An ounce of prevention

[Danno 1,228]

And from another angle;

While the K-mart Shotgun is more than able to handle near any task (not much of a snippers gun)

it might also be interesting and smarter in the "long term" to buy a gun which will gain in value over the years.

I noticed some of my guns have held value and others are worth even less than I paid for them ( some I got for nothing).

I don't follow the Gun market but I do know Guns and guitars ave very similar in some ways and I would NEVER

buy a brand new guitar.

I have had kids in my house most of my adult life and lived in pretty good areas, so I always had greater odds of a gun accident taking place rather than the midnight intruder so I never kept a loaded gun in the house.

If I lived in a dicey area I would weigh the odds and act accordingly.

[Brad and Vika 129]

Actually what they say is that a recession last about 18 months and if we have been in one since december 2007 then we should start seeing a turnaround in july or august. The other thing that worries me is how many states are running huge deficits. California has rung up about 17billion because of bad fiscal policy and that state alone in among the top ten economies of the world. What if a state goes belly up can we sell california back to mexico or maybe russia wants to buy it now.

That is only correct if this were a normal cycle, and I don't think it is. Normally, a period of expansion lasts 5-6 years, with a multi month contraction (based only on what I have been taught about the new monetarist theory). Since the expansion is roughly double in length due to monetary policy, the corresponding contraction should be longer too. And we can't spend our way out of it or put in enough liquidity to shorten it. Just as tinkering with Fed rates will stretch out the expansion, forcing liquidity will simply slow the inevitable tanking-out that is necessary for it to end. I agree that we are probably going to see improvement in the next few months, but we are not nearly finished. The end will come with inflationary whiplash caused by the artificial liquidity. In other words - a sharp interest rate spike in about a year.

[slim 1,533]

It'd be pretty hard to steal my safe. I won't go into specifics due to stalkage issues, but it's a non-issue. As for having a rifle hanging on doors, in mattresses, etc, that would also be a problem, and again for reasons I won't go into. (I probably just need to make a new VJ account or something.)

There are a lot of reasons that you're not going into and I respect your privacy, but if you're not safe inside your own home, that's pretty serious. If I felt I had a pretty serious situation such as that, I'd make sure I had a pretty serious piece to go with it. Sig's pretty serious, no?

Cyber stalkers that materialize into actual stalkers are pretty well sent back into cyberspace by a .45 through the front door. It's too bad that it's not PC to say, "if I see you at my house, I will shoot you right in the fu@#ing head" because that would really deter someone from making a drive from Canada down the coast. But, since we're not allowed to say such things I won't say it. (I'm still allowed to think it though, right?)

The fact of the matter is 99% of cyber stalkers are punks. The 1% that transition into real life can be stopped by real bullets.

I don't follow the Gun market but I do know Guns and guitars ave very similar in some ways and I would NEVER

buy a brand new guitar.

I'm also a believer in a good used gun. No reason to buy brand new when a used one is just as good and saves you 20%.

And let me just climb up on my soapbox for a moment....... if you have CCW in your state and you don't have one, you should probably get one. For nothing more than simply exercising your right, it's a good thing to have. But, when something like a cyber stalker hinting at paying you a visit at your REAL HOUSE pops up in your PM inbox, you'll sleep a little better at night knowing that not only are you safe in your bed, but you're safe when you walk from your door to your car, from your car to the store, from the store back to your car, etc. There's a simple choice to make - law abiding citizen exercising your right to carry..... or victim. I have never heard someone after a violent encounter say, "I wish I would've left my gun at home today."

[Brad and Vika 129]

It'd be pretty hard to steal my safe. I won't go into specifics due to stalkage issues, but it's a non-issue. As for having a rifle hanging on doors, in mattresses, etc, that would also be a problem, and again for reasons I won't go into. (I probably just need to make a new VJ account or something.)

There are a lot of reasons that you're not going into and I respect your privacy, but if you're not safe inside your own home, that's pretty serious. If I felt I had a pretty serious situation such as that, I'd make sure I had a pretty serious piece to go with it. Sig's pretty serious, no?

Cyber stalkers that materialize into actual stalkers are pretty well sent back into cyberspace by a .45 through the front door. It's too bad that it's not PC to say, "if I see you at my house, I will shoot you right in the fu@#ing head" because that would really deter someone from making a drive from Canada down the coast. But, since we're not allowed to say such things I won't say it. (I'm still allowed to think it though, right?)

The fact of the matter is 99% of cyber stalkers are punks. The 1% that transition into real life can be stopped by real bullets.

I don't follow the Gun market but I do know Guns and guitars ave very similar in some ways and I would NEVER

buy a brand new guitar.

I'm also a believer in a good used gun. No reason to buy brand new when a used one is just as good and saves you 20%.

