Tonight - Attempted Home Invasion at My House

AbNo · Apr 21, 2010

imported post

You would be drunk all the time if you were from Jersey, too. :lol:

tdbarge · Apr 21, 2010

imported post

HankT wrote:

Then grabbed my gun/holster and wished I had another loaded gun around,instead of my J-frame Airweight...
Then, I pulled my Colt Python and aimed it at the doorway...
I have my hand on my holstered gun as I ponder my next move....

BS anyone? I will now stop feeding the

HankT · Apr 21, 2010

imported post

eye95 wrote:

You did need your gun. Something was amiss, and you did not know what it was.

You were smart not to go outside. You had a good defensive position and were armed. Calling 911 was the way to go. If the cops responded in time (or, if it turned out to be nothing), perfect. If not, again, you had a good defensive position and were armed. You could effectively deal with the situation if the need arose.

Yah, I see that point. But it depends on the perspective. If everything had happened exactly the same as it did--except I don't have a handgun--what would have been the result? The same!

Ergo, gun not really needed.

OTOH, for my sense of well-being and to manage my fear of possibly being the victim of a break in......the gun was definitely useful ......and therefore needed.

The temptation to go outside wasn't very strong. I had good position and it made no sense to trade what I had for an unknown. I've read enough stories here and elsewhere where the home occupant did go outside. Most of the time, the folks who critique the stories end up realizing that staying inside is almost always the better move.

I did think of a couple of things that I did wrong. But, overall, I knew there was a high probability that it was a drunk kind of deal. As I mentioned in the nobucks thread, I've had one of those before, when like his event, a drunk was actually pushing on my door. I was on the other side with a handgun and, though I will never know for sure, I would have shot the man if he'd come in. And regretted it for the rest of my life because the man was no threat at all.

Ironbar wrote:

I think Hank was drunk when he wrote that.

Why do you say that, Ironbar?

eye95 · Apr 21, 2010

imported post

HankT wrote:

eye95 wrote:

You did need your gun. Something was amiss, and you did not know what it was.

You were smart not to go outside. You had a good defensive position and were armed. Calling 911 was the way to go. If the cops responded in time (or, if it turned out to be nothing), perfect. If not, again, you had a good defensive position and were armed. You could effectively deal with the situation if the need arose.

Click to expand...

Yah, I see that point. But it depends on the perspective. If everything had happened exactly the same as it did--except I don't have a handgun--what would have been the result? The same!

Ergo, gun not really needed.

OTOH, for my sense of well-being and to manage my fear of possibly being the victim of a break in......the gun was definitely useful ......and therefore needed.

The temptation to go outside wasn't very strong. I had good position and it made no sense to trade what I had for an unknown. I've read enough stories here and elsewhere where the home occupant did go outside. Most of the time, the folks who critique the stories end up realizing that staying inside is almost always the better move.

I did think of a couple of things that I did wrong. But, overall, I knew there was a high probability that it was a drunk kind of deal. As I mentioned in the nobucks thread, I've had one of those before, when like his event, a drunk was actually pushing on my door. I was on the other side with a handgun and, though I will never know for sure, I would have shot the man if he'd come in. And regretted it for the rest of my life because the man was no threat at all.

Ironbar wrote:

I think Hank was drunk when he wrote that.

Click to expand...

Why do you say that, Ironbar?

Most people who are murdered didn't need the gun the night before. Who cares about having a gun when you find out with 20/20 hindsight that you didn't need it. The concern is not having a gun when you do need it.

At the time, before you knew the outcome, probability was high that you would need the gun.

Before Schroedinger opens his box, he needs to be ready for a dead cat and ready for a live cat. Until he opens the box, both cats exist.

HankT · Apr 21, 2010

imported post

eye95 wrote:

HankT wrote:

eye95 wrote:

You did need your gun. Something was amiss, and you did not know what it was.

You were smart not to go outside. You had a good defensive position and were armed. Calling 911 was the way to go. If the cops responded in time (or, if it turned out to be nothing), perfect. If not, again, you had a good defensive position and were armed. You could effectively deal with the situation if the need arose.

