Engage or not engage?

Is there any possibility this kid is related to the other bunch you had the run in with?

I agree you should have gotten down out of sight. I used to make head shots on groundhogs ( woodchucks to some ) at 100 yards with my scoped .22 rifle. If he was that close to you , you were in trouble had he decided to fire.

Sounds to me that this young man needs a lesson in safe firearms handling .

Yeah, my gut feel on this is that he's using the scope as a telescope and was not aware (NOT THINKING) that his actions constitute a danger to life and limb.

There's two ways to go about it... one is to call 911 and get the federales on it, and/or grab a rifle and put a round above his head large enough to rain wood chips down on him. That being said, option #2 is not something that would be entertained by any member of this site. For one, he might suddenly think he has the OK to engage. He's just a kid.

If one had time to think, putting one down the end of his rifle would be a lesson, but the possibility of missing and killing him (and rightfully so, since he does have a rifle pointed at you) is frightening.

I second what the other poster said... hit the dirt, go for cover, call 911, and fetch a rifle (if safe to do so).

The police don't generally have a problem located a kid walking around with a .22.

Whatever comes of it- I was mostly looking for a consensus as to reactions to this type of situation. There's always a lot of angles to consider-but when the moment things are happening-not a whole lot of time for analysis of the options. So, there's the catch-22= do the sensible thing, hang tight, hope the guy with a rifle doesnt pull the trigger- maybe call 911 (for all the good it would do without direct proof, and the fact that way out here in the boonies, response times average 1.5-2 hrs at least) , or given time to get into action, return fire if fired upon, or?

My SD/HD scenarios dont all fit into the typical box that most others have to consider. Im not in a densely-populated urban/suburban area where I need to concern myself quiet as much with issues like overpenetration , and room-distance shoot-outs (unless someone manages to get inside) and such.
But, this doesnt mean that crimes dont happen- crimes, and violent crimes, at that, arent the exclusive domain of "urban" type punks with their pants half-down running around wanting to be Scarface.

As such, I have to factor in less-typical engagements, like someone 50, 75 or 100m away taking shots from off my property- but still potentially taking shots..
At what point does range/distance nullify "justifiable" SD/HD? If someone sends lead your way-be it from 3m or 300m, how is it any less a threat that needs to be addressed? I've run that hypothetical scenario past LEOS, lawyers, and looked it over in our Statutes- nothing seems to address it, specifically ,and those who should be in the know are at a loss other than to just point our "Stand your ground" Statute.

My past situation out here involved much the same thing-but from a different shooter, and from a different direction, but the incoming shots were from off-property approx: 40 meters.

Im sure the kid was probably clowning around, but- the situation itself reminded me of the previous situation, one Im not inclined to repeat, if possible-but- I have to consider the potential threats as they present themselves, no?

09jisaac said:

Yes, it is best to cower in fear every time you are faced with a possible threat and call our protectors to come to our aid. But they won't get there in time to do anything, and even if they did catch the kid walking down the road all they could do is talk to him anyways. He was only breaking the law when he pointed the rifle, and the cops probably won't catch him in the act. So it would be OP's word against the perps.

And you're thinking in the form of a handgun. It would still be hard to argue SD at 75m but a rifle, even a .22, is more than capable of that.

Click to expand...

Cowering in fear every time you are faced with a possible threat and taking cover when a kid is aiming a .22 at you while you're already in the safety of your home 75m away are two completely different things... but you wouldn't know because you appear to be trololololol.

I hate to say it, but Schlitz is right. The best course of action would be to take cover and call the police.

IDK about Florida, but in Texas you would, technically, be justified in using deadly force to remove the threat. However, do to the range, the fact the kid did not fire at the victim and that the victim was inside, it would be extremely hard to prove that in court. It would cost a lot of money, time and most likely your job. Let's not forget the numerous political ramifications. For the liberal press, this would be a goldmine. "GUN RIGHTS ACTIVIST/OCDO SUPPORTER SHOOTS/MURDERS CHILD FOR HUNTING SQUIRRELS"

It sucks that you have to take these things into consideration before you can protect your life and the life of your family and friends. But that is the reality we are faced with.