And let me just climb up on my soapbox for a moment....... if you have CCW in your state and you don't have one, you should probably get one. For nothing more than simply exercising your right, it's a good thing to have. But, when something like a cyber stalker hinting at paying you a visit at your REAL HOUSE pops up in your PM inbox, you'll sleep a little better at night knowing that not only are you safe in your bed, but you're safe when you walk from your door to your car, from your car to the store, from the store back to your car, etc. There's a simple choice to make - law abiding citizen exercising your right to carry..... or victim. I have never heard someone after a violent encounter say, "I wish I would've left my gun at home today."

The castle doctrine states that you can defend your home (and yourself or others in it) with lethal force if you truly believe that you are in danger. I don't think you need a CCW for that - keeping a gun in your home. Although castle doesn't really work if you are in your home shooting at a threat outside it, unless the shooting put your neighbors in danger, juries in most states don't convict. Small comfort, I know.

Also a word about ammunition, because I am reading lots of posts lately about buying good ammo cheap. If you live in an apartment or close to others, your household defence gun and ammunition should be appropriate for that location. I have seen courts handle this type of case from the inside, and in most states the intent follows the bullet. So if you shoot at a home invader and accidentally kill a little kid asleep next door, you will go to jail. So think low-grain and soft slug, maybe a 9MM or .38, not a .40, .45, .357 or .44 hand cannon. Just use common sense.

[Danno 1,228]

Perhaps that dovetails in with my "buy a used gun" that will hold value.

I would imagine a WW2 era german luger would hold it's value?

Of course I joke a little because I am sure the price of such a gun would be very high to start with but I think they are 9mm no?

Edited December 3, 2008 by Danno

[Ban Hammer 14,481]

The castle doctrine states that you can defend your home (and yourself or others in it) with lethal force if you truly believe that you are in danger. I don't think you need a CCW for that - keeping a gun in your home. Although castle doesn't really work if you are in your home shooting at a threat outside it, unless the shooting put your neighbors in danger, juries in most states don't convict. Small comfort, I know.

Also a word about ammunition, because I am reading lots of posts lately about buying good ammo cheap. If you live in an apartment or close to others, your household defence gun and ammunition should be appropriate for that location. I have seen courts handle this type of case from the inside, and in most states the intent follows the bullet. So if you shoot at a home invader and accidentally kill a little kid asleep next door, you will go to jail. So think low-grain and soft slug, maybe a 9MM or .38, not a .40, .45, .357 or .44 hand cannon. Just use common sense.

castle doctrine varies by state.

on the subject of bullets that don't penetrate, check out non-jacketed wadcutters.

[Brad and Vika 129]

The castle doctrine states that you can defend your home (and yourself or others in it) with lethal force if you truly believe that you are in danger. I don't think you need a CCW for that - keeping a gun in your home. Although castle doesn't really work if you are in your home shooting at a threat outside it, unless the shooting put your neighbors in danger, juries in most states don't convict. Small comfort, I know.

Also a word about ammunition, because I am reading lots of posts lately about buying good ammo cheap. If you live in an apartment or close to others, your household defence gun and ammunition should be appropriate for that location. I have seen courts handle this type of case from the inside, and in most states the intent follows the bullet. So if you shoot at a home invader and accidentally kill a little kid asleep next door, you will go to jail. So think low-grain and soft slug, maybe a 9MM or .38, not a .40, .45, .357 or .44 hand cannon. Just use common sense.

castle doctrine varies by state.

on the subject of bullets that don't penetrate, check out non-jacketed wadcutters.

True, like most legal defense theories, the castle doctrine will vary. I think all states and territories recognize it in some form though. It is really important if you are arming yourself for home defense to know how castle is interpreted where you live. For example, can you shoot a guy who is threatening you on the porch, or while he is trying to kick in the door, or not until he has chased you into the kitchen waving a machete? Seriously - reasonable avenue of retreat is an important factor in some places.

In my city, there was a group of drug dealers on the south side who had a gun related altercation a couple of years ago. Two men decided to "have a conversation" with a third guy at his house - and invaded his home to get his attention. The object of their affection saw them coming, and got down behind some furniture with his trusty handgun and killed both of them in his living room after they kicked his front door down. He was never charged with any crime related to killing the other two guys, although I think there were some other charges ancillary to that because his apartment had lots of police in it that day (illegal drugs, etc.). He was clearly defending himself in his home, justifying the homicidal acts.

[Brad and Vika 129]

Castle laws do vary, but one thing is constant: they have a lot harder time finding a good lawyer to sue your аss if they're dead.

True, you can sometimes avoid a civil suit. But what good does that do you if the City Attorney has you in jail?

[Brad and Vika 129]

Castle laws do vary, but one thing is constant: they have a lot harder time finding a good lawyer to sue your аss if they're dead.

