Guns safety in home defence situations

[Moontanman]

May I make a suggestion? Go to the expense of an actual gun safe, 10 gauge steel, at least 1" diameter bolts on all *four* sides of the door. It will cost a couple grand, but it's worth it.

 

We keep our guns in a real gun safe now. If you remember when I got robbed, someone stole my previous 20 gauge shotgun out of my pretend Wal-mart gun safe and who knows if they used it on someone? I have a responsibility to society to be sure my weapon is secure. If it really was, then it couldn't have been stolen. That's on me. I should have gone to more trouble to be sure that safe was secure for at least the average robbery attempt.

 

We have kids, and they way we dealt with this is the safe stays locked until we go to bed. I dial it open, but I don't open it. At this point, if I need my 12 gauge shotgun with shells designed for home defense, I can easily access my safe without fumbling the combination. Since the inside of the safe serves as home base for my keys, wallet, phone and all that, there is no "forgetting" to lock the safe each morning.

 

This does not remedy the infamous evening time home invasion. But, it's far more likely a child will get their hands on your gun by accident than you being faced with a home invasion so I cannot justify leaving the safe open in the evenings (not to mention of course, it ruins the whole point of having a safe).

 

In the event of a home invasion, we plan on throwing anything and everything out of the windows of our house, as many as we can while screaming our fool heads off. I want my yard to be littered with glass and debris all over the yard in a matter of seconds. With screaming weirdos, broken open windows and commotion like that, I don't think they're going to stay long. They can't really hang out and terrorize people when they're seen and heard from the street.

 

Just my two cents.

 

 

That is a reasonable reaction, children do change the mix, when i was little touching a gun with out permission was simply not within my behavior due to rather harsh training. I did not want to transfer that type of experience to my children so i did put trigger locks on my guns when my sons were young but I kept a single shot shotgun under the edge of my water bed with shells hidden between the mattress and the side board where i could get to them in a few seconds. The gun was in three pieces and I could put them together in the dark very fast. My dogs are always my first line of defense, they are aware of the slightest disturbance outside and let me know immediately, any one breaking in by force would be stopped long enough by them for me to get to my gun and a break in by stealth would be just as difficult. Try to sneak past a basset hound....

[CharonY]

Just out of interest, are there statistics regarding home invasions? Unfortunately it is not a listed as a separate crime but rather falls into e.g. robbery or assault. But I am interested in figuring out how high the risk is in relation to e.g. accidents (touching on something that was said earlier).

[rigney]

Just out of interest, are there statistics regarding home invasions? Unfortunately it is not a listed as a separate crime but rather falls into e.g. robbery or assault. But I am interested in figuring out how high the risk is in relation to e.g. accidents (touching on something that was said earlier).

Not to upset you, but do listings really matter? You go to bed at night never to wake up. With nothing invasive, it's generally considered a natural death, unless the coroner finds something in your blood sample to offer an entirely new avenue?. A schizo with robbery in mind don't give a damn if you have a hundred weapons and tons of ammo. You pop up from bed with a 'Daa' expression on your face and you may be toast. Gun safes? Get two or three of them. But when you go to bed at night, let the perp be wondering if he should intruding?? Edited July 25, 2012 by rigney

[Moontanman]

Where I live there have been two, I think, maybe three violent daytime or evening home invasions in the last three years or so. None of the people were able to respond and violence was done to the people inside the house in all cases. Regular break ins, stealth type, happen more often but seem to usually result in no injury just a smash and grab type thing, usually by someone the victims knew.

 

In none of the cases I'm aware of did the victims have dogs...

 

I have to admit I am guilty of late of carrying my shotgun around with me in the house during the day, drug dealers are too unpredictable but I do listen to my dogs and when they run to the door and sniff and act restless i do check and see if anyone is walking around my yard. Four times I have accosted someone who was in my yard for no good reason but they were not obviously up to anything and the noise of the dogs seemed to concern them greatly.

[Arete]

The Cap'n is right and the idea of a fire and an intruder being similar is a totally false analogy.

 

The point was to illustrate disproportionate responses to relative risk. Having a loaded gun under your pillow to prevent you being murdered in your sleep, whilst being reliant on the fire department to save you if your house catches fire are disproportionate measures, given the relative risk of these tragedies. Responding or preparing disproportionately to the risk of an event actually occurring, especially if that response or preparation has potentially negative outcomes (like leaving a loaded handgun under your pillow could) is not logical. If I found myself so scared of an intruder I was doing something like that, I personally, would be concerned about my phobia/anxiety.

Edited July 26, 2012 by Arete

[rigney]

May I make a suggestion? Go to the expense of an actual gun safe, 10 gauge steel, at least 1" diameter bolts on all *four* sides of the door. It will cost a couple grand, but it's worth it.

