Ok, a theif breaks into your home. You know there is a theif, but you do not know if he is armed or not. You have a weapon, sword, knife, gun, staff, missle launcher, nuclear missle, whatever. What would you do to the theif if you do not know if he is armed or not? Would you let him take what he wants and leave without hurting him? Would you attack him and let the police arrest him? Or would you kill him?
I would sneak up on him/her and smash his/her head with the bat i keep next to my bed. I would try to jst knock them out till the police got there but if i accidentaly broke their skull it would make them think twice about breaking into my house again
Pretty difficult. People get done for assaulting a burglar in England.
I would have thought that it was quite common for thieves to sue houseowners in America for basing them. Not true?
Personally speaking, if I was feeling up for it, I would try to knock them out with a large object and call the fuzz. Or call the fuzz and then, if they were going to leave before the Police arrived, then I’d knock them out.
Depending on the state, but for most you can shoot him. Then call the police.
Mass finally changed their laws, but before if they were killing your kids and you could get out, you had to leave. If there was no threat to you, you had no right to stop them in your own home.
In Tx you’re allowed to shoot an intruder IF: they’re all the way in your house and it’s dark. They don’t have to be armed under those circumstances. Although it’s not wise to boast about shooting an unarmed person before the trial.
I’ve got a friend who is on probation because he made two mistakes. 1 - he shot him while the burglar was in the doorway,
2 - he failed to kill him and got sued!:mad:
Any thief that gets out of my house alive will be very lucky…
You are allowed to use deadly force if faced with a threat of deadly force. The reason this works for ‘in the dark’ situations is you can argue you thought he was armed. Qi dup, that’s why you shouldn’t make statements like that. That rule does not apply. True you may be able to convince a jury and jury decisions of not guilty are final but shooting someone because they are in your house does not constitute self defense.
Dark knight, again that’s not true. Many people have gotten off for this because there are many jurors who don’t make decisions based on the law. The change in some state statutes to include defense of others still prohibits deadly force if a threat of deadly force does not exist. You have the right to defend your home with non-deadly force and the recommended method is calling the cops.
It’s best to talk to either a lawyer or LEO while making your strategy. But, here are a couple things I know from MI.
He has to have come completly in the house
He has to presend a reasonable threat to you that you feel you are in danger of either serious threat or death.
You better shoot him from the front, if he’s hit in the back YOU are in big trouble because it’s automatically assumed he was trying to leave when you shot him.
In other self defense scenarios you have what is called “the duty to retreat” which means you have to try and leave if possible. In Michigan, while in your house you don’t have to do this, you can stand there and defend your home/property with as much force as you feel is reasonable AT THAT TIME. This means that you have to know he has a weapon or other tool to cause you serious bodily harm, the means to do it, AND that he is attempting to.
(these were pulled from my LEO classes and MI crim. proc. book)
Someone broke into my house when I was 14. I was on the computer in the basement and I heard my window being pushed in. I grabbed a broom stick and quietly went upstairs, he was going through the drawers in my kitchen. I then charged at him and broke the broom stick over his shoulder. Then I was frozen, I had no idea what to do. He stood up, paused for a second, then pushed through me and bolted out the front door (which was unlocked the whole time lol). I called the cops right afterwards. When they got there, one of them told me that if the robber heard me coming up the stairs, he would have grabbed one of the huge knives from the kitchen and tried to stab me. All I could say was “oops”.
I think your absolutly right myosimka. This is one of those things I’m really not sure what I’m talking about. I just remember hearing about the make my day law on the news and that was a bout it. I never stoped to think about the legal side of it because well, I never pictured shooting an intruder seeing as I don’t own a gun. I have an antique revolver but i’m not old enough to by bullets for it. I’m glad you said what you did because I see how people could get the wrong idea from my saying that if someone is in your house you can shoot them. My bad and good call myosimka! Big Truck
I remember my friend telling me about one night after training when he arrived home to find two teenage theives in his house. He was in his full training Gi. (6’2, Built like a brick sh*t house with a black tip in traditional TKD.)
The two guys shat their pants and just bolted out the back door.