True, you can sometimes avoid a civil suit. But what good does that do you if the City Attorney has you in jail?

I actually forgot to add that when it's your word against his, you win by default if he's a corpse.

But Castle refers to location as much as perceived threat. What I meant was just don't shoot Korat on the porch if Castle doesn't cover that where you live.

[slim 1,533]

So think low-grain and soft slug, maybe a 9MM or .38, not a .40, .45, .357 or .44 hand cannon. Just use common sense.

And think biggest hole with least penetration. Jacketed hollow points work well in this aspect. The reason I'd go with a bigger caliber over a smaller is the number of shots required to stop a threat. Less shots = less chance of hitting something you don't want to hit. One shot center mass is very low risk to everyone except your target. Shoot someone in the sternum with a 9mm, even a hollow point, and they may still be able to stab you. Shoot them with a .45 JHP, not so much.

Perhaps that dovetails in with my "buy a used gun" that will hold value.

I would imagine a WW2 era german luger would hold it's value? Of course I joke a little because I am sure the price of such a gun would be very high to start with but I think they are 9mm no?

Lugers are 9mm and the German WWII versions can be very expensive. More of a collector piece than a home defense gun so it wouldn't make a lot of sense to buy one simply to keep your home safe. Good investment though.

For example, can you shoot a guy who is threatening you on the porch, or while he is trying to kick in the door, or not until he has chased you into the kitchen waving a machete? Seriously - reasonable avenue of retreat is an important factor in some places.

The bottom line, even in Castle Doctrine cases is that you feel a "reasonable" (which is vaguely defined as what a reasonable person would feel) threat that would cause serious bodily harm or death exists before you use a gun to defend yourself. Anything short of that and you should be fleeing and calling 911.

Now, that said, I'm one of those people who's probably not going to dial 911 before I shoot someone in my house at 3AM. Castle really helps with that but it's still not 100% and as Brad said above, know the law in your area before shooting someone in your house at 3AM. But, know also, that the Supreme Court has upheld that when you reasonably believe yourself to be in danger of serious bodily harm or death you do have the right to use deadly force to protect yourself and others.

[Thomas-n-Elena 0]

In michigan there is homestead law which covers all property. The danger does not have to be in the house in order to threaten bodily harm. If there is no other escape that seems reasonable or prudent you have the right to use deadly force. And as the lawyer who talked to us in a CPL class. "If you are going to shoot someone on your property make sure it is not in the back,it makes it look like they are running away. If you do shoot someone in the back roll them over shoot them in the chest and then the shoulder and tell the cops your first shot hit them in the chest, your second in the shoulder which spun the assailant around and the last one in the back, they will never know the difference and the assailant will be dead so no witness"

[slim 1,533]

In michigan there is homestead law which covers all property. The danger does not have to be in the house in order to threaten bodily harm. If there is no other escape that seems reasonable or prudent you have the right to use deadly force. And as the lawyer who talked to us in a CPL class. "If you are going to shoot someone on your property make sure it is not in the back,it makes it look like they are running away. If you do shoot someone in the back roll them over shoot them in the chest and then the shoulder and tell the cops your first shot hit them in the chest, your second in the shoulder which spun the assailant around and the last one in the back, they will never know the difference and the assailant will be dead so no witness"

They have ballistics testing that will account for such things as distance from the shooter and angle of entry/exit, etc. Not to mention if you shoot someone close range they'll have powder burns and residue all over them. Plus, if you roll someone over and shoot them in the chest and shoulder, the bullet will go clean through and impact into the ground below them.

Still not a bad thing to do from a CYA stance, just have to change the story a bit. "I pushed off to gain some distance, and when I did it wheeled him around. I stepped to my left so the first shot caught him right in the shoulder blade. He fell down and rolled over still fighting me so I popped two more into him. He gave up shortly after that. That's when I dialed 9-1-1 and then started CPR." (ALWAYS dial 9-1-1 and administer CPR because if you were doing CPR you clearly didn't want to kill the person, only neutralize the threat they posed. After you neutralized it, you tried to help.)

The main thing to keep in mind in all legal cases where a gun is involved is to persist in the existence of a perceived threat. Whether they're running away or not doesn't matter if you still feel threatened. What if they were running to their weapon or their buddies? Do you know if they were running away for good or just getting into a better position to attack again? Sure, you may know now, after the incident is over, but what did you know at the time? You perceived a threat and acted to counter it. If you did what a reasonable person would do, you'll be fine. There are the @$$hole prosecutors who want to charge everyone with everything but when you're judged by a jury of your peers, it's a lot easier to convince them you perceived a threat and acted reasonably to counter it.

Your story is important, but it's not as important as doing the right thing in the first place.