@ ATPN Gun owners

[spidey07]

Or advertise what you've got in the house to make it a more appealing target.

Always a classic.

 

[irishScott]

Or advertise what you've got in the house to make it a more appealing target.

Meaning they'll have to track my movements and go hardcore to make sure they do it when I'm not home. Which means they'd have to figure out what I look like in the first place. I'm looking to defend against the average burglar, not the FBI.

It's a tradeoff either way.

 

[Scotteq]

That is your lawyers job. I wouldn't want to explain to my wife that the bad guy started shooting wildly through the walls because I tried to scare him away by "racking" my shotgun. I also wouldn't lay quietly and wait for him to come to me though, I have kids and the absolute last thing I want is for anyone to make it into their rooms.

I do understand your point though, it really sucks that the laws appear to be more concerned with protecting the criminals than you.

I let this sit a few, since I don't want to seem like I'm attacking your point...


I would, however, like to make a statement that (your bolded comment) comes down to an argument over what is the "proper" moment to issue your "If you come in here, I'll shoot" warning. I would opine an exclamation point in the form of shotgun round being being pumped into the chamber would lend that command a lot more weight in the mind of an intruder.

Neither one of us want the guy to open the door...

 

[irishScott]

I let this sit a few, since I don't want to seem like I'm attacking your point...


I would, however, like to make a statement that (your bolded comment) comes down to an argument over what is the "proper" moment to issue your "If you come in here, I'll shoot" warning. I would opine an exclamation point in the form of shotgun round being being pumped into the chamber would lend that command a lot more weight in the mind of an intruder.

Neither one of us want the guy to open the door...

Why say anything? It's dark, how do you know if he's armed or not? Just flip on your gun light (you do have a gun light right?) wait till he turns toward it, and bang.

 

[werepossum]

I let this sit a few, since I don't want to seem like I'm attacking your point...


I would, however, like to make a statement that (your bolded comment) comes down to an argument over what is the "proper" moment to issue your "If you come in here, I'll shoot" warning. I would opine an exclamation point in the form of shotgun round being being pumped into the chamber would lend that command a lot more weight in the mind of an intruder.

Neither one of us want the guy to open the door...

I don't think that decibel for decibel there is a scarier sound than a pump racking in a shell. I like the buck and ball - it was used, hand loaded, fairly extensively in Vietnam and is supposedly the most lethal short range loading. However for home defense I prefer birdshot, #4 specifically. At point blank range it hits like a slug, yet loses energy very quickly (especially after penetrating walls and deforming - I LIKE some of my neighbors) and can always be followed by buck shot or buck and ball just in case. But for home defense I don't plan on shooting at anything beyond forty feet. I shot an 80 lb German Shepherd at near that range (a pack was chasing and killing cows) and several of the pellets passed completely through the animal. If I have to shoot someone, I want all the energy dumped into his body rather than through shots because I want to stop him more than kill him and I think most people, if shot with a 12 gauge with even #9 shot at point blank range, will immediately attempt to leave. If he survives, well, someone probably loves him.

 

[Scotteq]

Why say anything? It's dark, how do you know if he's armed or not? Just flip on your gun light (you do have a gun light right?) wait till he turns toward it, and bang.

I don't know: Maybe because I live in a State where a prosecutor may go after you for "ambushing" the guy?


Here, we're entitled to defend "Selves, Family, and Others". Not Property. You can shoot him for attacking you or anyone under your roof. You can't shoot him for stealing your TV. And *you* aren't allowed to be the instigator, either. It takes an overt act on the part of the intruder.


If you think I'm being hyperbolic, you can read it for yourself: Starts on page 2, and the 'property' line is on Page 3, Line 9

 

[spidey07]

I let this sit a few, since I don't want to seem like I'm attacking your point...


I would, however, like to make a statement that (your bolded comment) comes down to an argument over what is the "proper" moment to issue your "If you come in here, I'll shoot" warning. I would opine an exclamation point in the form of shotgun round being being pumped into the chamber would lend that command a lot more weight in the mind of an intruder.