 

We keep our guns in a real gun safe now. If you remember when I got robbed, someone stole my previous 20 gauge shotgun out of my pretend Wal-mart gun safe and who knows if they used it on someone? I have a responsibility to society to be sure my weapon is secure. If it really was, then it couldn't have been stolen. That's on me. I should have gone to more trouble to be sure that safe was secure for at least the average robbery attempt.

 

We have kids, and they way we dealt with this is the safe stays locked until we go to bed. I dial it open, but I don't open it. At this point, if I need my 12 gauge shotgun with shells designed for home defense, I can easily access my safe without fumbling the combination. Since the inside of the safe serves as home base for my keys, wallet, phone and all that, there is no "forgetting" to lock the safe each morning.

 

This does not remedy the infamous evening time home invasion. But, it's far more likely a child will get their hands on your gun by accident than you being faced with a home invasion so I cannot justify leaving the safe open in the evenings (not to mention of course, it ruins the whole point of having a safe).

 

In the event of a home invasion, we plan on throwing anything and everything out of the windows of our house, as many as we can while screaming our fool heads off. I want my yard to be littered with glass and debris all over the yard in a matter of seconds. With screaming weirdos, broken open windows and commotion like that, I don't think they're going to stay long. They can't really hang out and terrorize people when they're seen and heard from the street.

 

Just my two cents.

Bless your "Pea Pickin' Heart"! And I mean that affectionatly not condenscendingly. But do you believe a deranged person with mayhem in mind will give a rats tu tu what you throw out the window or how hard you scream to wake up your neighbor? I believe in absolute gun control. A shaky hand or being untrained in the use of fire arms is not the best way to approach a perp. But half a loaf is better than no bread at all. Best thing, get some training and a hand gun, at least. Edited July 26, 2012 by rigney

[rigney]

While I agree with you, security guards at many American corporate facilities tend to be laughable to the point of "Why bother?" The security guard at my office is probably 97 years old (ok, that's an exaggeration, but not much of one - he's got to be at least 70) and he only sits at one entrance. The other one they simply rely on the RFID badge device to make sure no one who isn't supposed to be there gets inside. Penetrating this office for someone intent on doing harm is so easy it's laughable.

 

Public venues such as malls, shopping centers, and theaters (movie and otherwise) are even worse. You might have eight or ten on duty guards to cover a mall of a couple hundred thousand square feet. Even if they do see something on the cameras, by the time they get to that location, the guy is already inside buried in a crowd of thousands.

 

At a small facility, such as the theater standing on it's own, you'd be lucky if there is a single security guard, and if there is, he's out front, not in the back, so getting inside is just a matter of waiting until someone comes out one of the exit doors and using it to get inside.

 

Once again I have to agree with Mooey that stopping the attack before it starts is always the best answer. But that required a diligence in observation that comes with a price tag.

 

The over-arching issue is that people in America feel relatively safe, and security costs money. We'll pay more attention for a few months (maybe longer in the area the event actually happened in) but after a while, we get lulled back into complacency.

Until the next time.

Facts are facts. As a kid, one night I heard a noise outside my window and like any dumb ass, cracked the shutter to take a better look see. That bear must have been two or three hundred pounds. Season wasn't in, so i closed the shutter; dragged my shotgun a little closer to the bed and went back to sleep. He wasn't out to do harm, just hungry; I guess?

 

While I agree with you, security guards at many American corporate facilities tend to be laughable to the point of "Why bother?" The security guard at my office is probably 97 years old (ok, that's an exaggeration, but not much of one - he's got to be at least 70) and he only sits at one entrance. The other one they simply rely on the RFID badge device to make sure no one who isn't supposed to be there gets inside. Penetrating this office for someone intent on doing harm is so easy it's laughable.

 

Public venues such as malls, shopping centers, and theaters (movie and otherwise) are even worse. You might have eight or ten on duty guards to cover a mall of a couple hundred thousand square feet. Even if they do see something on the cameras, by the time they get to that location, the guy is already inside buried in a crowd of thousands.

 

At a small facility, such as the theater standing on it's own, you'd be lucky if there is a single security guard, and if there is, he's out front, not in the back, so getting inside is just a matter of waiting until someone comes out one of the exit doors and using it to get inside.

 

Once again I have to agree with Mooey that stopping the attack before it starts is always the best answer. But that required a diligence in observation that comes with a price tag.

 

The over-arching issue is that people in America feel relatively safe, and security costs money. We'll pay more attention for a few months (maybe longer in the area the event actually happened in) but after a while, we get lulled back into complacency.

 

Until the next time.

Edited July 26, 2012 by rigney

[imatfaal]

!

Moderator Note

This topic was split off from the discussion about gun control - PM me if you feel I moved a message in error

[CharonY]

Not to upset you, but do listings really matter?