Let's say the individual comes back and does this again, you have your scoped rifle in arm's reach so you grab it and remove the very real threat. You are now burdened with proving that you were acting in self defense, you have to prove that the individual was aiming a weapon at you and you had real reason to fear for your life. In all likely hood you are going to be spending thousands to millions in legal fees alone. You will probably spend a considerable amount of time behind bars and there is a good chance you will lose your job. You WILL have to deal with bad publicity, this is especially true if the attacker is either a minor or minority. And if they are both, god help you because you're just plain screwed. "RACIST PSYCHOPATH SHOOTS/KILLS HELPLESS CHILD FOR HUNTING." Even if it is a clear cut case of self defense, you will still have to deal with bad publicity. You will also have to deal with outraged members of your community and possibly family/friends. The fallout, legal, financial and political will devastate if not outright destroy your family. It is unfortunate, but you can not defend yourself with deadly force then go on with your life. Your life will change and it will change for the worse.

You must consider these things and you must ask yourself if the threat is significant enough to warrant the fallout.

Jack House said:

I hate to say it, but Schlitz is right. The best course of action would be to take cover and call the police.

Let's say the individual comes back and does this again, you have your scoped rifle in arm's reach so you grab it and remove the very real threat. You are now burdened with proving that you were acting in self defense, you have to prove that the individual was aiming a weapon at you and you had real reason to fear for your life. In all likely hood you are going to be spending thousands to millions in legal fees alone. You will probably spend a considerable amount of time behind bars and there is a good chance you will lose your job. You WILL have to deal with bad publicity, this is especially true if the attacker is either a minor or minority. And if they are both, god help you because you're just plain screwed. "RACIST PSYCHOPATH SHOOTS/KILLS HELPLESS CHILD FOR HUNTING." Even if it is a clear cut case of self defense, you will still have to deal with bad publicity. You will also have to deal with outraged members of your community and possibly family/friends. The fallout, legal, financial and political will devastate if not outright destroy your family. It is unfortunate, but you can not defend yourself with deadly force then go on with your life. Your life will change and it will change for the worse.

You must consider these things and you must ask yourself if the threat is significant enough to warrant the fallout.

Click to expand...

Excellent post, sir.

The scenario you laid out therein is likely how this would all play out in the media hype.

The OP is in a difficult situation, no doubt, and seemingly in uncharted waters; but I think he would be wise to follow your counsel.

If local cops won't do anything call the FBI and report it as terroristic if it happens again. Guaran-damn-teed to get a reaction with that picture.

Badger Johnson said:

If local cops won't do anything call the FBI and report it as terroristic if it happens again. Guaran-damn-teed to get a reaction with that picture.

Click to expand...

And not to mention a lengthy visit to a Federal prison vs. a local/State one for such a report lol.
Dont get me wrong folks, Im not plotting to snipe the guy- BUT- if rounds do, for whatever reason, come my way, and Im not taken out by one of them, I'd have to think that would be plenty of reason to return fire.

But again, the catch-22: Do you actually sit and watch someone take aim on you with a scoped rifle (even if it is just a .22) -and wait around for someone to pull a trigger? Or prepare to engage by whatever means.
Flight/cover isnt always an option- phones arent always within reach- LEO response is anything but timely-even to shots -fired calls, etc.

Consider also, what if Im not in the house, like this time, but out in my yard working around the house, or going out to the mailbox, take out the trash, whatever routine, outside acticity, and this occurs? If a round is fired- am I even remotely likely to make it to adequate cover in less time than the travel of a round in my direction, much less to a landline (cells are almost useless out here)
How long does one wait- provided they happen to spot the guy aiming, like this time- to see if someone's going to shoot?

Flip it around to any other tactical situation for SD= like on the street somewhere, and some stranger comes up and draws out on you? As an OC/CC-carrying person, will/would you wait and see if they are going to shoot- be it from 3m or 25m? Or do you draw out and take aim yourself, and the two of you stand there like the scene out of some Spaghetti Western, having a stand-off?

