How about non-lethal devices? The last I looked at it, they even make paintball guns that shoot pepper powder pellets.
Again this is excellent theory but doesn't hold up to real-world experience. Years ago I was a weekend paintball player (as a result of being a paid judge on the playing field... I got to play for free so I did).
1. it was pointed out that reliability on the paint markers is far from 100%. In addition to the balls breaking in the barrel (once one ball breaks, ALL the rest do as well until you fully clean it) and the problem of seals: they rely on gas pressure ... and gas cylinders leak out over time. If your solution is to say "well screw in the cylinder in your time of need" that is a disaster because when you are sleepy and its dark and a hi stress emergency, you don't rely on gadgets requiring complex actions.
2. This one is big: It is true that when you get hit by a paintball you go OUCH! and it hurts rather a lot. Since you are having fun (it really is a hoot) you put on your 'dead' sash, announce you are out and head back to base for a beer. Last I checked a criminal has no dead sash in his kit, and he has no intention of going back to base. In fact, once he realizes you have nothing more than stupid little balls to shoot at him, he's likely to get pissed and come up and shove that paint 'gun' right up where the sun don't shine. For starters.
3. This one is bigger: Have you ever maced/peppered someone in anger? Usually it works as advertised. The bad person goes ahhhhh! and drops/leaves. However "usually" is not the same thing as "always". I'll never forget when, during a small riot where pepper spray was deployed by some police cadets, the biggest, baddest biker dude I have ever seen took a full blast in the face. Boy was he pissed, and his reaction was to punch the crap out of the guy who maced him ... at which point we all managed to talk the situation down from escalating. Him at the top of his lungs, crying his eyes out, absolutely livid and totally effective as a fighting force. Anecdotal? Sure. Ask your local LEO how often that happens.
A standard test I apply to bright ideas: If its so smart why isn't everyone doing it? There is usually at least one good reason worth hearing about.
take a look at this
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7e528FZKW6k&feature=related
this seems more than enough for home defense.
Key word: "seems". I notice they spell 'defence' with a 'c' which tells me this likely comes from a country where they can do no better legally. If all I had as alternative was a telephone I'd use a paintball gun too. And a big knife tied to the end of a stick for when he figures out he's fine.
The action you should take is the one that has the least probability of you or your family getting shot/killed.
Agreed. That would be a firearm, coupled to a defensive position and a call to the cops. If my opponent crosses my field of fire while I am waiting for the cops to show up, and I feel their actions put my life at risk, I'm going to defend myself (this is the legal standard where I live and may be different for you). In FBI tests they found a .45 hollow point is one-shot effective in 86% of cases. I have more than one round available.
If you don't want to defend yourself, don't. As I said you are free to believe what you want.
If an intruder sees you with a gun, this will be a surprise/shock and you don't know how he's going to react. He may run away, or he may duck for cover and start shooting. You're forcing him into a split second decision. Just because in your anecdotal case the intruder fled doesn't mean the next one will do the same.
As I said earlier, arguing this is a waste of breath. Some people believe to their core that nonviolence is their answer, and they'll say anything to further that viewpoint. Good luck.
Facebook
Twitter