• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

That Time of Season

mzbk2l

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 13, 2007
Messages
425
Location
Superstition Mountain, Arizona, USA
imported post

openryan wrote:
If someone puts a hole on my door, I am going to put a few more in it going the other way.


Why is that, Ryan? In the carjacking thread, you said you wouldn't shoot someone just over a threat to property. You should be able to retreat to another room and be perfectly safe until they stop damaging your property. :)
 

AbNo

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 8, 2007
Messages
3,805
Location
Shenandoah Valley, Virginia
imported post

Well, in that case, they WOULD be shooting at him.

At that point, it's personal.

zoom6zoom wrote:
If I were to hear a knock on the door (and wasn't expecting someone), I would simply rack the slide on my XD (or my 1911 in a few weeks), and say "Who is it?"
And that's why UPS drivers wear brown pants.

Actually, I know a UPS guy that works a few hours a day at a gun shop. :what:

He's awesome, though.
 

dichamw

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 4, 2007
Messages
137
Location
Alexandria (Fairfax County), Virginia, USA
imported post

Now I guess if you are in your house and thesmartBG start taking shots from the street or perimeter of your property at your house, only thing you can do is hunker down and call 911 for relief and salvation...can't use deadly force, so much for your useless AR15s, CAR A4, long guns that you have at home for show and tell at the range.

You also can encounter these guys at yourfriendly localmalls, theathers, storesand eateries...they do follow you or a family memberhome if youpissed themoff (disrespected them) or they want something you got (wife, daughter, car ormaybe you). Lot of these stories don't make your liberal newspaper....Don't want unecessarily scare you into thinking about your 2nd Amendment rights. The 27 year old in the FCPDreport...no matter what his role wasor he did... trouble came his way.
 

Tomahawk

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 1, 2006
Messages
5,117
Location
4 hours south of HankT, ,
imported post

Hawkflyer wrote:
If the BG is behind a closed door, he can't see you, you can't see him, and there is a barrier between you. The application of deadly force in not legal unless the person you are trying to fend off can actually carry out a threat of bodily harm. Until that door opens, that condition is not met. Unaimed bullets coming through a closed door do not qualify at that level of threat either, as you could just lay down. You do not even have to retreat to avoid the threat.

Windows are a different matter. They neither constitute a visual, or serious physical barrier, and therefore the threat is direct and Eminent. You could very well return fire through a window. Besides, most windows will effectively be open after the BG shoots the first shot.

Moving the body after the fact IS tampering with a crime scene. That will be the first charge placed against you. It gets MUCH worse from there, because people start asking a lot of questions as to why you felt the need to move the body. There are no good answers to that question.

Regards
That's not necessarily always true. If you're cornered inside your house and they are shooting through the doors and walls, and you have nowhere to run, you can only take so much of that. They may not be able to see you, but they sure as hell are shooting at you. Of course, you avoid shooting whenever possible, but do what you gotta do to stay alive. If you have loved ones in the house, you can't risk a stray bullet catching one of them. That s*** has to stop the day before yesterday.
 

openryan

State Researcher
Joined
Apr 18, 2007
Messages
1,602
Location
, Indiana, USA
imported post

Bulldog1967 wrote:
You can take the perp out of the ghetto, but you can take the ghetto out of the perp.

We should militarize the bridge coming over from MD.
Great way of putting it, did you come up with this one by yourself? :D
 

AbNo

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 8, 2007
Messages
3,805
Location
Shenandoah Valley, Virginia
imported post

Tomahawk wrote:
Hawkflyer wrote:
If the BG is behind a closed door, he can't see you, you can't see him, and there is a barrier between you. The application of deadly force in not legal unless the person you are trying to fend off can actually carry out a threat of bodily harm. Until that door opens, that condition is not met. Unaimed bullets coming through a closed door do not qualify at that level of threat either, as you could just lay down. You do not even have to retreat to avoid the threat.

