Bump in the yard 0545hrs

[ArfinGreebly]

Tactics =/= Morality

Some of you seem to be confusing the tactical situation with the morality of stopping a crime.

Since this is not the Morality Forum, but rather the Strategy & Tactics Forum, you will not be entirely surprised if those with some training and experience stress the tactical merits of the action over the moral merits.

Tactically, it is unsound to wander outside with compromised vision and/or inadequate lighting and without any support or backup.

Tactically, it is unsound to give up a secure position in favor of a pursuit of an unknown number of bad guys and no idea whether he or they are armed.

In an "all's well that ends well" sense, it turned out okay, but that's not a tactical victory, it's more a matter of luck.

Now, there are strategic issues as well, and one of those is training. People who engage bad guys for a living will tell you that there really isn't any substitute for that. Including luck.

Those who insist that "he did the right thing" in the context of social outcomes and crime prevention should remember that what may seem like a moral imperative at the time can be tactically catastrophic.

Step back a bit and separate the concept of tactical effectiveness from that of social heroism.

Stay alive, protect the family and loved ones.

Take the most tactically effective course of action, and don't get emotionally swept up in the social consequences of it all.

 

[crazyjennyblack]

OK. Put me down on the "protect my property" line of things. That is laudable in my book. However, if I can't see clearly, screw the car. My vision is what keeps me from putting a round in myself, my roommate, or a neighbor as opposed to the guy trying to kill me. Second, if a window looked out over the scene (I'm assuming that one might have, in the OP's case, but I can't speak for him) I'd prefer to open the window a crack, rather than put myself out there. The wall might not be cover, but concealment is better, and you'd be out of the way of blades, surprises from behind bushes/objects, and impact weapons. Also, LIGHT IT UP. Floodlights, car mounted lights, and porch lights are your friends. Lots of people have those little keychain thingies that make the car unlock and honk and stuff. Make the car honk. Shout, whatever. Thieves hate attention, and if they don't, they'll escalate the situation and THEN AND ONLY THEN might you be justified in using deadly force. It might be nice if the law covered protection of property more soundly, but in alot of places it doesn't, and even if it does you'll pay dearly for the lawyer bills. Still, a show of force to protect property is *generally* a good thing in a case like this, as long as you stay safe. OP's intent was good, but he could have polished up the way in which he did it. Still, everyone walked away, so it's +1 for the OP, 0 for the thieves.

 

[Sam1911]

The BG is not happy with what the cars have to offer. OP has called the police and the low priority 20 minute wait call turns into a peed off BG that wants more than what little the car has to offer. Hmm, lets see what the fridge has, I am hungry.....

You've now changed the scenario from petty property theft to home invasion. A distinct step up on the threat scale -- a step the theives made no move to take -- calling for a somewhat different response.

BG goes in the house and finds a homeowner so fear struck to do anything he takes the shotgun from him because the home owner is too afraid to defend himself, his brother or his brothers wife. Kills the hider, the hiders brother then rapes the brothers wife.

Why would you introduce the strawman argument that the homeowner is too scared to act? No one has claimed this or advocated acting like it. In fact, the homeowner was TOO 'brave' in this case. Taking an armed defensive position in your home puts you in the best possible posture to resist the home invader. To say, 'if he won't risk death and/or the taking of someone else's life in a foolhardy gambit to save a car stereo, then he must be so scared that he won't defend his loved ones' lives,' is an absurd exaggeration which ruins the point you're trying to make.

If a crime is being committed on my property it will be stopped as soon as possible. The OP has no idea how far the BG is willing to go. How do you guys that say it was bad to defend his property and family, that the BG would be happy with what was in the car?

You can only react to what the BG DOES. Not every illegal action is worthy of a lethal force response. Some are.

No one is blaming him for defending his family. He didn't -- so far as the story goes, his family was not threatened in any way. HE was not threatened in any way. He chose to raise the stakes by rushing outside without first securing "a clue." He nearly left his family fatherless/husbandless by being splattered in his own yard.

