I just don't understand the concept of "deterrent" when you are dealing with in invader who already forced his way into your occupied home! The only thing left to do is destroy the invader. I would think you would want to be as stealthy as possible in doing this. No lasers. No "cha-chinks". No "here I am where are you" flashlights. No talking. NO NOISE! Just a well-trained home owner with a firearm of his choice and a set of night sights.
Is the "scariness factor" important for an SD gun?
- Thread starter raftman
- Start date
- Status
I just don't understand the concept of "deterrent" when you are dealing with in invader who already forced his way into your occupied home! The only thing left to do is destroy the invader. I would think you would want to be as stealthy as possible in doing this. No lasers. No "cha-chinks". No "here I am where are you" flashlights. No talking. NO NOISE! Just a well-trained home owner with a firearm of his choice and a set of night sights.
SigP6Carry
New member
There are different legal situations depending on the local laws. It could be that you're well within your right to shoot to kill anyone in your home you don't approve, but for some of us: we'll get nailed for defending ourselves with excessive force. There for: a deterrent will prevent both bloodshed and legal issues.
Skans...
... that's a great way to shoot your college aged kid, who comes home unexpectedly for a weekend and surprises you.
... it's a great way to shoot your neighbor, who had one too many before his buddies dropped him off at the wrong house, and he decides to slip in through a window because his keys have been taken away.
... it's a great way to shoot the alzheimer's patient who wanders off from the house on the next block.
And so on.
If you have pre-determined that anybody who "forces" their way into your home is going to be shot as stealthily as possible, you are setting yourself up for misery.
Even by posting that intent online, you are setting yourself up for a very tricky defense case if you ever do have to deal with a break-in.
You aren't going to identify an intruder with night sights. Shooting at unidentified intruders is legally dangerous and morally repugnant. Shooting when shooting isn't necessary is legally dangerous and morally repugnant. Advising others to shoot when shooting isn't necessary is legally dangerous and morally repugnant.
Notice a pattern here?
... that's a great way to shoot your college aged kid, who comes home unexpectedly for a weekend and surprises you.
... it's a great way to shoot your neighbor, who had one too many before his buddies dropped him off at the wrong house, and he decides to slip in through a window because his keys have been taken away.
... it's a great way to shoot the alzheimer's patient who wanders off from the house on the next block.
And so on.
If you have pre-determined that anybody who "forces" their way into your home is going to be shot as stealthily as possible, you are setting yourself up for misery.
Even by posting that intent online, you are setting yourself up for a very tricky defense case if you ever do have to deal with a break-in.
You aren't going to identify an intruder with night sights. Shooting at unidentified intruders is legally dangerous and morally repugnant. Shooting when shooting isn't necessary is legally dangerous and morally repugnant. Advising others to shoot when shooting isn't necessary is legally dangerous and morally repugnant.
Notice a pattern here?
And on top of that, who says we're just talking about in-home defense?
All three of my "chase offs" happened on the street. Two involved me coming to the aid of another person. One of those it was aggressive dogs being chased off.
All three incidents were "broad daylight" (if you also include a well-lit subway train), which come to think is kinda peculiar in terms of odds...?
All three of my "chase offs" happened on the street. Two involved me coming to the aid of another person. One of those it was aggressive dogs being chased off.
All three incidents were "broad daylight" (if you also include a well-lit subway train), which come to think is kinda peculiar in terms of odds...?
English can be confusing sometimes. I said that the appearance of your SD gun can have an effect, sometimes. But the effect of the appearance of the gun is a highly variable thing. First, the gun has to been seen, and recognised, and second, the bad guy actually has to be deterred by the sight of the gun. These are things you simply cannot count on. It's nice when it happens, but you have to be capable of mastering the situation when it doesn't.
Therefore, the scariness factor is not important for an SD gun. What is important for an SD gun are those things you can count on, and count on every single time. Reliability, accuracy, power. Real tangible things, not the impression created in the mind of your attacker, which can be as different as the people involved.
Choose a gun based on your needs, then wants. What it looks like is the least important thing.
... that's a great way to shoot your college aged kid, who comes home unexpectedly for a weekend and surprises you.
