by the entrance of an unknown person into one's dwelling. Here is his response... first my question as posed to him.

*Question
--------*
"Afternoon, XXX. I have a question that harkens back to your seminars. There is an on-going discussion on another site about a case where someone who enters a dwelling at night and has not exhibited an intent to do evil. My position is that this person would still be considered a burglar and as such, a felon. His question then to me is this;

"Even when an uninvited stranger is in your home, and even in Virginia, you need to establish evil intent before you are permitted to respond with force of any kind.
Ask your attorney about that."

If he is considered a burglar, the intent is already assumed by the homeowner, whether or not there is intent on the part of the intruder, I would think.

Can you clear this one up for me?

Thanks so much,

SouthernBoy"

*His response
------------*
"to answer the question, though, "hogwash".

Unless you're a mind-reader, you can't know what the invader's intent is, so you have to rely on the presumption of intent from the person's actions. That's why I always talk about the extremes, where the guy wearing the black balaclava comes in through the basement window at two a.m. on the one hand, and the Alzheimer's patient from across the street comes in through the unlocked screen door at two in the afternoon. Here's the answer from another perspective. You can always use sufficient force to deal with the situation that is reasonable under the circumstances; you can't defend "mere property" with deadly force, and you can't injure a trespasser. But if the trespasser or person trying to steal the radio out of your car reacts with deadly force, that makes it a self-defense situation, so it's no longer a matter of protecting property. The "habitation" (or more popularly, "castle") can be defended because invaders are presumed to have the requisite "evil intent". Real property beyond the curtilage can be protected from trespassing by laying on of hands and a gentle escort, unless the trespasser reacts with force, in which case you can escalate as necessary. The use of deadly force has to be necessary, has to be reasonable under the circumstances, and has to be based on objective fact. But you don't have to know anything about what's in the other person's mind or be able to rely on scientific fact."

Hope this clears things up with this as it is addressed in my state.


----------



## pic

SB, 
Thank you,
Appreciate the time an effort , sounds like a great connection of information.
Pic
:smt1099


----------



## hillman

pic said:


> SB,
> Thank you,
> Appreciate the time an effort , sounds like a great connection of information.
> Pic
> :smt1099


My thanks also... just remember that the info is applicable to Virginia, not necessarily to, say, Arizona.


----------



## Steve M1911A1

Good information, and useful, but before you shoot an intruder you must remember: "...The use of deadly force has to be necessary, has to be reasonable under the circumstances, and has to be based on objective fact."

I submit to you that mistakenly entering someone else's dwelling, even by way of a window, does not present a necessity for the application of deadly force, and that the use of deadly force is not reasonable until the intruder has exhibited some kind of evil intent.

There's that word "intent" again...


----------



## SouthernBoy

Steve M1911A1 said:


> Good information, and useful, but before you shoot an intruder you must remember: "...The use of deadly force has to be necessary, has to be reasonable under the circumstances, and has to be based on objective fact."
> 
> I submit to you that mistakenly entering someone else's dwelling, even by way of a window, does not present a necessity for the application of deadly force, and that the use of deadly force is not reasonable until the intruder has exhibited some kind of evil intent.
> 
> There's that word "intent" again...


Ah but the mere illegal entry into one's dwelling is the intent so the burden is on the invader to either exit the property or submit to the instructions of the legal resident. We have already seen that an "innocent" invader can be shot and little or nothing may come from it. I'm not offering an opinion here, just observing a case. I know of a few others of similar nature. Heck, I recall a case 45 years ago where a man's home was broken into by two teenagers who were trying to steal the man's stereo equipment and he shot them both dead... in the back. No charges were filed. Again, I am not offering an opinion on that one, either.

I already stated what I think I would do under such circumstances; an illegal entry into my home at night. I am not so foolish to refuse to believe that each situation can have its own set of circumstances requiring specific and unique responses. I am still not solid in my mind whether or not I would shout out to "Get out, I have a gun and the police are on the way". I didn't do that in the two incidences where I had to put our plan into play. But like I said, each case is going to be unique.

I know this attorney personally and I know some of the things he has told me in confidence. I trust his experience and history with these sorts of cases. He's a good man and an interesting speaker.

*"The use of deadly force has to be necessary, has to be reasonable under the circumstances, and has to be based on objective fact."*
I believe his context here involved trespassers. They are not the same as a burglar... different set of circumstances involved. Burglary is a felony for which deadly force can be a reasonable and justifiable response. Rape, murder, arson, and robbery fall under the same umbrella.


----------



## SouthernBoy

hillman said:


> My thanks also... just remember that the info is applicable to Virginia, not necessarily to, say, Arizona.


This is true.


----------



## SouthernBoy

pic said:


> SB,
> Thank you,
> Appreciate the time an effort , sounds like a great connection of information.
> Pic
> :smt1099


His seminars were very interesting. Lots of good questions and especially those involving misinformation made the classes even that much more informative.


