Ok, there was another thread on this but someone had responded with such a true and relevant statement that I thought it was necessary to start another thread on the topic

somewhere along the lines someone brainwahed you into that old adage of "make sure he's in the house before you shoot"

Sometimes we follow a way of thinking without knowing why this particular train of thought ever came about.  Same is true with some tactics.   The whole "waiting until he's inside" thing is nothing more than the result of a liberal anti gun, anti self defense, sue happy mentality that tells us that it's better not to be sued and risk a little harm to ourself than it is to exercise good common sense.

Let me digress for a minute and tell a brief war story......many moons ago I was a young rookie involved in my first shoot out and high speed chase.  As we are driving the wrong way down a one way street with this guy shooting at me (several rounds through the car) I'm thinking one thing..........."Man, I could get into so much trouble if I wreck my car being that I'm going to wrong way".         HELLO, I'M BEING SHOT AT!  THIS A-HOLE IS TRYING TO KILL ME AND I'M THINKING ABOUT POLICY VIOLATIONS!!!!   Because this is how I was trained to think.   I won that encounter that night and went home to my family.....and the bad guy went to the morgue.

I vowed after that night to always put common sense first, F**K the lawyers and policy.  When you fight with bullets its for keeps.  Stop believing in this crap that "he has to be inside".  

I can tell you from years in the business it's very rare that a home invader ever works alone.  Someone brazen enough to kick the door down of an occupied dwelling has no fear......and won't hesitate to do you harm.   What if they're coming though a window?  Are you going to give him a chance to get into a good fighting posture?  I'm not.

It really baffels me for all the macho talk that gets thrown around here about "Molon Labe" and "Can't trust the Dang Dot-Gov to protect me and my own"  and "I'll take business into my own hands" when I "draw down" and "shoot till slide lock"   That these are some of the same people screaming for the arrest and prosecution of people who exercised deadly force to protect themsleves INSIDE THEIR HOMES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Home many of you agreed with the arrest and prosecution of the man from NY city who shot a burglar inside his daughters bedroom because it's was "an unregistered illegal handgun"?  That flew in the face of the 2nd Amendment.  Did you support that arrest?

Why?  I just don't understand.

Oh, and let's not get started about "he couldn't see his target".   Maybe there was a glass section of the door, maybe there was a peephole that he quickly looked through prior to shooting....maybe , maybe, maybe.........

he did the right thing and another bad guy is dead!  Good for him.

Let's go back to the main point......Don't get brainwashed by thinking that is intended to prevent lawsuits as opposed to thinking that is intented to prevent you from getting killed.

Quoted: Or move to a state that has a home is your castle law. I would shoot at someone in my house, crawling through my window, bashing in my door ... but probably not one walking down my street, and certainly not some guy at the drive up window at Wendys. You speak the having the proper mindset prior to engaging in this - the observe to action loop. Lots of people get stuck in the metal decission portion of the loop prior to dropping the hammer on someone who is more than willing to do the same on you and who as already completed the decission a long time ago. Lt.Col. Dave Grossman speaks of this thought process in his excellent books On Killing and On Combat.

Have you seen some of the guys in the Wendy's drive-up?

Seriously though, that is the main point----going straight from Observing to Acting as much as is possible.  We all get caught in the "white zone" and might go through a full OODA loop.  But making a decision now to live and face litigation later is imperative for survival.  

So, as a cop, you are advising us to shoot through the door?  I'll assume that anyone banging on my door is a target and take a shot.  Why bother to make sure?  After all, the "law" says it's cool, and I have no further responsibility.  You a Portland cop?  Might explain some of the shootings up here.

Quoted: So, as a cop, you are advising us to shoot through the door?  I'll assume that anyone banging on my door is a target and take a shot.  Why bother to make sure?  After all, the "law" says it's cool, and I have no further responsibility.  You a Portland cop?  Might explain some of the shootings up here.

I left your name out because I was trying to bring up a valid point.  If you want to troll then fine.  Common sense answers your question but if you have none then I'll answer it for you.