You DO NOT have the slightest clue what the BG had in mind and neither did the OP. He stopped a crime and who knows, just maybe saved a few lives that night. Maybe they called it a night after that. Maybe they had a list of crimes to commit. Maybe someone would have died, been raped, kidnapped or all of that. You have no clue.

But there was no move on the part of the criminals to commit those crimes, so he can't react to them as though they did. What they MIGHT go do later is irrelevant. All he should/can do is to make some reasonable and safe attempt to warn them off his property. Lights/dogs/alarms/sprinklers/whatever.

(And to say that, since he scared them away from his home, they stopped their crime spree and the neighborhood is safe is just woefully illogical.)

He can't be and isn't a vigilante -- stopping crimes before they happen.

That's comic book stupidity.

 

[Sam1911]

Start thinking about the crimes he STOPPED. The guy has earned a pat on the back. Start thinking of the good he did!!!!!

I know you really want this to be a victory of good folks making the world a safer place, but it just isn't so.

The only good he did was to save a few dollars worth of his own property -- through bravado and a lucky break.

Stop acting like the anti gun owning, criminals rights first people that dont even want YOU to own a firearm for any reason. Not just to defend life and liberty.

No one is advocating criminal rights. We're trying to make a valuable teaching moment out of a nearly very unfortunate event. This isn't the movies with a guaranteed happy ending. This is real life where well-intentioned decisions can have horrible, life-ending consequences.

For the person that said 12 million people being killed is tyrany and a crime being commited against one person is not. Then you have not been a victim of a crime. Tyrany comes in many forms. Twelve million people do not need to die before something becomes tyrany....

You are horribly misusing the term, and attempting to draw sympathy through gross exaggeration.

 

[Mp7]

I guess it comes down to seperating Emotions from Tactics.

Assessing the situation is key. So all of us posters here should shut their
mouth halfway. If you see them & they dont see you, you can
decide how you will engage: just by calling the cops, or by calling the
cops and the engage the BGs. That´s your choice and your risk-set.

No risk, low risk, high risk, foolish ....

Mixing anger and actions is for fools, always

 

[Gouranga]

One more thought to add to those who would advocate bringing lethal force to bear immediately.

One night about 5 years ago, my dog started growling about 10:30 pm at night. She does this only when someone is on my property. My motion light came on in back at nearly the same time. I looked out in time to see a half naked man step into the shadows behind my shed. A bit alarmed, (at the time i owned no firearms), I took a baseball bat and went out (yeah not the brightest thing but it is what it is). I got up on the dude, and suddenly realized I knew him. It was my next door neighbor. They have an annoying little ankle biter. He let him out to pee as he was heading to bed (half being in his sleep clothes) the dog ran off through the fence into my yard, and no he had to go get him. He was not about to go ringing my doorbell at 10:30 and wake the house up and we know each other pretty well. It was no big deal for him to run over and grab his dog.

I bring this up because, this had all the earmarks of something criminal going down. I got a half naked stranger in my yard at 10:30 at night who appears to be hiding behind my shed when the light came on. Going out guns drawn, would have had me putting a weapon on my neighbor. So while we analyze the OPs situation and the tactics to be employed when going out to confront an unknown trespasser, keep in mind it is not always a criminal matter, and going out with unproven assumptions on your opponent's intent, and identity is not a good thing to do. Better to go out, without the assumptions and act accordingly.

If it were to happen today, I would approach the shed from the side, gun in holster but grip clear for a draw, and pepper spray in hand. To go out with my weapon drawn, would have significantly raised the stakes that I would have shot him, and left his 3 daughters fatherless. Just something to keep in mind in the suburbs, targets need to be identified before bringing your weapon to bear.

 

[Boris bush]

through bravado and a lucky break.

The only bravado I am seeing here is the length and quantity of your posts.

You have no clue and I have no clue what the BG intentions were. A trip inside the house just might have been in the plans.