Click to expand...

Yah, I see that point. But it depends on the perspective. If everything had happened exactly the same as it did--except I don't have a handgun--what would have been the result? The same!

Ergo, gun not really needed.

OTOH, for my sense of well-being and to manage my fear of possibly being the victim of a break in......the gun was definitely useful ......and therefore needed.

The temptation to go outside wasn't very strong. I had good position and it made no sense to trade what I had for an unknown. I've read enough stories here and elsewhere where the home occupant did go outside. Most of the time, the folks who critique the stories end up realizing that staying inside is almost always the better move.

I did think of a couple of things that I did wrong. But, overall, I knew there was a high probability that it was a drunk kind of deal. As I mentioned in the nobucks thread, I've had one of those before, when like his event, a drunk was actually pushing on my door. I was on the other side with a handgun and, though I will never know for sure, I would have shot the man if he'd come in. And regretted it for the rest of my life because the man was no threat at all.

Ironbar wrote:

I think Hank was drunk when he wrote that.

Click to expand...

Why do you say that, Ironbar?

Click to expand...

Most people who are murdered didn't need the gun the night before. Who cares about having a gun when you find out with 20/20 hindsight that you didn't need it. The concern is not having a gun when you do need it.

At the time, before you knew the outcome, probability was high that you would need the gun.

Before Schroedinger opens his box, he needs to be ready for a dead cat and ready for a live cat. Until he opens the box, both cats exist.

Nah. The prob was that it was no threat.

Again, if everything happened the same last night, except I had no gun ....no gun needed. You cannot get around that. Next time? Might be different, of course. That's why I own firearms.

And in the Shroedinger thought experiment....there is only one cat. Two (potential) states--1 cat. One, and only one, of the states will be present upon observation of the interior of the box as the probability wave function collapses.

Hmmm, if I put a drunken home invader in a big box....with a radioactive isotope-based trigger attached to a vial of poison....

eye95 · Apr 21, 2010

imported post

HankT wrote:

eye95 wrote:

HankT wrote:

eye95 wrote:

You did need your gun. Something was amiss, and you did not know what it was.

You were smart not to go outside. You had a good defensive position and were armed. Calling 911 was the way to go. If the cops responded in time (or, if it turned out to be nothing), perfect. If not, again, you had a good defensive position and were armed. You could effectively deal with the situation if the need arose.

Click to expand...

Yah, I see that point. But it depends on the perspective. If everything had happened exactly the same as it did--except I don't have a handgun--what would have been the result? The same!

Ergo, gun not really needed.

OTOH, for my sense of well-being and to manage my fear of possibly being the victim of a break in......the gun was definitely useful ......and therefore needed.

The temptation to go outside wasn't very strong. I had good position and it made no sense to trade what I had for an unknown. I've read enough stories here and elsewhere where the home occupant did go outside. Most of the time, the folks who critique the stories end up realizing that staying inside is almost always the better move.

I did think of a couple of things that I did wrong. But, overall, I knew there was a high probability that it was a drunk kind of deal. As I mentioned in the nobucks thread, I've had one of those before, when like his event, a drunk was actually pushing on my door. I was on the other side with a handgun and, though I will never know for sure, I would have shot the man if he'd come in. And regretted it for the rest of my life because the man was no threat at all.

Ironbar wrote:

I think Hank was drunk when he wrote that.

Click to expand...

Why do you say that, Ironbar?

Click to expand...

Most people who are murdered didn't need the gun the night before. Who cares about having a gun when you find out with 20/20 hindsight that you didn't need it. The concern is not having a gun when you do need it.

At the time, before you knew the outcome, probability was high that you would need the gun.

Before Schroedinger opens his box, he needs to be ready for a dead cat and ready for a live cat. Until he opens the box, both cats exist.

Click to expand...

Nah. The prob was that it was no threat.

Again, if everything happened the same last night, except I had no gun ....no gun needed. You cannot get around that. Next time? Might be different, of course. That's why I own firearms.