If the UPS mans comes knocking.....Don't shoot
If the Mail man comes knocking......Don't shoot
If your neighbor is ringing the doorbell......Don't shoot

If anyone, including the above three people, are actively kicking down your door with such force you can only be lead to the conclusion that this is an illegal forced entry then.......go ahead and shoot.  Please make every attempt possible to shoot the person doing the kicking by the way as I already stated in other posts that "spray and pray" is never advocated.

Quoted: So, as a cop, you are advising us to shoot through the door?  I'll assume that anyone banging on my door is a target and take a shot.  Why bother to make sure?  After all, the "law" says it's cool, and I have no further responsibility.  You a Portland cop?  Might explain some of the shootings up here.

No, as a person with common sense I'm advocating shooting through the door at intruders.

You think the old man should have shot through the door on this guy?

Convicted killer pleads for life in stomping death of war vet, 91

By Tonya Alanez
Staff Writer
Posted December 27 2005, 9:04 PM EST


Gabby Tennis told a Broward judge Tuesday that he doesn't want to die.

In a reversal from one month ago when Tennis pleaded with a jury to sentence him to death for the slaying of a 91-year-old disabled war veteran, Tennis asked Broward Circuit Judge Susan Lebow to disregard those words.

"Please don't kill me," Tennis said to Lebow. "I don't want to die. I want to live."

Tennis, 21, was convicted of first-degree murder in September for the stomping death of Albert Vessella, of Hollywood, during a home invasion robbery in June 2003. Tennis and his ex-girlfriend, Sophia Adams, 19, who pleaded guilty to her role in the killing, went to Vessella's house to steal money to pay a dowry demanded by Adams' mother, Liza Boltos.

Tennis told jurors he would rather die than spend his life in prison for a crime he says he didn't commit. Jurors, after an hour of deliberation, returned an 8-to-4 recommendation that Tennis be executed.

"I don't know what I was thinking by coming up and telling those people to kill me," Tennis said, explaining that he had come to his senses since resuming his psychotropic medications. "Please, your honor, disregard those words. Please have mercy on me, please spare my life."

Vessella, a former Crime Watch president, was left with a broken neck and ribs and the imprints of Tennis' sneakers on his body, prosecutor Howard Scheinberg said.

The defense used Tuesday's hearing to try to persuade Lebow to veto the jury's recommendation to put Tennis to death.

As the start of the hearing neared, Tennis, dressed in a white undershirt and a black and gray jail-issued jumpsuit, seemed to grow increasingly agitated, admonishing his relatives in the courtroom and taunting and cursing the prosecutor.

Alternating between Romanian and English, he urged his family to leave: "Just go home, go ahead. God bless you guys, go on. Please."

Defense attorney Patrick Rastatter told Lebow he had trouble convincing Tennis' family to speak at the hearing.

Rastatter said he wanted Tennis' 17-year-old sister, Savannah, to describe their upbringing in the Gypsy culture, but she declined, saying she was worried she might say something to get their father, Leo Tennis, in trouble.

"As we sit here, I have no family members to offer to you except Leo Tennis," Rastatter said.

Gabby Tennis said his father was reluctant to speak because he felt that the prosecutor had tricked him into testifying against his son during the trial and feared being tricked again.

Standing at a lectern in the middle of the courtroom, Leo Tennis told the judge he tried to teach his son to respect others.

Tennis said he believed his son when he told him he wasn't guilty of the crime, and that's why he talked him out of taking a plea offer that would have spared his life.

Nearing tears, the father complained that the judge had denied their repeated requests for a new attorney.

"He's against us," Leo Tennis said, pointing at Rastatter. "They're killing me, they're killing my son for no reason. Where is the law? Where is the justice? This should have never happened. This should not have gone this far."

Rastatter gave Lebow a memorandum in support of life imprisonment. Scheinberg has 30 days to submit a written response. Lebow will set a sentencing date after that.

"Why should my son die for something he didn't do?" Gabby Tennis' stepmother, Mona Tennis, asked in the hallway after the hearing.

She said her son was so in love with Sophia Adams that he let her and her mother lead him in the wrong direction. Adams' mother, Boltos, sometimes cleaned house for Vessella.