When someone plans on violating my rights or wants to take something I spent my hard earned money on and I find out about it while they are doing it. I will stop it. At some point in your life you stopped running to mommy and daddy complaining brother or sister was poking you and did something about it. Police are cleanup crews and report paper filler outers.

THe damage to the car might have cost him time lost from work, Extra money he don't have for repairs. The car might have been stolen. On that the po po would have engaged in a car chase.

You have no clue what he stopped that night and criminals happen to be big risk takers. Once the crime has started all rules are out the window. Have you ever watched as a crime was commited on your property against your property? I chased 3 kids from a neighbors house as they were beating the door in on a house where 3 old ladies lived from the ages of 86-102. Yes I had a pistol and yes I had a huge maglite (days before surefires). The police drove by 47 minutes later and did nothing but shine the light as they drove by and never stopped.

Before you reply in great length, let us know about what you have done and exactly how proper it was and some of your call mommy n daddy (the police) buddies will tell you how bad or good you did waiting for the criminals to stop poking you.

The OP did fine. He is alive, learned a few very good tips and learned how he should have accepted the fact being a victim is better than protecting what he worked hard for. Its easy to pick it apart when you were not there.

This is real life where well-intentioned decisions can have horrible, life-ending consequences.

I know. In the movies the goodguy always wins with a little drama thrown in to waste 1.5 hours. In real life real criminals can and will take it to the point of taking the life of the good guy. Criminals on my property will be requested to leave promptly. I have no clue what their full intentions are. I am not going to go to the fridge and grab a piece of pie to offer them. A Glock in 45 or a shotgun would be more tacticaly sound. I have not got the time or money to waste on a criminal destroying my proerty while I idley watch and await his possible escilation of the crime while my family watches me do nothing but hide in fear .......

 

[TexasRifleman]

The OP did fine. He is alive, learned a few very good tips and learned how he should have accepted the fact being a victim is better than protecting what he worked hard for. Its easy to pick it apart when you were not there.

He's also very lucky. This forum is "Strategies and Tactics". Going outside alone against unknown BG's is bad strategy, and bad tactics. Hopefully the lesson learned is not to do that.

The damage to the car might have cost him time lost from work, Extra money he don't have for repairs.

Or they might have killed him, in which case the car wouldn't matter.

Bottom line is the choice to open the door and confront unknown BGs alone is not a good idea and is extremely dangerous, regardless of how it worked out this time.

 

[ultradoc]

I hope they will think twice about doing this again and that they soiled their pants!

 

[Sam1911]

The only bravado I am seeing here is the length and quantity of your posts.

Do you know the definiton of the term "bravado?" Words mean specific things and when you toss them around haphazardly it confuses the reader and evicerates your argument.

You have no clue and I have no clue what the BG intentions were. A trip inside the house just might have been in the plans.

Once more: His action in running outside did not stop those criminals from invading his home. They made no move to do so. His actions also didn't stop them from doing the polka.

The time to stop them from invading his home would be when they make some move towards doing so. Then (in most states) lethal force may very legally be used. The clear and immediate need exists. And, by remaining in the house, armed, in a position of cover/security, you are in the best possible position to do so.

Maintaining a strong defensive posture makes your home a very difficult target.
Running into the yard and getting killed leaves your home pretty "soft." (Not that you'll care at that point.)

When someone plans on violating my rights or wants to take something I spent my hard earned money on and I find out about it while they are doing it. I will stop it. At some point in your life you stopped running to mommy and daddy complaining brother or sister was poking you and did something about it. Police are cleanup crews and report paper filler outers.

No one has suggested that you stand idly by while someone steals your "stuff." But there are things you may do and things you should do about it, and things that are neither legal or wise. We're trying to take this out of the knee-jerk "get off my lawn" reactions (like running outside blind, waving a shotgun) that could get you killed and move towards pragmatic, safe and sane actions that balance effective home (and "stuff") defense with true defense of LIFE. DEFENSE of life has to include awareness of when you are seriously risking LOSING your life.