And in the Shroedinger thought experiment....there is only one cat. Two (potential) states--1 cat. One, and only one, of the states will be present upon observation of the interior of the box as the probability wave function collapses.

Hmmm, if I put a drunken home invader in a big box....with a radioactive isotope-based trigger attached to a vial of poison....

Oh well, I tried to explain. Good luck the next time you have not yet opened the box.

Good night.

Snakemathis · Apr 21, 2010

imported post

Hank, I don't mean to be rude, but you have less credibility on this site than Roethlisberger has in a court room filled with drunk women...

Packer fan · Apr 21, 2010

imported post

"Then, I pulled my Colt Python and aimed it at the doorway waiting for someone to break in. I did not shoot then. Didn't have to. The guy never broke in. "

"I have my hand on my holstered gun as I ponder my next move...."

Ok, did you or did you not point the gun? Is that saying you were ready to take a man's life even if you didn't know he was unarmed? It is a good idea not to shot an unarmed man. Yet you were ready if need be to shoot if this man came through.

Did you have the gun in the holster and never pull it out?

I'm thinking BS.

HankT · Apr 22, 2010

imported post

Packer fan wrote:

"Then, I pulled my Colt Python and aimed it at the doorway waiting for someone to break in. I did not shoot then. Didn't have to. The guy never broke in. "

"I have my hand on my holstered gun as I ponder my next move...."

Ok, did you or did you not point the gun? Is that saying you were ready to take a man's life even if you didn't know he was unarmed? It is a good idea not to shot an unarmed man. Yet you were ready if need be to shoot if this man came through.

Did you have the gun in the holster and never pull it out?

I'm thinking BS.

I'm thinking a reading disability...

Here's the unedited OP:

HankT wrote:

About60 minutes ago, as I was typing away on the keyboard, I vaguely heard a man's voice outside and the person seemed to be moaning. My sense was that the voice was coming from outsidemy neighbor's home next door. I dismissed its importance. Then I heard it again with some muffled speaking. Again, it sounded like next door. I thought maybe my neighbor was outside yakking away with someone, which he does on Wednesdays. He's usually pretty quiet. Brushed it off again.

Then the voice, maybe like moaning, came again. This time it seemed like it was from my front door! Again, the moan. Male. Yes, outside my door. Definitely. Yes.

I decided to put on my pants. Then grabbed my gun/holster and wished I had another loaded gun around, instead of my J-frame Airweight...then heard the voice again!. I eased over and looked out the front window, which is at a right angle to the front door. Couldn't see anything out of the ordinary. Uh-oh.

I KNOW that the male is outside my door. I hear him moving around. That means it cannot be my neighbor. The thought pops into my head that the male voice is drunk. I've had this situation before, about 25 years ago. Then, I pulled my Colt Python and aimed it at the doorway waiting for someone to break in. I did not shoot then. Didn't have to. The guy never broke in.

But this, tonight,is the real thing.....is it a drunk? Is it a home invader? I don't know. Can't tell.

I have my hand on my holstered gun as I ponder my next move....I think about going out the front door. Then I think about going out the back door and circling around...

Then, I pick up the phone and call 911 and quietly report what I'd heard. The dispatcher says she'll send someone out. While waiting, I wonder if the guy is still there. I hear the male voice again.Yep, still there...

An LEO does show up in about 5 minutes. I see him exit the carand he addresses someone in the direction of my front door while he approaches. The officer starts talking loudly to the man near my door, asking him for ID.

Turns out it's a guy so drunk he can't stand up, doesn't know his name and has no ID. Doesn't know where he lives either.

The LEO arranges for an EMS to pick the drunk up.

I thank the officer for coming out. He replies, "No problem."

I'm glad I learned from the experiences of others. I really didn't need to go outside. I really didn't need to even talk to the intruder. Just needed to make a phone call.

Didn't even need the gun, really. The guy was no threat. Just a drunk.

Note: I'm borrowing a Subject line from nobucks when he had his drunk guy incident about 7 months ago.

