Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I'm an experienced shooter, but I still carry my late father's .38 Special snub revolver (Colt Agent) in my briefcase. It won't stop a train or win out in a firefight with a cartel, but it doesn't need to.
Go to a shooting range , Learn how to shoot
Try several styles of gun.
See what is comfortable in your hand .
Personallly, I'd recomend some practice with a hiend BB/ pellet gun. learn gun safety.
The more time you spend around weapons ,and set in with discusions at the range the better prepared you are to dicide for your self.
The .22 is a good training weapon ,but not the recomended self defence weapon. Yes it will kill, not stop a drug crazed monster.
A 9mm carries more rounds than the rest of the centerfire cartrages available .
It's proven multiple rounds are most effective in a kill but again not a stopper for a crack head.
The reason .45 was invented was because the enemy at the time was commonly drugged, and it is capable of driving the perp backward.
Law enforcment has chosen the .40 cal , probibly as capable as the .45
Off duty cops have used their .40 on black bear succesfully. if that means anything .
There are BB guns made to perform and apear exactly the same as the fire arms they are made to represent . I practice with several because they are cheap to shoot and don't make much noise .
This might sound a little heartless, but legally, your best strategy is to kill the intruder. First, you have the entire body of police training and practices that support you. Once you start shooting, police training is to shoot until the person does not move. That is why every time there is a police shooting there are 56 bullets fired by a couple of cops.
Second, if he just needed to be disabled, it calls into question the severity of the threat.
Third and most importantly, when the perp comes to court in a wheel chair looking like a choir boy, and swears he had his hands in the air and begged you not to shoot you are gonna get convicted. When he is DOA, he won't be contradicting your lawyer's statement that he said he would kill you and your family and the cops when they showed up, blah, blah, blah.
Carefully examine what I said. Intent and outcome do not have to equal each other. Naturally, stopping an attack may mean the death of the assailant. But if a prosecutor can get you to say you shot to kill, he may establish that your main intent was to kill. If you state that your intent was to stop the attack and he can't force more out of you, he cannot establish a purposeful intent to kill. "I shot to stop the attack and shot until he quit coming" sounds much more acceptable to a jury than "I shot to kill him and shot until he was dead".
I was not advocating shooting to inflict minor wounds. That would be foolish indeed. Generally, a shot to stop a person should be into "critical mass", chest, stomach, etc. Aiming for an arm or leg would likely result in a miss and only irritate the attacker.
The proper mindset is shooting to stop the attack, not shooting to kill. If it results in a kill, so be it. If it results in a crippling injury, so be it. If he recovers, hopefully he gets "scared straight" and lives a better life afterward. Do I feel sorrow for a thug that gets shot and killed? Yes and no. Yes, I am sad when it is necessary for anyone to take a human life. I am sad that either no one taught the thug a proper way to live and/or that he chose to do evil. Will I cry that he should not have been shot? No, he endangered someone else and put himself at grave risk. He "rolled the dice" and lost.
If I am going to shoot someone, I fully intend for my shots to kill that person. Luckily, in our state, it is perfectly legal to kill an intruder.
Shoot to kill, people. Don't listen to the people who want you to be concerned with some POS criminal's life. Don't listen to people who have not ever been in a life threatening situation. If your life is in danger or someone breaks into your home. Shoot to kill.
If I am going to shoot someone, I fully intend for my shots to kill that person. Luckily, in our state, it is perfectly legal to kill an intruder.
It is only legal under the conditions as laid out in Texas Penal Code Title 2 chapter 9 Sections 9.21 through 9.44.
You have NO legal right to intentionally kill anyone, you are a mostly standard Castle Doctrine state with a few historical additions which means you have (only recently I might add, certainly not long enough to permeate the police conscious) no necessity to retreat. You may employ deadly force only at such times as a reasonable and prudent man would feel there is an imminent threat of death of serious injury, and in defense third parties and of property as laid out in the sections cited.
However, there is one issue, under Texas Penal Code Section 19.01 (a)
Quote:
Sec. 19.01. TYPES OF CRIMINAL HOMICIDE. (a) A person commits criminal homicide if he intentionally, knowingly, recklessly, or with criminal negligence causes the death of an individual.
So, lets look at your post...
"I fully intend for my shots to kill that person"
Case closed. Particularly as pleading Justifiable Homicide by Self Defense is an affirmative defense (you admit you killed that person, but were justified in doing so).
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zembonez
Shoot to kill, people. Don't listen to the people who want you to be concerned with some POS criminal's life. Don't listen to people who have not ever been in a life threatening situation. If your life is in danger or someone breaks into your home. Shoot to kill.