----------



## SouthernBoy

I would like to say again that if I were awakened in the middle of the night by someone breaking into my home, my initial reaction is to consider worse case scenarios and then work backwards from there based upon my observations. I do this when driving, when going somewhere I've not been, and in a host of other situations. It's part of my defensive mechanism and it has worked well in the past.

If I was able to determine that the individual was not a threat, then I would probably want to hold them under gun point (this is not something I relish for obvious reasons) until the police get there and can sort things out. More than likely I imagine that once discovered, the invader is going to want to exit quickly. But this is something I would never plan on happening.

I also have set a few places where I will not allow that person to get to. For example, if I see them, tell them to get out, and they decide to ascend the stairs to the second floor, I'm going to put holes in their body. If they have a weapon or if there's several of them or if he/they just stand there and don't respond to my commands, they are escalating their chances of receiving new openings as well.

But even with all of this said, once the threat is real and you now have to take a decision to either open or hold fire, I am a firm believer in the fact that you're never really going to know how you're going to respond until the threat is happening LIKE RIGHT NOW. You have to do something and do it very quickly.


----------



## hillman

SB:
"But even with all of this said, once the threat is real and you now have to take a decision to either open or hold fire, I am a firm believer in the fact that you're never really going to know how you're going to respond until the threat is happening LIKE RIGHT NOW. You have to do something and do it very quickly."

I think this is right, especially if one hasn't been in combat - "in harm's way". I do know that the _thought_ of killing someone is slightly nauseating, and suspect that actually doing so might cause vomiting. I am also familiar with the 'flash of panic', under the influence of which all bets are off. I estimate the odds are, panicked or not, I will shoot first and puke later.


----------



## pic

SailDesign said:


> I believe in Texas they shoot first and ask questions after...


I know it's not true, but it was funny. No offense, I love Texas

:anim_lol:


----------



## pic

SouthernBoy said:


> I would like to say again that if I were awakened in the middle of the night by someone breaking into my home, my initial reaction is to consider worse case scenarios and then work backwards from there based upon my observations. I do this when driving, when going somewhere I've not been, and in a host of other situations. It's part of my defensive mechanism and it has worked well in the past.
> 
> If I was able to determine that the individual was not a threat, then I would probably want to hold them under gun point (this is not something I relish for obvious reasons) until the police get there and can sort things out. More than likely I imagine that once discovered, the invader is going to want to exit quickly. But this is something I would never plan on happening.
> 
> I also have set a few places where I will not allow that person to get to. For example, if I see them, tell them to get out, and they decide to ascend the stairs to the second floor, I'm going to put holes in their body. If they have a weapon or if there's several of them or if he/they just stand there and don't respond to my commands, they are escalating their chances of receiving new openings as well.
> 
> But even with all of this said, once the threat is real and you now have to take a decision to either open or hold fire, I am a firm believer in the fact that you're never really going to know how you're going to respond until the threat is happening LIKE RIGHT NOW. You have to do something and do it very quickly.


I like the fact you mentioned there may be several intruders. 
I also like the defensive position you mentioned, (2nd floor)of defending or being alert of just one access area (stairway) ,,letting them come to you ,,,if the situation allows (loved ones, family are all upstairs).

I'm not implying that it should be your only plan. But it's a good one
On the first floor you're more of an open target. Due to the multiple entrances, windows.
A person is more likely to be blindsided or get set up if there were multiple intruders (they may be experienced) 
My personal preference would be to remain quiet,,,listen to assess , then shoot to stop

This is just IMHO , I'm sure there are other great plans.


----------



## SouthernBoy

hillman said:


> SB:
> "But even with all of this said, once the threat is real and you now have to take a decision to either open or hold fire, I am a firm believer in the fact that you're never really going to know how you're going to respond until the threat is happening LIKE RIGHT NOW. You have to do something and do it very quickly."
> 
> *I think this is right, especially if one hasn't been in combat* - "in harm's way". I do know that the _thought_ of killing someone is slightly nauseating, and suspect that actually doing so might cause vomiting. I am also familiar with the 'flash of panic', under the influence of which all bets are off. I estimate the odds are, panicked or not, I will shoot first and puke later.


Right. I left off my usual caveat of, "unless you have had a similar experience in the past". I don't want to shoot someone if I can help it. But I have done my best to train my mindset to respond to a threat in the most deliberate manner, should I have to do so. I tend to go with "always be aware of your surroundings" when out and about... something I tried to drill into my daughters when they were young (It did pay off once with my youngest girl).

But still, when some BG is there, right in front of you, in your home or outside, and you know you have to get your gun out... that's when the exit side of your alimentary canal is going to pucker and all bets are off.


----------