"He had no criminal background," she said. "They've been doing this with the elderly for a long time."

Boltos, 46, is facing a felony charge in Miami-Dade County for exploiting the elderly in excess of $200,000.

Tennis still faces an open case regarding a home invasion robbery of an elderly woman in Miramar, committed two weeks before Vessella's death.

Quoted: Ok, there was another thread on this but someone had responded with such a true and relevant statement that I thought it was necessary to start another thread on the topic somewhere along the lines someone brainwahed you into that old adage of "make sure he's in the house before you shoot" Sometimes we follow a way of thinking without knowing why this particular train of thought ever came about.  Same is true with some tactics.   The whole "waiting until he's inside" thing is nothing more than the result of a liberal anti gun, anti self defense, sue happy mentality that tells us that it's better not to be sued and risk a little harm to ourself than it is to exercise good common sense. Let me digress for a minute and tell a brief war story......many moons ago I was a young rookie involved in my first shoot out and high speed chase.  As we are driving the wrong way down a one way street with this guy shooting at me (several rounds through the car) I'm thinking one thing..........."Man, I could get into so much trouble if I wreck my car being that I'm going to wrong way".         HELLO, I'M BEING SHOT AT!  THIS A-HOLE IS TRYING TO KILL ME AND I'M THINKING ABOUT POLICY VIOLATIONS!!!!   Because this is how I was trained to think.   I won that encounter that night and went home to my family.....and the bad guy went to the morgue. I vowed after that night to always put common sense first, F**K the lawyers and policy.  When you fight with bullets its for keeps.  Stop believing in this crap that "he has to be inside".   I can tell you from years in the business it's very rare that a home invader ever works alone.  Someone brazen enough to kick the door down of an occupied dwelling has no fear......and won't hesitate to do you harm.   What if they're coming though a window?  Are you going to give him a chance to get into a good fighting posture?  I'm not. It really baffels me for all the macho talk that gets thrown around here about "Molon Labe" and "Can't trust the Dang Dot-Gov to protect me and my own"  and "I'll take business into my own hands" when I "draw down" and "shoot till slide lock"   That these are some of the same people screaming for the arrest and prosecution of people who exercised deadly force to protect themsleves INSIDE THEIR HOMES!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Home many of you agreed with the arrest and prosecution of the man from NY city who shot a burglar inside his daughters bedroom because it's was "an unregistered illegal handgun"?  That flew in the face of the 2nd Amendment.  Did you support that arrest? Why?  I just don't understand. Oh, and let's not get started about "he couldn't see his target".   Maybe there was a glass section of the door, maybe there was a peephole that he quickly looked through prior to shooting....maybe , maybe, maybe......... he did the right thing and another bad guy is dead!  Good for him. Let's go back to the main point......Don't get brainwashed by thinking that is intended to prevent lawsuits as opposed to thinking that is intented to prevent you from getting killed.

All good thoughts. I voted in the guy's favor.

i wish that Klingon would contribute something intelligent, or go back to the Star Trek convention Just kidding you Trekkie, but seriously, defect from the Cop Hating Nation.

I police in a state that has a provision in the law that allows deadly force to be used if someone is attempting to enter your house in a "violent and tulmutious manner", ie kicking in doors and windows.  I have been asked 1 million times "if somebody is trying to kill me can I kill him first?".  The next question is always "do I need to drag him inside the house?".

In GA the provisions in state law refering to use of deadly force refer to the use by a "person".  There is no special provisions for LEO's, all citizens are held to the same standards.  

Quoted: i wish that Klingon would contribute something intelligent, or go back to the Star Trek convention Just kidding you Trekkie, but seriously, defect from the Cop Hating Nation. I police in a state that has a provision in the law that allows deadly force to be used if someone is attempting to enter your house in a "violent and tulmutious manner", ie kicking in doors and windows.  I have been asked 1 million times "if somebody is trying to kill me can I kill him first?".  The next question is always "do I need to drag him inside the house?". In GA the provisions in state law refering to use of deadly force refer to the use by a "person".  There is no special provisions for LEO's, all citizens are held to the same standards.

