Homeowner shoots intruder in Glyndon

Some quick reading for everyone, if I link this correctly via my phone:

https://tacticalprofessor.wordpress...ar&utm_medium=social&utm_source=meetedgar.com

kaliroger said:

She is recovering, so he did not use deadly force. Shooting someone in the lower body is not using deadly force. IMHO just enough force was used to defuse the cituation.
By the way, the 80 year old should become a police instructor and train law enforcement folks in the correct usage of force.

Click to expand...

Sorry. NO. He did use deadly force, too bad he didn’t hit the T zone. He should not become a police instructor, you don’t shoot someone in the leg or shoot to wound. Center mass and stop the threat.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

hogarth said:

I'm not condemning anyone. I think if someone does that I should be allowed to shoot them and then take a nap. But I live in the real world, IN MARYLAND, and all I'm saying is that, even though someone can legally be shot does not mean that that is a desirable for anyone involved, including the shooter.



I've still not seen any details about how it was that she forced her way in (maybe she just ducked under his arm in the doorway), nor what she did once inside. Also have no idea what kind of shape the homeowner was in. My dad is 80 and could destroy most people on this board. But maybe this guy was walking around with an oxygen tank and two bad knees. To me, those are the determining factors. I'm not talking about legally. I'm talking about whether or not it was "necessary".

Click to expand...

The only determining factor is, was he fearing for his life? If so, good shoot, move on.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

hogarth said:

Some quick reading for everyone, if I link this correctly via my phone:

https://tacticalprofessor.wordpress...ar&utm_medium=social&utm_source=meetedgar.com

Click to expand...

I think the author is an idiot.

daNattyFatty said:

Are bullets from the grave to humans, like silver bullets are to werewolves?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Click to expand...

In today's world, who knows?

I think we all need to relax and wait to see what all the facts are in this situation. Much depends on what happened and the outcome will depend on how those facts are presented in this case. Generally, you need to use the minimum force necessary. There are certain set of conditions in which you can use deadly force.

clandestine said:

I think the author is an idiot.

Click to expand...

Claude Werner is an ex-Green Beret and former head instructor at the elite Rogers Shooting School, among many other things. He is someone who, when he speaks, people should listen. Those who find him to be an idiot are people who, by extension, I would never take advice from.

hogarth said:

Claude Werner is an ex-Green Beret and former head instructor at the elite Rogers Shooting School, among many other things. He is someone who, when he speaks, people should listen. Those who find him to be an idiot are people who, by extension, I would never take advice from.

Click to expand...

I'm not offering advice to you. I'm arguing against your posts.

I did listen to him, and I think he is making a primitive thing like self defense way too complex. I was harsh to call him an idiot, and for that I apologise. I do think his opinion on this subject is idiotic, no matter what his accolades are.

You shouldnt have to be a law expert or an expert in psychology to use a gun in defense of ones self. That is level of absurdity these guys take these subjects.

I didn't dream up my views on this subject. One of my most trusted friends woke me up long about about self defense. He dealt with lots of bad people, and has killed man and beast before. His advice about self defense is simple. "If there is ANY doubt, then there is NO doubt.".

A person in a self defense situation cant read an attackers mind, they can't possibly weigh how they will feel after killing someone in defense, or worry about how the courts, and the court of public opinion will try to ruin them. If that kind of thing is in the forefront of your mind then you have handicapped yourself and given an attacker a massive advantage. I, nor any other person defending themselves shouldn't have to wait to be beaten unconscious, riddled with bullets, or slashed up before killing an attacker. Because when you break it down, that is exactly what the run away crowd presents as an argument.

The common legal standard is simple, do I feel the attacker is going to cause serious harm or death? If I do, then I have to determine where my "Line in the Sand" exists, and if someone crosses it, I unleash hell.

I'm not going to worry beforehand about how I might feel after saving my own life, nor will I worry about how the public or the courts view my response. It's overcomplicating a primitive response which is fight or flight. I'm using a reasonable and long-standing legal standard, which is, was my life in danger, and if it is, I will respond with overwhelming violence to save myself. Why overwhelming? Because I want to win and fights are not fair.

Could I have mental issues after killing an attacker? Absolutely, but maybe I wont. Could I be bankrupted by the legal system and have my name smeared by the media? Sure, but maybe I wont. I do know that I would rather be alive to face those things than dead. I live a simple life and I leave people alone. If I kill someone, they had it coming.

IME, none of those thing that author mentions should be a factor when you have to defend yourself because it won't help you, it will only make you slower or hesitate.

If you can and that author can weight the mental possibilities and legal ramifications, in a true self defense scenario you fellas must be superhuman. That is no insult, you must work on a higher level than I can because the situations I have been in that dictated me presenting a gun, none of those things that author is babbling on about ever crossed my mind. My mind was focused on how to win if they cross a line. THANKFULLY no one ever crossed that line.

I think if a gun owner can't handle the idea of killing someone in defense of their own life they probably shouldn't own a gun for the purpose of self defense, but I wouldnt deny them that right. They would happily deny me my freedom if I shot someone to save myself though.

Ever sit and think about WHY people's lives get ruined when a man shoots an attacker? Yeah I said man for a reason. It's because society makes excuses for the turds of society, but they never have sympathy for the man who wants to be left alone. They love watching movies with violence and revenge, but G-damn the guy who decides he isn't going to be a victim. Yeah, burn that guy, can't have that kind of persons in a society full of victims and excuses.

You can do whatever you like. I'm commenting on how I will plan to respond to deadly force and how the gun community and our country is full of a bunch of backstabbing assholes.

TexDefender said:

I think we all need to relax and wait to see what all the facts are in this situation. Much depends on what happened and the outcome will depend on how those facts are presented in this case. Generally, you need to use the minimum force necessary. There are certain set of conditions in which you can use deadly force.

Click to expand...

Agree. It's easy to Monday morning quarterback.

That said lol, If the gentleman says he feared for his life than hey, he did what he had to do.

Back in my drinking days I did A LOT of dumb things. Once I woke up in the back of a strange vehicle parked in someone's front lawn. I'm glad nobody shot me. Haven't had a drink in a few years now.


I've never had some drunk come wondering in my home pushing their way around but I'd like to think I'd have the patience and mindset to handle the situation accordingly. Hope I'm never in that situation. Shooting someone whether right or wrong sounds like its a lot of paperwork.

Friend of the neighborhood.

A 30ish young mother showed up drunk. Wrong house. Was crying and rambling. Scared to go home. Her family lives in the area I'm told. The neighbor didn't recognize her and shot due to not being able to get her to calm down. I'm told she is a very pretty young mother who has been going through a really hard time. Some locals know the husband.

Really sad situation.

The home owner is the victim, plain and simple. In that situation I think he was absolutely fearful of his life... this woman could have done anything to him. Unless other details came out (like he invited her in), I'd say justified.

Perhaps make better life decisions if you are a 30 year old going through hard times.

Like not walking into a house or leaving when the old man goes to get his gun. I'd also assume he told her a few times before firing his weapon. Perhaps, even if you are drunk, just sit down and wait for the police.

Everyone goes through "hard times" doesn't resolve you of your responsibility to be a good person and act in a sane manner. If you decide against that because of "hard times" they road might just get a bit rougher for you.