THe damage to the car might have cost him time lost from work, Extra money he don't have for repairs. The car might have been stolen. On that the po po would have engaged in a car chase.

None of which matter at all if he runs outside, catches a bullet, and bleeds out on his lawn. That's tragically heroic, I guess, but dumber than a bag of hammers.

You have no clue what he stopped that night and criminals happen to be big risk takers.

Again, we know exactly what he stopped. He told us. Implying that he stopped a massive, violent crime spree by chasing a couple of stereo thieves away from his car is an appeal to exaggeration that doesn't fly.

Before you reply in great length

Awww, shucks. Wish I'd have read that first before I replied at great length. Oh well. Too late now!

The OP did fine. He is alive, learned a few very good tips and learned how he should have accepted the fact being a victim is better than protecting what he worked hard for.

I believe the OP has learned more than you're giving him credit for. At least I hope so.

Its easy to pick it apart when you were not there

If you come to a defensive strategy and tactics forum and relate something you did of that happened to you, why would it be improper for folks who study these things to give you suggestions pertinent to your situation?

The OP didn't come here to brag. He didn't come here to get patted on the back for being a hero. That's not what S&T is for.

In real life real criminals can and will take it to the point of taking the life of the good guy. Criminals on my property will be requested to leave promptly. I have no clue what their full intentions are. I am not going to go to the fridge and grab a piece of pie to offer them. A Glock in 45 or a shotgun would be more tacticaly sound. I have not got the time or money to waste on a criminal destroying my proerty while I idley watch and await his possible escilation of the crime while my family watches me do nothing but hide in fear

Again, you are exaggerating things to try to make a point which isn't logical. Requesting that criminals leave your property is a GOOD thing. There are ways to do this that don't risk your LIFE for something worth less than your life. That's not cowardice, that's WISDOM.

A Glock .45 or a shotgun are not "tactically sound" on their own. They require you to have your brain engaged to use them most effectively. No one is telling you to put down your weapons. What we are saying is that lethal force is not the DEFAULT reaction. Not the first tool in the toolbox. And that risking your life illogically has no place in a sound self-defense strategy.

You seem to want to be told that a real man will charge head first into danger because that's your definition of self-defense. To do less is to "hide in fear."

Real defensive thinking is a lot more complex than that becasue defense is about living through the event, not just showing how brave you are.

 

[Mp7]

+1 to the above.

This is the Art of War, as well as the Art of defending your Life, and
defending your possessions.

If youre not heavily on top of the situation, you do not fight unless cornered.

 

[Kleanbore]

Once the crime has started all rules are out the window.

???

Nope.

The tactical rules of successful engagement (don't get shot, stabbed, disarmed, clubbed, or stomped upon) apply until the encounter has ended.

So do the rules of law. The fact that a crime has been committed does not relieve anyone of his responsibility to abide by the law.

The OP in this case assumed an unnecessary tactical risk and was successful only because of luck.

Had he ended up using deadly force to stop any property crime that did not involve a forcible felony (an imminent threat of violence against a person) or the defense of habitation, he could face criminal charges. I'm not sure about case law involving the protection of an unoccupied vehicle in Georgia; the OP's case could have been the one to establish the precedent. That's a costly process.

The wrong turn of events in either could have ensured that this was his last such act with a lawfully owned firearm, one way or the other.

 

[hso]

If we focus on the tactics our young friend used instead of getting wrapped around other issues he'll have a better chance of learning from the experience.

Is this a difficult or easy target for BGs? While probably not armed with a gun do we want to risk that they don't have a cheap pistol?

 

[hso]

Is this guy more dangerous in the dark? If we can't see because of deep shadows or darkness do we want to encounter this guy if we don't have to? When the adrenaline if flowing our vision tunnels so it makes it even more difficult to spot people off to the side waiting to brain us in an attempt to escape without being identified or shot.