Last Night - Attempted Home Invasion at My House

http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/forum60/29591.html

Bikenut · Apr 22, 2010

imported post

Hank... just like your postulate your subject line for this thread is misleading... and your post implies that a gun isn't needed when responding to an attempted home invasion.

But you didn't have an attempted home invasion... you just had a drunk guy on your porch... most likely looking for a flowerbed to relieve himself in.

Packer fan · Apr 22, 2010

imported post

HankT wrote:

Packer fan wrote:

"Then, I pulled my Colt Python and aimed it at the doorway waiting for someone to break in. I did not shoot then. Didn't have to. The guy never broke in. "

"I have my hand on my holstered gun as I ponder my next move...."

Ok, did you or did you not point the gun? Is that saying you were ready to take a man's life even if you didn't know he was unarmed? It is a good idea not to shot an unarmed man. Yet you were ready if need be to shoot if this man came through.

Did you have the gun in the holster and never pull it out?

I'm thinking BS.

Click to expand...

I'm thinking a reading disability...

Here's the unedited OP:

HankT wrote:

About 60 minutes ago, as I was typing away on the keyboard, I vaguely heard a man's voice outside and the person seemed to be moaning. My sense was that the voice was coming from outside my neighbor's home next door. I dismissed its importance. Then I heard it again with some muffled speaking. Again, it sounded like next door. I thought maybe my neighbor was outside yakking away with someone, which he does on Wednesdays. He's usually pretty quiet. Brushed it off again.

Then the voice, maybe like moaning, came again. This time it seemed like it was from my front door! Again, the moan. Male. Yes, outside my door. Definitely. Yes.

I decided to put on my pants. Then grabbed my gun/holster and wished I had another loaded gun around, instead of my J-frame Airweight...then heard the voice again!. I eased over and looked out the front window, which is at a right angle to the front door. Couldn't see anything out of the ordinary. Uh-oh.

I KNOW that the male is outside my door. I hear him moving around. That means it cannot be my neighbor. The thought pops into my head that the male voice is drunk. I've had this situation before, about 25 years ago. Then, I pulled my Colt Python and aimed it at the doorway waiting for someone to break in. I did not shoot then. Didn't have to. The guy never broke in.

But this, tonight, is the real thing.....is it a drunk? Is it a home invader? I don't know. Can't tell.

I have my hand on my holstered gun as I ponder my next move....I think about going out the front door. Then I think about going out the back door and circling around...

Then, I pick up the phone and call 911 and quietly report what I'd heard. The dispatcher says she'll send someone out. While waiting, I wonder if the guy is still there. I hear the male voice again. Yep, still there...

An LEO does show up in about 5 minutes. I see him exit the car and he addresses someone in the direction of my front door while he approaches. The officer starts talking loudly to the man near my door, asking him for ID.

Turns out it's a guy so drunk he can't stand up, doesn't know his name and has no ID. Doesn't know where he lives either.

The LEO arranges for an EMS to pick the drunk up.

I thank the officer for coming out. He replies, "No problem."

I'm glad I learned from the experiences of others. I really didn't need to go outside. I really didn't need to even talk to the intruder. Just needed to make a phone call.

Didn't even need the gun, really. The guy was no threat. Just a drunk.

Note: I'm borrowing a Subject line from nobucks when he had his drunk guy incident about 7 months ago.

Last Night - Attempted Home Invasion at My House

http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/forum60/29591.html

Click to expand...

Hank now that I went back to read it without laughing I see what you were writing.

If a gun is not needed why then do you use it even if it never left the holster?
The first thing you should have picked up was a bat.
I'm glad you are safe from a drunk guy never tried to break in.:uhoh:

25 years ago you pull a gun on a drunk? You pull a gun on a threat that was not there? Wow Hank I'm glad you learned from your mistakes.

As far as borrowing a thread your story I still say BS and his are two different situations, You perceived a threat and the other man had a threat. You are only one in the house, the other man had a wife and kids.