I don't have one of those.
... it's a great way to shoot your neighbor, who had one too many before his buddies dropped him off at the wrong house, and he decides to slip in through a window because his keys have been taken away.
That's not an issue for me - we live on 1+ acre lots and this kind of thing just doesn't happen.
... it's a great way to shoot the alzheimer's patient who wanders off from the house on the next block.
Also, not going to happen.
Yes, you need to know the laws and your own situation. My house has enough ambient light for me to identify an intruder without flashing a high-powered xenon flashlight around. Laser beams just give an intruder fair warning. I can see their application in police work, but not really for HD.
If you have pre-determined that anybody who "forces" their way into your home is going to be shot as stealthily as possible,
Yes, on the rare occasions that I've had to sweep my house, this is the presumption that I go on. That doesn't mean that I'm going to shoot blindly at shadows, but it does mean that I'm not going to give "fair" warning or hesitate before firing at an intruder. Hesitation could cost you your life, and I value mine.
you are setting yourself up for misery.
Anyone who breaks into my house is setting themselves up for misery
Shooting at unidentified intruders is legally dangerous
I have anough ambient light in my house to make a quick identification of anyone who is supposed to be in my house - not an issue for me, I've already been through this drill twice (but never shot anybody).
Shooting when shooting isn't necessary is legally dangerous and morally repugnant.
If an intruder breaks into my house (and I do mean break in, because I keep it well locked during the day and at night), I'm not going to be messing around with a bunch of electronic devices. I'm not going to question him. I'm not going to talk to him. I'm not going to shout "FREEZE SUCKER". I'm not going to give him cookies and milk. My little old scared self is going to take care of business the best way I know how.
Know your occupant situation. Know your laws. Know your own house like the back of your hand. Then prepare appropriately.
I don't have one of those.
... it's a great way to shoot your neighbor, who had one too many before his buddies dropped him off at the wrong house, and he decides to slip in through a window because his keys have been taken away.
That's not an issue for me - we live on 1+ acre lots and this kind of thing just doesn't happen.
... it's a great way to shoot the alzheimer's patient who wanders off from the house on the next block.
Also, not going to happen.
Yes, you need to know the laws and your own situation. My house has enough ambient light for me to identify an intruder without flashing a high-powered xenon flashlight around. Laser beams just give an intruder fair warning. I can see their application in police work, but not really for HD.
If you have pre-determined that anybody who "forces" their way into your home is going to be shot as stealthily as possible,
Yes, on the rare occasions that I've had to sweep my house, this is the presumption that I go on. That doesn't mean that I'm going to shoot blindly at shadows, but it does mean that I'm not going to give "fair" warning or hesitate before firing at an intruder. Hesitation could cost you your life, and I value mine.
you are setting yourself up for misery.
Anyone who breaks into my house is setting themselves up for misery
Shooting at unidentified intruders is legally dangerous
I have anough ambient light in my house to make a quick identification of anyone who is supposed to be in my house - not an issue for me, I've already been through this drill twice (but never shot anybody).
Shooting when shooting isn't necessary is legally dangerous and morally repugnant.
If an intruder breaks into my house (and I do mean break in, because I keep it well locked during the day and at night), I'm not going to be messing around with a bunch of electronic devices. I'm not going to question him. I'm not going to talk to him. I'm not going to shout "FREEZE SUCKER". I'm not going to give him cookies and milk. My little old scared self is going to take care of business the best way I know how.
Know your occupant situation. Know your laws. Know your own house like the back of your hand. Then prepare appropriately.
44 AMP
You state:
Let's look at some stats:
raftman post73
We all know that stats can be misleading; however, if the numbers are anywhere near accurate, even with a large error factor, then at least half of the time, or more (up to over 90%), the mere presentation of a firearm has/will deter the aggressor in a self-defense situation.
Recognition that it is a firearm is much easier/scarier for the aggressor if it is quickly recognizable as a firearm, for example a stainless steel Government size 1911 versus a black Beretta 21a.
I personally like those odds. One little variable, that some dismiss as meaningless, that can make all of my hard earned practice NOT have to be used in a self-defense situation up to over 90% of the time sounds very good to me.