 

Yes, they do. It will depend a lot on location, I presume. According to Moon in his area it appears to be rather frequently and safeguards may be prudent. However, I would think that in most areas the risk is negligible. Why I consider it relevant is that the safety is a big argument for having quick access to guns in your home. This has several implications. The first is that people are afraid. My question is whether the fear is justified (and again, this is going to be area-dependent) or whether it is just a media-inspired fear. I.e. whether the actions taken are in no relation to the actual risk.

Examples for bad risk assessments would be e.g. having a gun in the house, but no fire extinguisher. Or a gun in the car, but not wearing seat belts.

It is kind of odd, but living in the US has made me realize that fear is quite pervasive in society and in many cases it does not really correlate with real risk. Of course things happen, and it may happen to you or someone you love and in retrospect you would have wished that you have prepared accordingly.

However, everything is a matter of chance and people choose very strange priorities, and I think that people are being manipulated by it. Guns and the safety argument appear to be a very strong factor. In other countries where guns are allowed the relationship appears to be quite different.

[imatfaal]

CharonY - I was very curious about the chances of home invasion/murder as well; this table is taken from the 2011 North Carolina DoJ Crime Survey ¹ (and Moontanman - not getting at you in the least it was the first state that came to mind bearing in mind this discussion)

 

I presume that murder arising in a home invasion situation will be listed in Burglary - the English common law accepted usage is

"The breaking and entering the house of another in the night time, with intent to commit a felony therein, whether the felony be actually committed or not"²

 

 

 

Circumstance2002200320042005200620072008200920102011Rape1 1 Robbery16171118161423161715Burglary63213 21 Larceny11 1 Arson4 1 Other Sex Offenses 1 Narcotic Drug Laws1813161219105952Lover's Quarrel 11 213 Argument144132130141144132128115111124Gangland Killings38436256110Other Circumstances182168147155144198179157131130Unknown Circumstances173165201242205250259182199220 1 1 1 Total548508512575539606603488468501

 

 

Crap - that table was fine in preview !

 

 

 

I cannot find statistics relating to injury during a burglary - or the number of aggressive (as opposed to secretive) burglaries

 

1. http://crimereportin...ov/Reports.aspx

2. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burglary

Edited July 26, 2012 by imatfaal
Ok pasted in bad screenshot - but you can see the figures

[ParanoiA]

It is difficult to use current crime statistics to pin down home invasion statistics - home invasion being a particular style of executing the same general list of crimes.

 

I agree with the wikipedia definition of home invasion: Home invasion is the act of illegally entering a private and occupied dwelling with violent intent for the purpose of committing a crime against the occupants such as robbery, assault, rape, murder, or kidnapping.

 

And I think the important distinction is the intent to commit violent crimes against the occupants, rather than to merely neutralize the occupants while they take their stuff. It also think it deserves distinction from the same crimes committed outside an enclosed structure such as a home. All of those violent crimes can be better enabled and realized, as well as escalated and prolonged by many orders over the street level version.

 

Interesting bit here from Home Invasion News about the issues with FBI crime stats:

 

http://www.homeinvasionnews.com/home-invasion-statistics-and-definitions-from-the-fbi/

 

 

The FBI, which compiles a range of crime statistics from data collected around the country, has no information on the number and rate of “home invasions.” The most relevant national crime statistic related to “classic home invasion” would be “robbery.”

 

Why robbery?

 

The FBI classifies robbery as a “violent crime.” By the FBI’s definition, violent crimes include: murder and non-negligent manslaughter, forcible rape, robbery, and aggravated assault.

 

So far so good, but the FBI’s definition of robbery is, “The taking or attempting to take anything of value from the care, custody, or control of a person or persons by force or threat of force or violence and/or by putting the victim in fear.” Clearly some robberies, while very serious, are not home invasions (car jacking comes to mind).

 

In addition to “robbery,” another FBI category of crime — aggravated assault — is sometimes associated with classic home invasion.

 

The FBI says that “aggravated assault” is “an unlawful attack by one person upon another for the purpose of inflicting severe or aggravated bodily injury. This type of assault usually is accompanied by the use of a weapon or by means likely to produce death or great bodily harm. Simple assaults are excluded.”

 

Again, although aggravated assault is a characteristic of classic home invasion, aggravated assaults are not necessarily “home invasions.” For example, beating someone badly with an object behind a bar or in an alley, is not a home invasion, but it is likely an aggravated assault.

 

And then there’s “burglary.”

 

As defined by the FBI, burglary is “The unlawful entry of a structure to commit a felony or a theft” (attempted forcible entry is included).” By the FBI’s definition, burglary itself does not incorporate the use of force or violence. This is an important distinction, because, in “classic home invasion,” violence or the threat of violence is part of our understanding.

Edited July 26, 2012 by ParanoiA