I don't understand the point of this whole story. I know I'm slow and not as smart as others so could you please tell me why you feel the need to equate your perceived threat to someone who clearly had a threat.

joshcdc · Apr 22, 2010

imported post

Well done HankT. You did not need to go outside, the best goal is for no one to get hurt. The phone was a great option in that situation. You might have needed the gun if the drunk had gained entry, I'm glad he didn't.

You might have learned the futility of your postulate, what if he had been unarmed and attacked you:banghead:? What would you have done? What was the relative height and weight of you and the drunk? What is your current medical condition?

P.S. The incident in the thread you were mocking was very different from the one you had, as the drunk was attempting to beat down the door in the other thread and the poster was protecting his family. Did the drunk on your doorstep at any time attempt to force the door?

1245A Defender · Apr 22, 2010

imported post

I have my hand on my holstered gun as I ponder my next move....I think about going out the front door. Then I think about going out the back door and circling around...

Then, I pick up the phone and call 911 and quietly report what I'd heard. The dispatcher says she'll send someone out. While waiting, I wonder if the guy is still there. I hear the male voice again.Yep, still there...

i am shocked and appalled to find out, after reading so many of your wise and thoughtful posts,

that you really are a "gun first" kind of girl!

CO-Joe · Apr 23, 2010

imported post

Yep, because we all know that since you had one drunk guy mistake your front door for a urinal (a purely hypothetical situation, I imagine), that means *every* home invasion ends like this--and nobody ever wishes they had a gun they never needed, because the worst person they'd ever have to deal with is the real life version of Otis Campbell, you know, the one from Mayberry.

Yes, I know.. IHBT IHL IWHAND

wrightme · Apr 24, 2010

imported post

Bikenut wrote:

.45acp wrote:

HankT wrote:
Note: I'm borrowing a Subject line from nobucks when he had his drunk guy incident about 7 months ago.

Last Night - Attempted Home Invasion at My House

http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/forum60/29591.html

Why? This makes zero sense.....

Click to expand...

It makes perfect sense if the purpose is to make the statement that a gun isn't needed to thwart a home invasion... all that is needed is to call 911.

Hank... I'm not saying that the incident you related did not happen... or happen exactly as you describe. I am saying that your credibility rating is extremely low on my side of the monitor screen.

Exactly. What does not make perfect sense is Hank's seeming willingness to tie "Need/no need" to a single anecdote. All such encounters as he describes are not "one size fits all." In ALL encounters such as this one, you only "need" specific tools and actions that you employ. That does not negate a "need" to have other tools and actions available. Hank fails to either understand this, or admit this.

Big Gay Al · Apr 24, 2010

imported post

Ok, just for the record, I'm TOTALLY lost on this one. WHY the statement about not really needing the gun? Does this mean next time, the OP isn't going to go for his weapon? I don't get it.

wrightme · Apr 24, 2010

imported post

Big Gay Al wrote:

Ok, just for the record, I'm TOTALLY lost on this one. WHY the statement about not really needing the gun? Does this mean next time, the OP isn't going to go for his weapon? I don't get it.

No. It ONLY means that he said it because he thinks it lends weight to his anti-gun stance, and to his pustulate.

.45acp · Apr 24, 2010

imported post

wrightme wrote:

Big Gay Al wrote:

Ok, just for the record, I'm TOTALLY lost on this one. WHY the statement about not really needing the gun? Does this mean next time, the OP isn't going to go for his weapon? I don't get it.

Click to expand...

No. It ONLY means that he said it because he thinks it lends weight to his anti-gun stance, and to his pustulate.

Hank likes to argue nuance, quite often delving into insignificant points. To me, it is a waste of time responding, as it just generates another response by Hank pointing again to nuance and insignificant points.

Regarding Hank’s Postulate : It may be bad strategy to kill an unarmed man, but it is worse tactics to let an unarmed man kill you.
Steve

HankT · Apr 24, 2010

imported post

Big Gay Al wrote:

Ok, just for the record, I'm TOTALLY lost on this one. WHY the statement about not really needing the gun? Does this mean next time, the OP isn't going to go for his weapon? I don't get it.