Schlitz said:

Cowering in fear every time you are faced with a possible threat and taking cover when a kid is aiming a .22 at you while you're already in the safety of your home 75m away are two completely different things... but you wouldn't know because you appear to be trololololol.

Click to expand...

Relative safety at best. He wouldn't have had time to distinguish a .22 from a .300 wm if he would have hit the deck at 1st sight of a scope. Most high powered rifles would have tore right through any outside walls leaving OP in danger. You should have the right to feel safe in your own house. I know that this time it was just a kid, but the kid knows right from wrong. I would have ready my scoped rifle and let anyone aiming at me know that I was prepared to use lethal force. If a camera scared that kid off a .308 would have too.

Are you really so childish someone cannot disagree with you without you calling them a "trololololol."

Badger Johnson said:

If local cops won't do anything call the FBI and report it as terroristic if it happens again. Guaran-damn-teed to get a reaction with that picture.

Click to expand...

What can they do? Go talk to the boy? And then what happens? Now OP is on the boy's sh!t-list (if not already) and he realizes that OP can't do anything against him without proof. The situation would be just as likely to escalate than to be resolved.

There is no RIGHT answer, no matter what you do OP.

This is one time where you want to alert the authorities. If you do, the kid is on their radar (again?). If you DO anything, it can be turned back around against you (good kid just playing, shooting squirrels, are you afraid of a little .22, etc.)

I would already have called the feds - once time is too many.

OC for ME said:

There is another alternative....dead....just saying. If the kid is gunna shoot you, shoot at you, he will shoot no matter where you happen to be and you will likely not have prior notice....just saying, again.

Tough call no matter what anyone thinks. Start piling up verifiable complaints with local LE. If any rise to a felony offense then the complaint trail will be handy. It is my understanding that any complaint(s) that are a misdemeanor in nature usually have to be witnessed by a LEO.

Don't go near the kids property, ever, don't talk to the kid or his family, let LE do the heavy lifting for you. Any contact can/will be construed as aggressive behavior.

Document as best you can and stay safe.

Click to expand...

Good points -is pretty much what Im doing, anyway. Held off on discussing with the father of the kid, as the guy hasnt given a crap in the past, and isnt likely to now. He's not the brightest bulb on the Christmas tree to begin with, and it would probably take finding his kid laid out in the pasture with a hole in his forehead to "get it" anyway...:banghead:

Im on the local Sherrif's Advisory Council, so LEO report/contact is already done. But, like I said, they have little/no comment on the matter other than point right back to the "Stand your ground" statute... unless/until he actually does something. Neat how that works, eh? May have to wait until my wife or I have been sniped, or a neighbor, before any action is taken by LE...

09jisaac said:

Relative safety at best. He wouldn't have had time to distinguish a .22 from a .300 wm if he would have hit the deck at 1st sight of a scope. Most high powered rifles would have tore right through any outside walls leaving OP in danger. You should have the right to feel safe in your own house.

Click to expand...

The OP is in his house, (which you don't know what it is made out of) and you're saying he is safer to engage a target 75m away who hasn't fired on him than to take cover and call law enforcement? Right, you can't tell if it's a .22 or a .300, for all you know he has a .50BMG and you want to have a shoot out with him? And this is justified force when you take it to court?

I find it hard to believe that you honestly think the guy with the .22 OUTSIDE of your home has some sort of super hero vision where he can see through your home's walls and find out where you are.

If you have the time to stop what you're doing, go grab your long gun, scope in on the guy 75M away OUTSIDE OF YOUR HOME and shoot him then you have time to take cover and call the cops.

Firearms and use of deadly force are our LAST RESORT to stopping a threat. Taking the time to involve yourself into a gun battle that didn't need to happen in the first place is not a LAST RESORT.

Are you really so childish someone cannot disagree with you without you calling them a "trololololol."

Click to expand...

You said that taking cover from a rifle threat while you're inside the safety of your home is the equivilent of cowering in fear every time you face a threat. Yes, such a ludicrous statement is considered trolling. Yes, sure, call me childish, whatever.