Of course the other functions of a firearm are paramount (reliability, accuracy, your ability to use the firearm, etc..); however, if the aggressor did not have to recognize and be scared of the firearm, then we all could just use our fingers, cock our thumb back as we pointed our index finger at center mass and watch the aggressor leave 9 times out of 10.
One could make a solid argument that the mere recognition/scariness factor statistically can outweigh actual self-defense shooting accuracy. Just take a look at stats involving police shootings, or self-defense shootings. What is the percentage of actual hits versus misses?
My point being that I believe that appearance/"scariness factor" is an important variable when considering a self-defense firearm, and that dismissing this out of hand is not positive. And that some firearms do have a higher "scariness factor" than others.
Massad Ayoob used eight photos within his book In The Gravest Extreme. The text that accompanies one of these eight images mentions "increasing deterrent effect"; along with other passages in the book discussing this same topic. (Want more, read his book.)
With all of that said, I prefer to carry concealed for self-defense Commander or Government sized guns. I own a "pocket pistol" or two, and feel much better served with the larger "scarier" looking firearms. I know that I "can" defend myself with a "pocket pistol", but I would rather have a higher likelyhood of NOT having to shoot by carrying a "scarier" gun.
You state:
Emphasis by AZAK
Let's look at some stats:
raftman post73
We all know that stats can be misleading; however, if the numbers are anywhere near accurate, even with a large error factor, then at least half of the time, or more (up to over 90%), the mere presentation of a firearm has/will deter the aggressor in a self-defense situation.
Recognition that it is a firearm is much easier/scarier for the aggressor if it is quickly recognizable as a firearm, for example a stainless steel Government size 1911 versus a black Beretta 21a.
I personally like those odds. One little variable, that some dismiss as meaningless, that can make all of my hard earned practice NOT have to be used in a self-defense situation up to over 90% of the time sounds very good to me.
Of course the other functions of a firearm are paramount (reliability, accuracy, your ability to use the firearm, etc..); however, if the aggressor did not have to recognize and be scared of the firearm, then we all could just use our fingers, cock our thumb back as we pointed our index finger at center mass and watch the aggressor leave 9 times out of 10.
One could make a solid argument that the mere recognition/scariness factor statistically can outweigh actual self-defense shooting accuracy. Just take a look at stats involving police shootings, or self-defense shootings. What is the percentage of actual hits versus misses?
My point being that I believe that appearance/"scariness factor" is an important variable when considering a self-defense firearm, and that dismissing this out of hand is not positive. And that some firearms do have a higher "scariness factor" than others.
Massad Ayoob used eight photos within his book In The Gravest Extreme. The text that accompanies one of these eight images mentions "increasing deterrent effect"; along with other passages in the book discussing this same topic. (Want more, read his book.)
With all of that said, I prefer to carry concealed for self-defense Commander or Government sized guns. I own a "pocket pistol" or two, and feel much better served with the larger "scarier" looking firearms. I know that I "can" defend myself with a "pocket pistol", but I would rather have a higher likelyhood of NOT having to shoot by carrying a "scarier" gun.
Willie Lowman
New member
---On this past new years, some people that live a few miles from me had someone break into their home around 3am.
If I am following you right, and this was your home, you would have produced your "firearm of choice" and "destroyed the intruder." No lights, no noise, no questions or second thoughts.
---The person who broke into the house was a teenage girl. She and her boyfriend had been drinking and at some point he started beating her. She fled with out a coat into the snow, in the country, in the middle of the night, drunk... This girl was cold, upset, and drunk. She broke a window and climbed into a house. Remember cold+upset+drunk = rational thought probably wasn't working for her.
Not every person who comes into your house with out asking is there to kill you. Sometimes the person who broke your window is your neighbor's daughter, trying to get away from an abusive boyfriend. It can pay to know who you are shooting or give them a chance to leave.
But I am sure
where you live. No way it could, as anyone who bothers to enter your house is only there to attack you.
Taking the life of someone without regard for who they are or why they are in your house is a spectacular way to get your little old self into a civil case that will destroy you.