BGA, see:

HankT wrote:

eye95 wrote:

You did need your gun. Something was amiss, and you did not know what it was.

You were smart not to go outside. You had a good defensive position and were armed. Calling 911 was the way to go. If the cops responded in time (or, if it turned out to be nothing), perfect. If not, again, you had a good defensive position and were armed. You could effectively deal with the situation if the need arose.

Click to expand...

Yah, I see that point. But it depends on the perspective. If everything had happened exactly the same as it did--except I don't have a handgun--what would have been the result? The same!

Ergo, gun not really needed.

OTOH, for my sense of well-being and to manage my fear of possibly being the victim of a break in......the gun was definitely useful ......and therefore needed.
...

Bikenut wrote:

HankT wrote:

Bikenut wrote:

Hank... I'm not saying that the incident you related did not happen... or happen exactly as you describe. I am saying that your credibility rating is extremely low on my side of the monitor screen.

Click to expand...

Paralipsis strategem, eh?

Expected. Weak. Called.

Click to expand...

Hank... you didn't call... you sent me a PM.

No stratagem Hank... simply told you like it is right up front.

No, I don't mean 'called' like in telephone call. I mean, 'called' as in acknowledging your use of rhetorical technique. Essentially, a fallacy. You try to make a point [questioning the truth of something] while declaring that you won't actually question the truth of it.

It's a poor rhetorical device--especially when it is identified and acknowledged--'called.' You then lose the point.

'Calling' your use of paralipsis had nothing to do with the PM I sent you. Here it is:

From: HankT
Date: 2010-04-21 11:10:30
Subject: Yep, You're Right

It makes perfect sense if the purpose is to make the statement that a gun isn't needed to thwart a home invasion... all that is needed is to call 911.

Yep. That's the general implication that was intended. How could the other fellow not get? Sheeze.

Thanks for pointing it out.

HT

Bikenut · Apr 24, 2010

imported post

HankT wrote:

Bikenut wrote:

HankT wrote:

Bikenut wrote:

Hank... I'm not saying that the incident you related did not happen... or happen exactly as you describe. I am saying that your credibility rating is extremely low on my side of the monitor screen.

Click to expand...

Paralipsis strategem, eh?

Expected. Weak. Called.

Click to expand...

Hank... you didn't call... you sent me a PM.

No stratagem Hank... simply told you like it is right up front.

Click to expand...

No, I don't mean 'called' like in telephone call. I mean, 'called' as in acknowledging your use of rhetorical technique. Essentially, a fallacy. You try to make a point [questioning the truth of something] while declaring that you won't actually question the truth of it.

It's a poor rhetorical device--especially when it is identified and acknowledged--'called.' You then lose the point.

'Calling' your use of paralipsis had nothing to do with the PM I sent you. Here it is:

From: HankT
Date: 2010-04-21 11:10:30
Subject: Yep, You're Right

It makes perfect sense if the purpose is to make the statement that a gun isn't needed to thwart a home invasion... all that is needed is to call 911.

Yep. That's the general implication that was intended. How could the other fellow not get? Sheeze.

Thanks for pointing it out.

HT

"Called" vs "called"... no sense of humor huh Hank?

And you outed yourself again by posting your supposedly private message to me on the forum. By your own admission your purpose in posting your experience with a home invasion that didn't happen was to imply that a gun isn't needed to thwart a home invasion... just a call to 911 will save the day.

A bit disingenuous I would say.... you see Hank... I can find the description of your experience as true while still being suspicious of your motives for posting it... hence my mention of your lack of credibility on my side of the screen.

Have a nice day Hank.

Tonight - Attempted Home Invasion at My House

Regular Member

Regular Member

State Researcher

Well-known member

State Researcher

Well-known member

Regular Member

Regular Member

State Researcher

Bikenut

Guest

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Michigan Moderator

Regular Member

Regular Member

State Researcher

Bikenut

Guest