Do not mistake peoples statements that they will shoot to defend themselves as not employing deadly force to the fullest extent of the law. They're just a little more savvy than to make a statement that may, in the future, come back to destroy any hope of successfully achieving a plea of self defense; particularly as not succeeding in that plea could lead to civil actions, fines, imprisonment, and at very worst case execution.
Location: where you sip the tea of the breasts of the spinsters of Utica
8,297 posts, read 14,164,711 times
Reputation: 8105
My understanding is that regardless of technicalities in Texas, it's considered political suicide to bring charges against a homeowner who kills an intruder with a gun. Or even one without a gun. So the chief LEOs take that into consideration, since they are political appointees or become sheriffs through elections.
Also it's simply the common mentality in Texas, almost everyone believes in defense of property through violent means up to and including lethal force. (That's what I've heard from Texans, I've never lived there).
My understanding is that regardless of technicalities in Texas, it's considered political suicide to bring charges against a homeowner who kills an intruder with a gun. Or even one without a gun. So the chief LEOs take that into consideration, since they are political appointees or become sheriffs through elections.
Also it's simply the common mentality in Texas, almost everyone believes in defense of property through violent means up to and including lethal force. (That's what I've heard from Texans, I've never lived there).
Seems a pretty reasonable case of self defense to me, yet the homeowner was charged with murder, a stab wound to the chest (which may not stop the attack), and one to the throat.
Anyway this misses the point, the point is the law as written is the law, how it's currently enforced can change on a moments notice (not to mention how the law changes naturally through the legislatures), by differing ADA/DA's or moving to a different state. A self defense shooting may not be in defense of the home, but in a parking lot or anywhere away from home or inside your vehicle. You may be in federal property at the time and subject to federal law, this is why it's a really smart idea to stay away from such statements, as the terms "establishing prior intent" springs to mind.
. . . there is no need to make any statement to the police at the scene of the shooting. Wait until your lawyer has advised you no matter how perfect and justified the shooting may have been. The police do not need your statement to do their job at this time and nothing good can come from a person articulating anything about the shooting other than your name and your desire to speak with your lawyer before being interviewed. No matter what, don't back off this position even if they threaten to arrest and charge you. Trust me on this, if they do charge you they were going to do so anyway and your statements about the event will be your lawyer's biggest headache in getting you off.
Just say "leave me alone, I'm not saying anything until I talk to my lawyer."
Quote:
Originally Posted by jmellc
Carefully examine what I said. Intent and outcome do not have to equal each other. Naturally, stopping an attack may mean the death of the assailant. But if a prosecutor can get you to say you shot to kill, he may establish that your main intent was to kill. If you state that your intent was to stop the attack and he can't force more out of you, he cannot establish a purposeful intent to kill. "I shot to stop the attack and shot until he quit coming" sounds much more acceptable to a jury than "I shot to kill him and shot until he was dead".
Carefully examine what I said. There is no earthly reason why any thinking person would be talking to the prosecutor about this matter. Before the prosecutor asks one anything, there has to be a rial which, if my advice is followed, there would never be. This is America. They have to have probably cause to try you and even then you don't have to testify. And, this would never come about unless you blubbered to the police which is what it sounds like you are advocating.
My understanding is that regardless of technicalities in Texas, it's considered political suicide to bring charges against a homeowner who kills an intruder with a gun. Or even one without a gun. So the chief LEOs take that into consideration, since they are political appointees or become sheriffs through elections.
Also it's simply the common mentality in Texas, almost everyone believes in defense of property through violent means up to and including lethal force. (That's what I've heard from Texans, I've never lived there).
Keep in mind that this discussion covers many states & localities. Authorities in some states already do not like armed citizens and quickly accuse citizens of "taking the law into their own hands". If one is known to make statements such as "I will kill the ### that does this or that", it can come back to haunt him if he winds up in court over a shooting. A savvy prosecutor can make it appear that a person was "just waiting for a chance to kill someone". In some parts of my state (NC), that might not fly. In some liberal towns here, the jury would come in believing it & the prosecutor stating it would clinch the verdict.
My CCW instructors, all lifelong police officers, advised against ever making such statements that we would kill someone for this or that offense & to keep in mind we are only entitled to use deadly force to stop an attack.
Think of this too. We are civilized people. What does it do to our minds & hearts if all our thoughts are centered around killing? Again, I say if a shooting results in a death, the shooter did nothing wrong if he was defending himself or family. If the shooter gives "1 for good measure" after attacker is down, he will have a lot of sleepless nights, whether convicted or not.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