I agree, but for some reason people always believe that LEO's get a special nod.....too much TV I suppose.  The truth is most State's Attorney's love to fry LEO's.

Guard your home.  It's your right, it's your duty.

Amen brother!!!

Quoted: Let me digress for a minute and tell a brief war story......many moons ago I was a young rookie involved in my first shoot out and high speed chase.  As we are driving the wrong way down a one way street with this guy shooting at me (several rounds through the car) I'm thinking one thing..........."Man, I could get into so much trouble if I wreck my car being that I'm going to wrong way".         HELLO, I'M BEING SHOT AT!  THIS A-HOLE IS TRYING TO KILL ME AND I'M THINKING ABOUT POLICY VIOLATIONS!!!!   Because this is how I was trained to think.   I won that encounter that night and went home to my family.....and the bad guy went to the morgue.

I have made this point before, when people paint some officers as trigger happy; the reality is that many officers hesitate to fire because of things liek concerns over policy, liability, etc

Home many of you agreed with the arrest and prosecution of the man from NY city who shot a burglar inside his daughters bedroom because it's was "an unregistered illegal handgun"?  That flew in the face of the 2nd Amendment.  Did you support that arrest? Why?  I just don't understand.

Regardless of the justification of the shooting itself, the possession of the unregistered pistol in that locale is an entirely different legal issue. A legal self defense shooting means abiding by all relevant legal requirements.

Quoted: In a reversal from one month ago when Tennis pleaded with a jury to sentence him to death for the slaying of a 91-year-old disabled war veteran, Tennis asked Broward Circuit Judge Susan Lebow to disregard those words.

A 91-year old disabled vet is a bit different than a 20-something cop who had time to retrieve his weapon and scope out the perp.  Good, I'm glad the bad guy is dead.  I question his need to shoot through a door.  As was said in the other thread, the law is on his side.  As a cop, I would hope you excercise a little more restraint in the same situation.  If not, please re-eval your carreer or your training.  

Quoted: If not, please re-eval your carreer or your training.

I "re-eval'd" my training many years ago when I realized it was policy/liability oriented.  That was in the orginal post.  And were does your 'expertise' stem from other than the QB position in the lounge chair?

So like I said......Concearn yourself with surviving the fight, and deal with the litigation later.

So what if, for arguments sake, the guy trying to kick the door down is you and your buds running a no-knock on the wrong house?

Quoted: So what if, for arguments sake, the guy trying to kick the door down is you and your buds running a no-knock on the wrong house?

First, we don't run no-knocks on the wrong house.....I won't go into our operational plans but we go to great lengths to avoid this.

We also annouce our presence....LOUDLY AND CLEARLY.  We also ensure we are well identified by our uniforms and gear as well as lighting.  If it's not light outside, we bring our own sun......Spotlights from vehicles and helicopters.

I'm not trying to side step the argument....My team just takes the right steps to avoid this mistake.



Anyway, back to the original post.....

Bump for the day shifters

tagged...

You have two types really, those that own or carry a gun for a specific purpose, and those that own or carry a gun for a toy. It shows in their keyboard attitude.  You'll never reach the latter.

Think about every gun vs gun thread you've ever read.  Remember the people whose major consideration  is whichever is the "prettier" gun?

Quoted: Quoted: If not, please re-eval your carreer or your training.   I "re-eval'd" my training many years ago when I realized it was policy/liability oriented.  That was in the orginal post.  And were does your 'expertise' stem from other than the QB position in the lounge chair? So like I said......Concearn yourself with surviving the fight, and deal with the litigation later.

Well, I think the card in my wallet that says "USMC Retired" authorizes me to at least have an opinion.

We also annouce our presence....LOUDLY AND CLEARLY. We also ensure we are well identified by our uniforms and gear as well as lighting. If it's not light outside, we bring our own sun......Spotlights from vehicles and helicopters.

So what?  When shots come through the door, at least the guy inside knows who he's shooting at.
After all, you keep telling us that it's justified.