Schlitz said:

The OP is in his house, (which you don't know what it is made out of) and you're saying he is safer to engage a target 75m away who hasn't fired on him than to take cover and call law enforcement? Right, you can't tell if it's a .22 or a .300, for all you know he has a .50BMG and you want to have a shoot out with him? And this is justified force when you take it to court?

I find it hard to believe that you honestly think the guy with the .22 OUTSIDE of your home has some sort of super hero vision where he can see through your home's walls and find out where you are.

If you have the time to stop what you're doing, go grab your long gun, scope in on the guy 75M away OUTSIDE OF YOUR HOME and shoot him then you have time to take cover and call the cops.

Firearms and use of deadly force are our LAST RESORT to stopping a threat. Taking the time to involve yourself into a gun battle that didn't need to happen in the first place is not a LAST RESORT.


You said that taking cover from a rifle threat while you're inside the safety of your home is the equivilent of cowering in fear every time you face a threat. Yes, such a ludicrous statement is considered trolling. Yes, sure, call me childish, whatever.

Click to expand...

Im not just factoring in a scenario like the one I had, Im also factoring in other possible variables as well. All of which I think are prudent to consider, no?
At this particular time, I happened to be sitting at my work table in front of a large, bay window, which has a mostly clear field of fire/line of sight to where the kid was- a clear, straight shot right into my head, if he'd wanted to, and I hadnt spotted him. With a scope, the kid had no problem whatsoever lining me up.

Immediately at hand were a camera, and the .45 on my hip.Phone and shotgun were in other parts of the house. Im not inclined to consider if I'd had enough to time to get up, run to some other part of the house, and grab a phone or shotgun.

If the situation were reversed- and knowing my own skills/limits with a rifle, I could have put 8-10 rounds into me by the time I got away from the table, with that shot, no problem at all.
Despite the kid's misses in the past, which originally alerted neighbors to the troubles this kid poses, Im also well aware that's actually quiet a good shot with that thing. He hunts squirrels all over the place out here, and I've-in the past-seen him make a few fantastic shots. As his current skills exist, he could easily qualify at least Marksman level on the Army's BRM ranges.

So with that in mind, Schlitz, (absolutely horrid choice of beer, btw) let's flip things around a bit. Put yourself in my shoes- same scenario, only Im standing downrange @ approx. 75m with a rifle/caliber of your choice, and a decent scope. Care to wager how far from that table and window you'd get before I got a couple of rounds into you? Now, if you had a firearm at hand in that situation- would you actually be trying to make a run for it? Or would you be considering getting that firearm ready-time permitting?

Schlitz said:

The OP is in his house, (which you don't know what it is made out of) and you're saying he is safer to engage a target 75m away who hasn't fired on him than to take cover and call law enforcement? Right, you can't tell if it's a .22 or a .300, for all you know he has a .50BMG and you want to have a shoot out with him? And this is justified force when you take it to court?

I find it hard to believe that you honestly think the guy with the .22 OUTSIDE of your home has some sort of super hero vision where he can see through your home's walls and find out where you are.

If you have the time to stop what you're doing, go grab your long gun, scope in on the guy 75M away OUTSIDE OF YOUR HOME and shoot him then you have time to take cover and call the cops.

Firearms and use of deadly force are our LAST RESORT to stopping a threat. Taking the time to involve yourself into a gun battle that didn't need to happen in the first place is not a LAST RESORT.


You said that taking cover from a rifle threat while you're inside the safety of your home is the equivilent of cowering in fear every time you face a threat. Yes, such a ludicrous statement is considered trolling. Yes, sure, call me childish, whatever.

Click to expand...

You have more sense to believe someone has to be able to see you to shoot you. Plenty of times people have been shot without the shooters knowledge that they were even there. But all it takes is one lucky (or unlucky) bullet to kill someone, even if they aren't seen. I have read stories of soldiers in Iraq shooting through walls with the 50 bmg to hit targets on the other side. Are you implying that they had x-ray vision too? Doubtful. The most likely possibility is that they guessed were the threat would be and then relied on the "spray and pray" method. If he knows that you're in a room, all he has to do is guess. If he is right, you're hit.