Windows are a different matter. They neither constitute a visual, or serious physical barrier, and therefore the threat is direct and Eminent. You could very well return fire through a window. Besides, most windows will effectively be open after the BG shoots the first shot.

Moving the body after the fact IS tampering with a crime scene. That will be the first charge placed against you. It gets MUCH worse from there, because people start asking a lot of questions as to why you felt the need to move the body. There are no good answers to that question.

Regards
That's not necessarily always true. If you're cornered inside your house and they are shooting through the doors and walls, and you have nowhere to run, you can only take so much of that. They may not be able to see you, but they sure as hell are shooting at you. Of course, you avoid shooting whenever possible, but do what you gotta do to stay alive. If you have loved ones in the house, you can't risk a stray bullet catching one of them. That s*** has to stop the day before yesterday.

Well, would shooting through the window be a legal solution?
 

openryan

State Researcher
Joined
Apr 18, 2007
Messages
1,602
Location
, Indiana, USA
imported post

mzbk2l wrote:
openryan wrote:
If someone puts a hole on my door, I am going to put a few more in it going the other way.


Why is that, Ryan? In the carjacking thread, you said you wouldn't shoot someone just over a threat to property. You should be able to retreat to another room and be perfectly safe until they stop damaging your property. :)
You are right, if they are there to take my car, take it, however not everything in my house is as replaceable as my vehicle, such as loved ones, heirlooms, and items of that nature.

I suppose it could have been miscontrued as to what I said in the thread. I have had time to repost yet...

But here is a condensed version- Certainly just giving up is not the way to go in the vast majority of scenarios.

Basically if someone comes at me with a gun, and demands my keys, they will get my keys, assuming nobody is in my vehicle, well anyone that I care about at least...

Certain things are replaceable, and I believe you do have to pick your battles, if someone had the drop on me, and I do not think I can reasonable draw on them without getting shot in the process, I am going to comply until A) I either have the chance to produce my weapon/means of defense or B) if it is very clear what they want, or what the demands are, along the lines of replaceable property, I would rather have them take my stuff and worry about replacing it later, escaping with my life.

Now I am not trying to say that being complacent is the way to go, it most certainly is not in many cases, however I do think that complying in certain cases would be permissible depending on the circumstances surrounding a particular event.

Obviously this is not my 'blanket' policy, as if it were I would not own any firearms.

When I read the post again, the one on the car jacker thread, I immediately deleted it, as I knew it would be misconstrued...

I guess I didn't word it too well!
 

openryan

State Researcher
Joined
Apr 18, 2007
Messages
1,602
Location
, Indiana, USA
imported post

Tomahawk wrote:
Hawkflyer wrote:
If the BG is behind a closed door, he can't see you, you can't see him, and there is a barrier between you. The application of deadly force in not legal unless the person you are trying to fend off can actually carry out a threat of bodily harm. Until that door opens, that condition is not met. Unaimed bullets coming through a closed door do not qualify at that level of threat either, as you could just lay down. You do not even have to retreat to avoid the threat.

Windows are a different matter. They neither constitute a visual, or serious physical barrier, and therefore the threat is direct and Eminent. You could very well return fire through a window. Besides, most windows will effectively be open after the BG shoots the first shot.

Moving the body after the fact IS tampering with a crime scene. That will be the first charge placed against you. It gets MUCH worse from there, because people start asking a lot of questions as to why you felt the need to move the body. There are no good answers to that question.

Regards
That's not necessarily always true. If you're cornered inside your house and they are shooting through the doors and walls, and you have nowhere to run, you can only take so much of that. They may not be able to see you, but they sure as hell are shooting at you. Of course, you avoid shooting whenever possible, but do what you gotta do to stay alive. If you have loved ones in the house, you can't risk a stray bullet catching one of them. That s*** has to stop the day before yesterday.
I would think that if someone was outside my door, putting holes in it, and they did not identify themselves as the police, or using threatening language during the act itself, that I would be qualified to return fire.