Last edited:
Stevie-Ray
New member
I happen to shoot .45 ACP better than any other caliber. Do I love the fact that the bore looks huge from the other side? Absolutely.
This is an interesting discussion
It's a fact that today, a lot of kids who might commit random crimes such as muggings do not understand that getting shot...really, really hurts. Ones that have been shot have been quoted as saying that it was surprising, they didn't think it would hurt so bad. TV and movies "taught" them that a guy shot in the leg or the shoulder can grin and bear it, and carry on. Before they got shot, they thought it would hurt, but not like that, they are tough, they can take it. Yeah, right!
But that mindset translates into less fear of a .32" hole in a tube compared to a .45" hole in a tube- they are less likely to be frightened by those 'little guns that can't hurt me much'
You or I know that a .22 can ruin your day and whatever is left of your life. But you need to consider the person you might need to defend against, and their logic isn't yours. Perversely, people seem to be less afraid of being shot than they are of being stabbed, for instance. I assume that's because so few people have really been shot and related the experience, while most of us have some idea of what being sliced by a sharp object is like
It's a fact that today, a lot of kids who might commit random crimes such as muggings do not understand that getting shot...really, really hurts. Ones that have been shot have been quoted as saying that it was surprising, they didn't think it would hurt so bad. TV and movies "taught" them that a guy shot in the leg or the shoulder can grin and bear it, and carry on. Before they got shot, they thought it would hurt, but not like that, they are tough, they can take it. Yeah, right!
But that mindset translates into less fear of a .32" hole in a tube compared to a .45" hole in a tube- they are less likely to be frightened by those 'little guns that can't hurt me much'
You or I know that a .22 can ruin your day and whatever is left of your life. But you need to consider the person you might need to defend against, and their logic isn't yours. Perversely, people seem to be less afraid of being shot than they are of being stabbed, for instance. I assume that's because so few people have really been shot and related the experience, while most of us have some idea of what being sliced by a sharp object is like
Don't bring out a gun unless you are going to use it, if you use it it doesn't matter if its a 44 magnum or a 32 ACP, pink, shiny silver plated or pink, the only thing that matters is that it goes bang and a bullet comes out of the muzzle and hits what you want hit.
Mleake and Lowman,
I have to agree with you guys on your points about an intruder. I have children, they are only two and one, but I was always raised, and trained to know what you are going to shoot before you shoot it. Knowing includes the reason the person is in your home. If I see a guy creaping around my house in a ski mask, especially since I live in the South, then I'm probably not going to ask a bunch of questions, but a scariness factor would play a role in a HD gun to prevent shooting said person. We can not ignore several things here. One is if you shoot the person and they don't die, then you are almost certainly going to face a civil case. The second is if you kill them, there may still be a civil case, but now the real issue is a moral one. Taking someones life is no joke, game, or easy thing to live with, even when said action is legal self defense or war. Taking the life of someone that had no intention of harming you or your loved ones will not only be terrible legally, but psycologically.
I have to agree with you guys on your points about an intruder. I have children, they are only two and one, but I was always raised, and trained to know what you are going to shoot before you shoot it. Knowing includes the reason the person is in your home. If I see a guy creaping around my house in a ski mask, especially since I live in the South, then I'm probably not going to ask a bunch of questions, but a scariness factor would play a role in a HD gun to prevent shooting said person. We can not ignore several things here. One is if you shoot the person and they don't die, then you are almost certainly going to face a civil case. The second is if you kill them, there may still be a civil case, but now the real issue is a moral one. Taking someones life is no joke, game, or easy thing to live with, even when said action is legal self defense or war. Taking the life of someone that had no intention of harming you or your loved ones will not only be terrible legally, but psycologically.
Old Grump
You state:
The last time that I had bullets whizzing by my head, I chose cover and retreat with a gun in my hand. I was not pursued. I did not fire a shot. I lived to contact law enforcement and let them deal with the drunks shooting at me.
Now, had I followed your advice, you would not likely be seeing mine here today. Multiple assailants all armed. However, the fact that I did have a gun allowed me more options at that time. The "deterrent effect" of having a gun may have bought me the time to escape without firing a shot.