And I could ready any of my guns before I could even get ahold of 911.

+1 for hit the deck and call the cops. Grab your gun in case he comes for you, but unless he fires one thru the window, then game on... but otherwise, you gonna have some 'splainin to doooo if you pop off some rounds at a kid 75m away who you will have a hard time proving that you had no choice but to fire on him.

I would have called 911. You most certainly should make a police report.

It likely was difficult from that range to determine he was drawing a bead with a .22. Once he shouldered it you could see what it was no problem. Anything .223 and over will go through mud, plaster, sheet-metal framing etc. Only j4l knows what his house is made out of to make that assessment for us.

You have to take into account perspective in a situation like this. A soldier/marines first likely response is going to be simply to do as trained. This is going to be instinctual, and likely involve hitting the deck, and finding a way to remove the threat by any means possible. Those means will be obtained by assessing the situation, and determining the most efficient way to engage the threat with the lowest possible threat to ones team (or self).

I am a firm believer in that a mans home is his sanctuary. Whether the threat is external or internal, one has a right to defend himself.

Remember that hindsight is always 20/20, and its easy to determine the right course of action in this case from a computer hundreds to thousands of miles away while seated in your airback chair. Reality however differs. Would I have potentially returned fire? I can say with certainty that I probably would have. I have an old kevlar around here somewhere. Throw that on and creep to a window to observe, without silhouetting. Nikon Bushmaster on a Panther with a 20" Bull Barrel @ 75m? No problems there.

One of my first instincts is to call the cops of course.

"9-1-1? Yes my name is Jason _______________ and I live at ________________ in Richmond. There is a young male pointing a rifle directly at me outside of my house. He is prone and trying to hide behind a fenceline and a bush, trying not to be seen. I fear for mine and my families life. Please send officers now!*Click*".

That would probably go a long way evidence wise.

A firearm pointed at anybody at any time is a threat. j4l was ALREADY in his house, and had nowhere else to retreat to, short of digging a hole. All it takes is one round from .223 or better and he could have lost his life, his wifes life, etc.


In summation, a persons home is the last place they should ever have to retreat. There should NEVER be a reason somebody intently points a firearm at an individuals house or the occupants therein. Judged by twelve, carried by 6, etc. You guys know the old saying.

Why is this is getting ridiculous?

Is the original poster prepared and willing to fire the first shot through his window glass or through the walls of his home?

Or, did he think it would be o.k. to open the front door?:banghead:

If I had a rifle, and had to return fire back that way, yes I could have shot through the window to clear the obstacle- goes both ways though- he''d possibly have to fire one shot to take out the glass (doubt he knows to aim slightly higher when firing through verical glass though-to compensate for bullet deflection, but..)
If I spot the threat in time to move a few feet to either side of the window, and behind the walls to either side- Im fine. Short of him acquiring a Barrett, it is unlikely he will penetrate any of my exterior walls:

I mean, c'mon- as I mentioned in another thread, my exterior is not standard, residential construction- that to the right is the interior side of my walls- thinnest areas are 8" thick of solid, re-enforced concrete, the extrior outside the window, is a layer of brick- almost entirely cosmetic-but brick just the same.
But again, that all assumes having time to make to that cover, if I spot the threat in time. This time that I did was entirely a fluke, and a result of that kid's scope reflecting light-which caught my eye.




But we're getting off-track here- the main reason of the post is consideration of an unusual, potential shoot/n0-shoot scenario. We can spend all week going over what if this, what if that. Bottom-line is: Should one engage if they spot someone aiming a firearm at them (regardless of make/model/caliber, etc) whether its from 3m or 3km ?

I'm going to blanket answer with "Yes".

However, this shows that SA, even while in ones home, is an absolute must in day to day life.

slowfiveoh said:

I'm going to blanket answer with "Yes".

However, this shows that SA, even while in ones home, is an absolute must in day to day life.

Click to expand...

Concur 100%