 

[hso]

So what are the best tactical options for dealing with this sort of situation?

Light up the area where there's no shadows for thugs to hide in. That tends to make cockroaches scurry and so will most low end thieves.

Be patient. Thieves usually aren't. Observe from a safe location with a commanding view. If the lights are on outside and you're watching from a dark house you can see much better than they can. Look from different angles while staying in the house. If there's more than one person to observe, have them assist. Don't go out of the house until you're confident that no on is still on the property.

If you have a car with a panic button remote and you suspect that someone is still outside hiding in shadows sound the alarm. Better to tell the neighbors that someone was driven off by the alarm than it is to end up in the hospital.

Until you think the area is safe and if you want to inspect for damage or theft, don't go out without someone backing you up. If nothing more, they can observe the general area and alert you to movement or possible danger. Take a very bright flashlight and light up shadows before you get close to them. You don't want some punk surprising you with a prybar by jumping up and taking a swing at you because they're afraid that you're going to step on them or shoot them with the shotgun. Fill every dark hole with light before you get near it.

 

[Charleo0192]

Probably would have stayed from doing what you did til I could see decent. But still, best part was them running away yelling to not shoot

 

[shockwave]

Put me down on the list of "protect your property" instead of "hide in your house and wait for the police".

If there's a list going, I'm on the "protect your property" side as well. Notice that there's been some criticism here regarding the defense of the automobiles. That's Monday-morning quarterbacking. Our homeowner here did not know until after the fact that these were petty thieves.

What was known is that the dogs were barking and intruders were on the property. And that's the crux of the matter: If I look out my window and see strangers on my land, I'm going out to find out what the hell they are doing. Absent any other information, I'm not holing up and calling for help.

The entire reason I own firearms is so that I can protect and defend my property and myself. I do not see my weapons as tools to be used only to fend off danger until the cavalry arrives. But yes, they can serve that purpose if necessary.

So a lot here in this case really depends on what you might see going on outside and how much of a threat the intruders appear to be. How many are there? How big, how old? How are they moving and what are they doing. And you could suss all that up in a first look. In this case, we've got a couple of punk kids acting hinky. Grabbing the shotgun and checking the situation out does not, in this analysis, appear to be a foolhardy move.

It is, however, a bit of a gutsy move, and the kind of move that a strong, confident man should be able to make on his own hard-earned property. Yes, these could be lethal killers, etc., but being free and living free means being able to open your door and walk out onto your land. Whoever is out there should be afraid of you!

If the sight of strangers has you reduced to barring the doors and calling for help, then I contend that you are not at liberty. On strategy and tactics, an interesting move here might have been for someone else in the house to open a side window or door and call out, "Hey, you! What are you doing?" while you take station at the door with the shotgun. You could cover them and the house and set up before they know you are in play.

But in general, just going out and running the punks off is simple and straightforward. I'm not seeing any major problems with that. Kudos to the OP for standing tall.

 

[Geno]

What happens outside of my door I let the LEOs deal with. Their eyes are already adjusted to the dark as they are on patrol. To boot, they also have all of the fun toys: spotlights, multiple sets of eyes, carbines, shotguns, handguns, mace, tasers, nightsticks, and best of all...radios. I can't add anything more than what is said...light your area, keep a dog, and call the LEOs what what happens out of doors.

I am glad no one was injured, but I would encourage you to read, and re-read the posts here. Some of these folks have genuine life experience in these matters...listen to their advice.

Geno

 

[TexasRifleman]

But in general, just going out and running the punks off is simple and straightforward. I'm not seeing any major problems with that.

Other than not knowing if they are armed and might shoot you. But I guess that's nitpicking....

If the sight of strangers has you reduced to barring the doors and calling for help, then I contend that you are not at liberty.

Unless you live in a state without prosecutors, you are not at liberty when you step outside with a firearm. Right or wrong, that's reality. Part of a defense strategy should include staying out of jail.