And all in all is not that what a "self-defense" gun is for, being able to walk the next day; as opposed to lying in a hospital bed, or lying six feet under?
You state:
The last time that I had bullets whizzing by my head, I chose cover and retreat with a gun in my hand. I was not pursued. I did not fire a shot. I lived to contact law enforcement and let them deal with the drunks shooting at me.
Now, had I followed your advice, you would not likely be seeing mine here today. Multiple assailants all armed. However, the fact that I did have a gun allowed me more options at that time. The "deterrent effect" of having a gun may have bought me the time to escape without firing a shot.
And all in all is not that what a "self-defense" gun is for, being able to walk the next day; as opposed to lying in a hospital bed, or lying six feet under?
Last edited:
Willie Lowman
New member
It seems that in someone's part of the world there are only three kinds of handgun finish... And two of them are pink
Let me make this very clear. Upset, drunk breaks through a window of my house at 3:00 am. This is a clear threat to me and my family! I'm not going to wait around to hear the sob story and then verify this with her "evil" boyfriend, while "evil boyfriend" could be in on this plot. I'm not going to whip out my meth-testing kit to verify that she is only "drunk".
YES, as far as I'm concerned, this is a bad guy and he/she is going to get shot.
I'm not responsible for people's bad choices in life, especially when they break into my house at 3:00 am. I am responsible for protecting my family and myself. Perhaps you think I am a heartless, uncompassionate bastard. Perhaps I am. Well, let's add that at 3:00 am, I'm one heartless uncompassionate bastard who is armed and scared for his safety when crazy drunk woman comes crashing through his window.
I have lived in the Alaska bush at times. I live in "rural" Alaska at present. Not only are there cabins and homes in the bush that do not even have locks on the doors, but even if they do they are often not locked.
It is quite possible to freeze to death quickly in the Alaskan winter. Being drunk is not the only way to end up that way. (And hypothermia can produce "drunk-like" symptoms.)
I am grateful that where I have lived in this state, the people have been helpful to me, and each other (when appearing drunk, "drunk-like", or otherwise) as I have been to them.
NickySantoro
Moderator
Is the "scariness factor" important for an SD gun?
A friend of mine was robbed by two guys with a .22 rifle. He was plenty scared.
A friend of mine was robbed by two guys with a .22 rifle. He was plenty scared.
That is a very different place from where I live. How you react does depend on the circumstances. I live in Florida, where unemployment is over 11%. We have serious problems with meth, drugs, gangs, burglary, fraud, car-jacking, armed roberies, gypsies and con artists. This is the land where mothers kill their 4 year old daughters, stuff them in the trunk of their car and go out partying the next day. If someone comes crashing into your window at 3:00a.m. you can be assured that they intend you harm. Where I live, all the houses are very different looking and on 1+ acre lots - "innocent" drunks don't just "get confused" and wonder into other people's houses.
Hesitation = dead family.
Skans
I have been to Florida. I did CC while there; Florida does recognize Alaska's ACHP.
The last time that I was shot at was NOT in Alaska; from my previous post.
Sounds like you have your opinions based on your circumstances regarding home defense. I sincerely hope that you never have to go through any type of home invasion; and live with the aftermath.
I will say again, I am grateful to live where I live. Where total strangers can help each other out, I have done this and had it done many times.
Biggest invasion problem was this morning, three moose next to the house eating the alder brush; upset one of the dogs a bit! (And almost had a cow moose come through one of my big living room windows last winter; that would have been a real home invasion problem!)
I have been to Florida. I did CC while there; Florida does recognize Alaska's ACHP.
The last time that I was shot at was NOT in Alaska; from my previous post.
Sounds like you have your opinions based on your circumstances regarding home defense. I sincerely hope that you never have to go through any type of home invasion; and live with the aftermath.
I will say again, I am grateful to live where I live. Where total strangers can help each other out, I have done this and had it done many times.
Biggest invasion problem was this morning, three moose next to the house eating the alder brush; upset one of the dogs a bit! (And almost had a cow moose come through one of my big living room windows last winter; that would have been a real home invasion problem!)
- Status