Here we go with the universalized opinions again. Doc_Jude, if you want to skip the birdshot and kill the perp, then that is your home, your gun, and your prerogative. Pay close attention to how well I avoid words like "utter ignorance." First of all, most home defense shootings are at very short distances. Consequently, the #4 birdshot does not spread much and is more lethal than you appear to think.
Yes, I'm aware, but this has more to do with the spread. It IS interesting how you seem capable of avoiding the word ignorance and not ignorance itself.
Second you have erected a straw man by quoting you "etched-in-stone cardnal rule." My stone says, "Do not point your gun at anything that you are not willing to destroy." The willingness does not communicate the obligation. The fact that I shot him means I am willing to kill him, it does not follow that I must kill him.
So... your rationale is that you're shooting the guy with a "not non-lethal" round with the intention of NOT killing him? & when you shoot him with bird shot and your gun is found to have buckshot in it, your defense for using birdshot would be "I was willing to kill him but didn't intend to kill him"??? You think that this protects you from law suit? Shooting to Wound?
I reject your cardinal rule. Thirdly, stop perpetuating the myth that I must kill someone to avoid litigation.
I wasn't. Funny, I thought that I said this:"Second... a living perp gets a criminal defense lawyer. I know that I certainly don't want any of that trouble."
Is this true, or not true? I'd rather have to deal with the D.A.'s office, or a jury of my peers. Who's issuing the Straw Man now?
Fewer people get sued for defending their homes than you may think and even fewer actually lose the lawsuit. Not to mention the fact that you may be sued by the family of the perp. YOU CAN'T SHOOT THEM!!!
Yes....
I am not shooting at a beast, I am shooting at a man; and I choose to give every man the opportunity to live. For me that means birdshot to stop him and if he does not stop I use buckshot. It's my prerogative. Again notice the lack of ad-hominem statements like "utter ignorance." Allow someone to have an opinion others than yours. It's not all that hard.
Ad Hominem is an attack upon the person, not the argument or ideology. Please educate yourself before you use such terms that "you appear to think" you're capable of using. I specifically spoke against the PLAN, not the person.
BTW, I like the roll-eyed winky smileys. It almost seems like you care.
I am not shooting at a beast, I am shooting at a man; and I choose to give every man the opportunity to live. For me that means birdshot to stop him and if he does not stop I use buckshot. It's my prerogative.
Yes, it is. Oh, & I love the condescending tone: "Pay close attention... it's not all that hard." Blah
You know what? If you read some Hobbes, you'll learn about social contract and "the state of nature". If a man violates the social contract through thinking that he is entitled to everything, even your property, then he is no less than a beast, wouldn't you think?
Are you going to shoot someone with #4 birdshot, which is apparently "more lethal than I may appear to think", with the intention of wounding them? Where will you shoot them, with this "chance-granting yet not non-lethal" round? You're going to call a shot? Good luck with that.
In my world, & the world of most intelligent people, a burglar gets many chances, many opportunities "to live".
First, he presumably knows the law.
Second, he is breaking into my home, which is not his, to take property, which is not his, or to perpetrate a crime against someone who is obviously not him (he can do whatever he likes to himself, I could care less).
His third strike would be not doing EXACTLY what the hell I tell him when I have a gun pointed at him.
If you're pointing a gun at someone who's gone through all of these steps, and then are issuing, in essence, a "warning shot" with some bird load....
Here's a little article about
SHOOTING TO WOUND
Also, I hope that you're not assuming that my stance is just shooting any and all burglars IN ORDER TO AVOID A LAWSUIT. It's not, is it? Because that would be another Straw Man on your part.