 

[rbernie]

It is, however, a bit of a gutsy move, and the kind of move that a strong, confident man should be able to make on his own hard-earned property. Yes, these could be lethal killers, etc., but being free and living free means being able to open your door and walk out onto your land. Whoever is out there should be afraid of you!

Dear lord - so now I'm not a real man if I choose to take an approach that prioritizes my protecting that which ACTUALLY matters to me (my wife and children)? I surely hope that this post was an effort at parody...

What happens when our GutsySteelyJawedFlintyEyedHero waltzes out the back door to confront the miscreants, only to find that while he was stumbling about in the back yard half asleep their accomplices got busy kicking in the front door?

How smart is THAT?

Some of y'all seriously do not 'get it'. Defense of person and property is not about being a man. It's not about being brave. It's about being willing and able to throw down over those things that matter, and learning how to do so with the greatest likelihood of coming out the other side in one piece and with the least legal entanglements.

That means that you first have to decide on a priority list for the things that matter to you. Then you gotta figure out the likely threats against those things. Then you gotta come up with plans on how to avoid (first) and defeat (last) those threats. Finally, you have to train yourself and those around you to read a situation appropriately and react in accordance to the plans.

Waltzing out into harms way (armed or not) without a plan or a clue, just to make a socio-political statement or to satisfy some societal expectation, is foolhardy in the extreme. Encouraging others to do so is flatly irresponsible, unless you're willing to cover the associated legal and financial commitments arising from others having accepted your bad advice.

 

[Sam1911]

Our homeowner here did not know until after the fact that these were petty thieves.

You say that like it's a GOOD thing! In reality, only sheer dumb luck allowed him to live through his mistake.

That's Monday-morning quarterbacking.

Are you suggesting that coaches, officials, and other interested parties don't review game tapes and try to learn from what happened? That's a silly argument.

So a lot here in this case really depends on what you might see going on outside and how much of a threat the intruders appear to be.

That is VERY good advice. Observe. Evaluate. Plan. Take whatever steps are in your defensive plan in case petty theft is not all these guys have on their minds.

If I look out my window and see strangers on my land, I'm going out to find out what the hell they are doing.

Why? Don't you have some other way to give them notice that you are aware of them and the police are on the way? What about the car alarm panic button, the flood lights, yelling a challenge from a safe vantage point, releasing the dogs, turning on the sprinklers -- heck, playing "Flight of the Valkyries" over a loudspeaker! D) It doesn't matter much how you do it, except that you don't have to present yourself before them like a human silhouette target or piñata!

The idea that you will sally forth and give combat to these brigands who've affronted your sacred domain is foolhardy.

Yeah, you might be running off some 14-year-old pranksters. Or you might be walking into an experienced gang who have more practice at using violence than do you.

Observe, evaluate, plan, and then make sure that your next move is a notch or two LESS risky than you think prudent.

It is, however, a bit of a gutsy move, and the kind of move that a strong, confident man should be able to make on his own hard-earned property. Yes, these could be lethal killers, etc., but being free and living free means being able to open your door and walk out onto your land. Whoever is out there should be afraid of you!

How many bullets does it take to kill a "strong, confident man on his own ground?" What law of nature says ANYONE should be "afraid of you?" These are hollow platitudes and grandiose daydreaming. Remember, John Wayne's scriptwriter had a vested interest in seeing our hero live to appear in the next film. Does yours?

On strategy and tactics, an interesting move here might have been for someone else in the house to open a side window or door and call out, "Hey, you! What are you doing?" while you take station at the door with the shotgun. You could cover them and the house and set up before they know you are in play.

NOW you're back in the real world! Defensive positions. Use of cover. Use of light and shadow. Even use of misdirection with another person doing the talking! Nice. THIS is worth something.

 

[Joe Demko]

It is, however, a bit of a gutsy move, and the kind of move that a strong, confident man should be able to make on his own hard-earned property.