Plus, after one hole is in the door, its opened, at least to an extent right? The barrier is no longer in tact... If there were simply standing on the other side with a firearm pointed at my door that may not be a 'threat' in the context you are using.

However, don't some of the stand your ground laws permit you to use deadly force if you reasonably believe that you are about to be harmed as long as it is on your property?
 

Mr. Y

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 6, 2006
Messages
485
Location
Super Secret Squirrel Bunker, Virginia, USA
imported post

would think that if someone was outside my door, putting holes in it, and they did not identify themselves as the police, or using threatening language during the act itself, that I would be qualified to return fire.
Why would it matter if they were the police or not? They're presumably perforating your front door in your direction. Assuming you didn't open fire on them or otherwise attack, if they're shooting through someone's door, I have to question the lawfulness of that act. If you're firing OUT the door at someone, from your residence, or a place where you have a right to beand either someone there has a weapon, or flees with a weapon, my first thought would *probably* be - homeowner repelling an attack.

Uniforms or not, people used to thinkthat <insert LE agency here> would never attack someone. Then there was Ruby Ridge, Waco, recently there was Atlanta.

Even so, that's very, very rare (unless of course you're an optometrist in Fairfax County).

I am familiar with theparticular area original poster mentions, and he's rightthere's a lot of "spill over" thugs who can't "make their bones" in PG because they're kind of "junior varsity" thugs. They're "not ready for prime time" hoodlums so there's a high arrest & conviction rate. If they keep it up they're going to get themselves killed in record numbers. As blue as the county is, you would likely be surprised by the percentage of gun owning homes around. Most may not be asvocal as OCDO, but they run the gamut from 4'6" retired old ladies to professionals & service men/women. Plus, there isn't too much crime about the person, it's mostly property crimes from what I've seen, and a great deal of the issues take place on the Rt.1 corridor. It's tough to fault FCPD for this, they have a fairly visible presence.

I'm probably going to get flamed for this...

<donning nomex suit>

This is what happens when you give people things that they don't earn, or even try hard to achieve. Subsidized,"8A", & low income housing are allkeywords for wealth redistribution ladies and gentlemen and when you let your elected delegations promote this crap, we end up paying for it exponentially year after year. It's also complicated by the fact that FC in particular is on a political Jihad to stuff as many human beings in the smallest amount of real estate possible. The combination of too many peopleand subsidized housing and being a "sanctuary county" for illegal CRIMINAL aliens, turns great places to live into slums in less than a generation. You can't give people freedomthey have to earn it. People don't appreciate giftsas much as they do acquisitions they achieved through hard work.

Flame away.

If we really wanted to get rid of the Junior varsity, not ready for prime time hoodlums that are coming to FC, all we would need to do is make it inhospitable for them.

Actually do immigrant status checks for all service requests.
Start enforcing some of the laws 'to the letter' - nuissance crimes.
start saturation patrols of these 'high service call' areas
Use the CPOs to coordinate neighborhood watches (to take the heat off the patrols of having to be everywhere)
Have patrols hang out at the apartment complexes, insteadofthe 7/11's on 235 and Starbucks at Beacon hill and HD shopping center. - no joke, Starbucks will come to you if you make arrangements. IfFCPDput "sub station camps" there, crime would plummetlike a ROCK. Cockroachs don't like sunlight and JV thugs don't like to be around "Five Oh". we could bring the donuts to the apartment complexes with FCPD a few feet away.
 

vtme_grad98

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 21, 2006
Messages
385
Location
Virginia Beach, VA, ,
imported post

Hawkflyer wrote:
What ever you do, never shoot through the door. You WILL hang for that. If the guy is on the other side of a closed door, he does not meet the criteria for deadly force, even if he is shooting through the door at you.

Regards
I would never shoot through a door just because someone on the other side wants to hurt me. But I'll be damned if I'll just sit there and pray that I get lucky if he actually starts shooting through the door. Drywall is not cover, and I'd rather take my chances after the fact and watch a prosecutor try to convince a jury that being shot at isn't a reasonable threat, door or no door.