Neither one of us want the guy to open the door...

The problem is in states without castle laws or "duty to retreat" states where you have to prove self defense in your own home, if you fire after giving a warning you're actually in more legal trouble than if you hadn't. By giving the warning you actual aren't in fear of your life and that will be used against you.

The line of reasoning will be "He had time and opportunity to give warning and therefore could have retreated rather than using deadly force."

 

[Scotteq]

The problem is in states without castle laws or "duty to retreat" states where you have to prove self defense in your own home, if you fire after giving a warning you're actually in more legal trouble than if you hadn't. By giving the warning you actual aren't in fear of your life and that will be used against you.

The line of reasoning will be "He had time and opportunity to give warning and therefore could have retreated rather than using deadly force."

Can't shoot him just for being there, either. So Damned if you do... Damned if you don't...



And let's not ignore the costs/effort involved in defending even a righteous shooting. IMHO, this is the real reason some prosecutors here tell you to leave if you can.

For example: The guy broke into your house, clearly was robbing the place, he did have a gun, and he did have a violent criminal record, and he did make some overt move.... So yeah: You did have the right to pull the trigger. But that's little consolation if you lose your house paying the resultant legal bills.

 

[spidey07]

Can't shoot him just for being there, either. So Damned if you do... Damned if you don't...



And let's not ignore the costs/effort involved in defending even a righteous shooting. IMHO, this is the real reason some prosecutors here tell you to leave if you can.

For example: The guy broke into your house, clearly was robbing the place, he did have a gun, and he did have a violent criminal record.... So yeah: You did have the right to pull the trigger. But that's little consolation if you lose your house paying the resultant legal bills.

That's the purpose of castle doctrines. They CAN'T prosecute you nor can you be held civilly liable so you don't even have to defend yourself in court. These laws PROTECT the home owner, not the criminal, the way it should be. More and more states are adopting them. Sadly I don't think NJ ever will unless some radical changes are made.

 

[werepossum]

That's the purpose of castle doctrines. They CAN'T prosecute you nor can you be held civilly liable so you don't even have to defend yourself in court. These laws PROTECT the home owner, not the criminal, the way it should be. More and more states are adopting them. Sadly I don't think NJ ever will unless some radical changes are made.

New Jersey is very liberal; their doctrine is that it's the government's castle in which they are graciously allowing you to live for 8% of its value in property taxes, and as the government's chattel you have no right to shoot another of government's chattel merely to protect the property the government hasn't yet taken.

 

[Scotteq]

That's the purpose of castle doctrines. They CAN'T prosecute you nor can you be held civilly liable so you don't even have to defend yourself in court. These laws PROTECT the home owner, not the criminal, the way it should be. More and more states are adopting them. Sadly I don't think NJ ever will unless some radical changes are made.

I linked the law above: It does say we're not obligated to retreat, and it actually does use CASTLE language... It also specifically states protecting Yourself, Your Family, and Others from death or severe bodily harm. And it specifically states that Property is not a justification, unless you are a police officer.

 

[Carmen813]

New Jersey is very liberal; their doctrine is that it's the government's castle in which they are graciously allowing you to live for 8% of its value in property taxes, and as the government's chattel you have no right to shoot another of government's chattel merely to protect the property the government hasn't yet taken.

psssst....That's not liberal!

I'm taking the word back.

 

[BoberFett]

psssst....That's not liberal!

I'm taking the word back.

Too late. It has already been hijacked by authoritarian big government goons.

 

[Scotteq]

New Jersey is very liberal; their doctrine is that it's the government's castle in which they are graciously allowing you to live for 8% of its value in property taxes, and as the government's chattel you have no right to shoot another of government's chattel merely to protect the property the government hasn't yet taken.

10.883% of assessed value in my Boro for Property Tax (varies by city).
http://www.state.nj.us/treasury/taxation/lpt/taxrate.shtml

Plus I'm at about 7.5% for State Income Tax - As high as 9% as your income grows.

State Sales Tax is 7%


Chattel... Yeah....