I'm strong and confident enough that I won't feel castrated by placing a higher priority on the safety of my family and myself (especially since I am the breadwinner) than on a used car.

 

[hso]

We've had some sound tactical advice for this sort of situation, but we've had a lot of postulation about manhood, social obligation, legalities, freedom, etc. that just don't contribute to the discussion.

Should you engage in a confrontation? Not if you can avoid it.
How do you avoid it? Do nothing? Sure, but that's not a useful approach in achieving the goal of making sure you and your property are secure.

What ways can we make sure both our property and ourselves are secure without doing nothing? Lights, fences, dogs, clear lines of sight/fire, alarms, use of concealment and cover, coordinated observers, distraction/deception, and an understanding that there are rings of safety that start at the wall, porch and lighted area of the property that become progressively less secure and less safe the further from the security of the house we move and that there are smart ways to improve the safety of those regions. That's the value of this discussion.

For those of you concerned about "manhood" perhaps it would be more constructive to offer advice that the young, the elderly as well as the fit, fearsome and fearless can use to ensure their security and the security of their property so they don't become a news report we end up discussing and critiquing.

 

[waterhouse]

Our homeowner here did not know until after the fact that these were petty thieves.

Isn't that sort of the point? He went into a mostly unknown situation. He may have known the MINIMUM number of people he was facing (you know, the ones he could see). He didn't know the maximum number, and he didn't know their intentions, and he didn't know their capabilities.

So a lot here in this case really depends on what you might see going on outside and how much of a threat the intruders appear to be. How many are there? How big, how old? How are they moving and what are they doing. And you could suss all that up in a first look. In this case, we've got a couple of punk kids acting hinky. Grabbing the shotgun and checking the situation out does not, in this analysis, appear to be a foolhardy move.

emphasis added

In this case, based on our Monday morning quarterbacking, we know that all it was was a couple of punk kids looking "hinky". Because everything turned out exactly how it appeared, the OP ended up unharmed.

At the time, the OP only knew what he could see through his admittedly sleepy and blurred vision, in the dark. To repeat, when you are in your home, looking outside, you can only count and size up the minimum number of people you may be dealing with. If you see 2 punks kids acting hinky, there may be 2 punk kids, or there may be 4.

So you see 2 punk kids acting hinky on your property, and you grab your shotgun and walk out to see what is going on. You have the upper hand, because you can see both people and you have the shotgun, and you know how to use it. Now the third guy who was just waiting for someone to walk out the door blindsides you with a steel pipe, and now there are three guys over your unconscious body and they have your shotgun. Oh, and your door is wide open. Hope your wife and children are up for dealing with 3 guys walking into your house, one with a steel pipe and one with a shotgun.

It is, however, a bit of a gutsy move, and the kind of move that a strong, confident man should be able to make on his own hard-earned property. Yes, these could be lethal killers, etc., but being free and living free means being able to open your door and walk out onto your land. Whoever is out there should be afraid of you!

I guess you and I disagree in our versions of living free. I like to put emphasis on both of those words, Living and Free. For me it is a simple risk reward analysis. Best case is I protect everything in my car, saving me a $500 deductible. Worst case is myself, wife, and daughter get killed because I opened the door to my house knowing that there were bad people outside.

Would I be pissed that someone took my stuff? Heck yes. Would a younger version of me gone charging out to protect that stuff? Possibly. I'm not much older now, but I'm wise enough to know what actually has value in my life, and during sleeping hours none of it is in my car and all of it is in my house.

On strategy and tactics, an interesting move here might have been for someone else in the house to open a side window or door and call out, "Hey, you! What are you doing?" while you take station at the door with the shotgun. You could cover them and the house and set up before they know you are in play.

This seems like a much more reasonable idea to me than unlocking the door while there are criminals outside at night.

 

[HunterBear71]

This has been an entertaining thread . I have to agree with the folks who advocate defending your property. However, stumbling around outside with blurry vision is a tactical mistake. A spotlight on the thieves would have probably sent them running just as effectively.