Fortunately, our variety of thug tries the "Omg, your house is on fire. Open the door quick!" bit instead. The true gang bangers don't seem to make it anywhere near me unless they're already fleeing the police.
 

PackininVB

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 5, 2006
Messages
285
Location
Back on the beach, , USA
imported post

If someones shooting through your door at you, they are threatening deadly force. plain and simple. You gotta think, some apartments have a hallway that goes 15 feet back before you get to a living room. Laying down on the ground you can still get shot, and unwitting family members walking into the scene can easily get hit! Besides just because they cant see to aim doesnt mean they cant kill you. Hell even if your in the parking lot and someone takes a shot at you, chances are THEY arent aiming (cant aim very well with your gun cocked to the side anyways).

If you shoot through my door im going to return fire before you even get done shooting. No jury in the world would convict you.
 

PackininVB

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 5, 2006
Messages
285
Location
Back on the beach, , USA
imported post

AbNo wrote:
California...
New York...
Boston....

Well dont move there then. Maybe i should clarify, no resonable person would think that someone shooting at you, whether it be through a door, through a window, or through a wall is NOT still potentially dangerous to your health and an obvious threat of bodily harm on you.

Where is the code that says that you can defend yourself, except when someone is shooting at you through a door?
 

openryan

State Researcher
Joined
Apr 18, 2007
Messages
1,602
Location
, Indiana, USA
imported post

PackininVB wrote:
AbNo wrote:
California...
New York...
Boston....

Well dont move there then. Maybe i should clarify, no resonable person would think that someone shooting at you, whether it be through a door, through a window, or through a wall is NOT still potentially dangerous to your health and an obvious threat of bodily harm on you.

Where is the code that says that you can defend yourself, except when someone is shooting at you through a door?
I don't think firing back is illogical, I would too shoot back, but I would make every effort to be sure that I or my loved ones are intended victims as best I could, then fire.
 

AbNo

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 8, 2007
Messages
3,805
Location
Shenandoah Valley, Virginia
imported post

openryan wrote:
PackininVB wrote:
AbNo wrote:
California...
New York...
Boston....

Well dont move there then. Maybe i should clarify, no resonable person would think that someone shooting at you, whether it be through a door, through a window, or through a wall is NOT still potentially dangerous to your health and an obvious threat of bodily harm on you.

Where is the code that says that you can defend yourself, except when someone is shooting at you through a door?
I don't think firing back is illogical, I would too shoot back, but I would make every effort to be sure that I or my loved ones are intended victims as best I could, then fire.

If someone is shooting through my front door, I don't care if I'm the specifically intended target or not.

I'm not going to stop and ask them if they are sure they have the right Apt. Q.

I know that's not what you meant, I'm simply making a point.

I suppose it helps that there's nothing but junk cars for 250' out my front door, as well.
 

openryan

State Researcher
Joined
Apr 18, 2007
Messages
1,602
Location
, Indiana, USA
imported post

AbNo wrote:
openryan wrote:
PackininVB wrote:
AbNo wrote:
California...
New York...
Boston....

Well dont move there then. Maybe i should clarify, no resonable person would think that someone shooting at you, whether it be through a door, through a window, or through a wall is NOT still potentially dangerous to your health and an obvious threat of bodily harm on you.

Where is the code that says that you can defend yourself, except when someone is shooting at you through a door?
I don't think firing back is illogical, I would too shoot back, but I would make every effort to be sure that I or my loved ones are intended victims as best I could, then fire.

If someone is shooting through my front door, I don't care if I'm the specifically intended target or not.

I'm not going to stop and ask them if they are sure they have the right Apt. Q.

I know that's not what you meant, I'm simply making a point.

I suppose it helps that there's nothing but junk cars for 250' out my front door, as well.
Right, but if just one came through I would keep the doors locked, remain armed and be alert as to what is happening as I called the police.

If multiple shots were coming through or someone was yelling at me specifically I would immediately return fire.
 
Top