He grabed his old medievil broadsword off the wall and chased them down the street while shouting fond remarks.
We might not have the rite to protect our homes but we can protect ourselves. I take this to mean if no one else is around which there usually isnt when im at home, it was self defence. I would think of a good story while i was waiting for the fuzz.
In most cases, here in the USA, one is allowed to shoot an intruder in the home, if intruder is completely inside the home.
Some states allow this if there is no other way to avoid it or if the home owner can’t escape, some do not allow it at all, aren’t these SOCIALIST states wonderful?, they give the bottom-feeding, useless predators more rights than a useful, law-abiding citizen. Thankfully my state allows extermination of these worthless .
Scotty1- Ain’t Socialsim and forced multi-culterism wonderful?
I’d leave ASAP if you can. Unfortunately England is the example of which the rest of the world is heading.:mad:
I heard a story a few months ago about somebody here in san antonio that had somebody break into their house. As the thief was exiting thru the window in which he/she/it broke in, the homeowner shot and killed the theif. The person then dragged the thief back into the house and placed the body by the window where he shot the theif and waited for police. Of course forensics could have determined where the events took place and ended, but the homeowner was never charged with a crime. My feeling is that they (SAPD) figured that he got what he deserved…and he did. I have no way to confirm this happened, but the person that told me had no reason to make it up.
I personally would not wait around to have a sit down and kindly ask an intruder whether or not he wanted to harm my wife and daughter, or just to aquire some of my belongings. The fact is that if my windows or doors are locked, that means that no one other than us should be in the home unless invited.
The law varies widely from state to state withing the US. In some areas, you can shoot almost anyone (heck, Texas you can shoot someone driving off in your car). Regardless of what is and is not allowed, I’m going to persue what I feel is prudent. That said…
If there is a safe exit for everyone, I’ll take it. If an exit is not available, it depends. In my current situation, there are no children, so there is just myself and my girlfriend in an room with only one entrance. I would grab the gun, wait in ambush near the entrance to the bedroom, and dial 911 on the cordless. If there were children in another room, I am going to act to preserve their safety as well. If it is reasonable to grab them and leave, I will. If there is a reasonable point of defence (say stairwell access) that I can ambush, I will. And if I have to actively presue and kill the thief to protect them, I will.
In all cases, I am adapted to teh darkness, and know the layout of the house well. One thing I will add is “BE SURE OF YOUR TARGET”. Do not shoot uncle Bob.
". . . (T)o the anti-gun lobby, the worst news of all had to be the way in which tens of thousands of Americans reacted to the atrocities of Sept. 11: They went out and bought guns. ‘Steep Rise in Gun Sales Reflects Post-Attack Fears,’ reported the Sunday New York Times in a Page 1, above-the-fold story on Dec. 16.
“Drawing on FBI statistics and surveys by gun owners organizations, it noted that ‘guns and ammunition sales across the country have risen sharply,’ with many of the weapons being acquired by ‘a steady stream of serious-minded first-time buyers.’ The number of background checks for gun purchases surged sharply after Sept. 11, peaking in October at 1,029,691 – almost 22 percent higher than in the same month a year earlier. Meanwhile, ‘around the country, gun instruction classes have shown significant increases in enrollment.’”
A gun is a self-justifying right. Farmer Bob shouldn’t have shot the kid in the back as he was trying to escape, although I think his act was far from murder. Anyway, if people want to take our guns away (100, 000 gun owners in this country, no I don’t own one currently) their ultimate recourse is to shoot the person trying to arrest them or take it away. “give me that gun, son!” “wait a second, this is precisely why I own this sucker. Come take it, fool!” Think about it. Do you trust your government more than you trust yourself? Do you think there will ever ever be a situation in the USA where criminals will find it difficult to get a gun?
Last year someone decided to try and steal my car off the driveway, its a sturdy old thing and the locks resisted their best attempts. However when they couldnt nick it they decided to sabotage it. The result was that I crashed the car leaving my village and then I reported it to the police they said there was no point coming out but they would add it to their reports.
Great! I report a crime and my insurance goes up…that makes sence. would hate to think what would have happened if I had caught the @*!~#$£& and took them on. One of two things probably