your thoughts on this situation? (blind shooter)

[thunderbyrd]

my sister in law is completely blind. her husband is a bus driver and occasionally he is gone overnight. they live in a house trailer and their nearest neighbor is about 150 feet away, i would guess. they have two big dogs that can bark their heads off, but i doubt they would attack anybody.

my SiL has fired guns before and she really likes it, as long as she's got someone to point her in the right general direction. so we had a big family gettogether a couple weeks ago and she was saying she wants a shotgun for defense at home when she is alone. she has the idea that if she needs to shoot, that buckshot is going to spread all over. but i told her that in the space inside her trailer, the shotgun will not spread much at all. i mean, we're talking less than 10 feet.

my idea is that she needs a snub nosed revolver in .38. as a matter of fact, i recommend she have 2 loaded revolvers that she can always get to. nothing to think about except point it in the direction she thinks she needs. an assaulter would have more difficulty in taking the small pistol away from her.

anybody got a better idea?

i know, from years working in a prison, and from reading about various psychotic criminals, that there are sick people in this world who are "turned on" by helplessness and prey on those who they perceive to be vulnerable.

 

[Blue Jays]

Hmmmm…this is certainly an unusual circumstance. She is absolutely entitled to safety at home.
Has she already embraced techniques like bars on windows, alarms, cameras, and bright exterior lights?
I make that suggestion to everyone before exploring the steps of armed protection.

 

[Ru4real]

Two Judges or Governors, one for each hand, loaded with 410 defensive loads designed for those guns.

The dogs will pretty much guarantee that she will never need to use the revolvers. But if she does, she needs to understand that the dogs may be injured, as well.

 

[JDeere]

Has she already embraced techniques like bars on windows, alarms, cameras, and bright exterior lights?

All fine and dandy for additional security. Of course the cameras would be of little use to a blind individual. If the lady is comfortable with using a firearm then she should go for it. Not a thing wrong with a shotgun with the right shot if she so chooses. One would be surprised at the senses a blind individual develops in other areas after losing sight or being born without. I say this is one brave woman for pushing forward...

 

[DoubleMag]

...is that she needs a snub nosed revolver in .38. as a matter of fact, i recommend she have 2 loaded revolvers that she can always get to. nothing to think about except point it in the direction she thinks she needs. an assaulter would have more difficulty in taking the small pistol away from her.

Actually it is easier to disarm a pistol vs a long gun. My vote would be a shotgun, easier to ''point shoot''. And again, harder to disarm

 

[WestKentucky]

Shockwave. If there’s ever been a good place for one, this is it. The strap on the forearm would help improve the ability to maintain control of the gun and use it as a club when it’s empty.

 

[Blue Jays]

No doubt this woman is brave and understandably eager to ensure she has control of her environment.
My thoughts behind having as fortified a home as possible is to create as much space/time before bullets fly.
That additional space/time provided would maximize a good choice in a shoot or no shoot situation.

 

[unclenunzie]

This is a very difficult defensive preparation scenario. It's difficult enough with a sighted person, and the risk factors are the same but harder to control. Unintended physical and legal consequences. I'm thinking a trusted family friend staying with her during the husband's away times. And enhanced passive security measures.

 

[Atavar]

This is one case where I just don’t see a firearm being viable. Not only must you be able to discern your target you must be able to discern your backdrop so you know where the bullet is going if it passes through or you miss.
I would much more strongly suggest professional self defense training with an instructor who is also expert in edged and blunt weapons.
Someone skilled with h2h, short sword, knife and cudgel is a formidable target and never at a loss for a weapon.

 

[Craig_AR]

I would suggest some attorneys weigh in on this topic, specifically addressing how well a blind victim could testify realistically that ,"My life was in danger, and I knew there were no innocents in the direction of fire."
Credible and supportable claim of self defense could be tricky to assert.
Innocence, Imminence, Avoidance, Reasonableness, & Proportionality?

 

[GEM]

While the usual gun forum response is to throw out equipment suggestions based on firepower, I regret that some are not well thought out. I'm researching some of the literature on low vision or blind shooters but quickly found these:

https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01727/full
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/18436163/
https://blindabilities.com/?p=5332

I would strongly disagree with the usual shotgun, shockwave suggestions as they are not well thought out.

Expecting a blind person to manipulate the gun is problematic. Yes, intensive training might enable them to rack a gun, take the safety off, etc. Keeping these guns chambered and safety off is not recommended. Will the user go through the multiple reps to guarantee successful deployment esp. without visual cues? I doubt it. Also, if the gun jams, as with a short stroke, try to clear that blind without intense reps. We know that the shotgun does not fill the room, has significant recoil. The shockwaves take practice to use so you don't eat it and recoil control takes practice.

The better gun, IMHO, is a revolver with a milder load as not to add recoil problems to the shooter. A 38/357 with mild wadcutters might fit the bill. The 410 revolvers are gimmick crap in this scenario, they are NOT room filling shotguns.

The person needs to practice (obviously without ammo, triple checked), orienting and dry firing the possible usage space and then fire the gun at the range. I'd find professiona training if such is available as to help with grip, recoil, target orientation.

Just throwing out guns is only part of it. Other options and legal evaluations are a good idea.

 

[bdickens]

A blind person with a gun is the very definition of reckless.

 

[whughett]

One needs to aim or lest point the gun in the right direction. One also, above all else needs to know who or what they are about to shoot. Neighbor, friend, family member.??? How does an unsighted person know this. Sounds like an accident looking for a place to happen.

 

[Odd Job]

I don't think a gun is the answer, for the same reason others have said: can't identify the target and can't be sure of where the rounds or pellets will go.

 

[Kleanbore]

Agree

 

[GEM]

If a distance weapon is wanted, there are impact projectors that are not firearms:

https://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog...cept-for-police-forces-and-security-agencies/

There are others out there, such as pepper ball guns but their availability - don't know about that.

The point of not being absolutely sure of target identity and background are excellent cautions. The latter point would be even more event with a heavy, recoiling long arm. Totally blind vs. low vision are quite different and sporting applications that I referenced aren't SD scenarios.

Can the person in question get a personal, to be worn, panic alarm that sounds a loud internal siren and calls the law?

 

[shafter]

I don't think a blind person with a firearm is a good idea at all. There is way too much that can go wrong. Blasting away in the general direction of what we think may be a threat is terribly reckless.

I feel for someone in that situation but there isn't alot that can be done aside from hardening the home to the point where having to deal with an assailant would be extremely unlikely. Solid door and window security coupled with a dog would be the way to go.

 

[Atavar]

Does anyone else think this makes about as much sense as Braille keys and instructions at a drive through ATM?

 

[Zerodefect]

She'd only be able to use it at contact distances against someone already hurting her.

Think that there's already a case of this out there.

 

[Craig_AR]

The dogs will pretty much guarantee that she will never need to use the revolvers

Well, not unless they are specifically trained as protective guard dogs. Take a look at the 10/13/21 ASP video Scary Home Invasion Caught On Surveillance Video noting the actions of the two reasonably large dogs in the home. John Correia points out their value as they wander around the victims and armed home invaders.

 

[FL-NC]

Be sure of your target and what is beyond it.

 

[AlexanderA]

I hate to say this, but blindness and guns don't mix. Unless the blind person is simply a collector.

It's the same as if a blind person tries to drive a car. He can own the car, but not drive it.

Yes to the rights of the handicapped, but there are logical limits.

In addition to wild off-target shooting, the blind person could very well end up being disarmed by the invader, thereby putting himself in more danger.

 

[Kleanbore]

I think the consensus is "no".