Using A Handgun For Home Defense: What Then?

[Cold Steel]

Just curious.

If you shoot an intruder in Maryland, what then? Do they take your gun? And if so, do you get it back?

Years ago, in the 70s, I was told by an anti-gun woman that it shouldn't even be a consideration. But what if the intruder died?

"I don't think any gun used to take a human life should ever be returned to the pool of privately owned handguns," she replied.

How about "non-privately owned handguns," I asked. Should they be returned to police use?

She thought a few seconds. "No, I don't think so."

 

[Occam]

Amazing. Because, you know, once a particular gun has had a taste of human blood, it will just want to kill more people, right?

This sort of childlike magical thinking is what has the lefties always referring to "gun violence" as if the inanimate objects have animate powers and a will of their own.

A Glock isn't Sauron's ring, lady. I wonder what that lady would say if you asked her if the PERSON who had just shot someone in self defense simply replaced the weapon used with another one. Is that some sort of karmic reboot? Does she realize that not giving the gun back means that the Eeeeevil Gun Industry will just be making the sweet, sweet blood profits off another fresh sale of another brand new gun to replace it?

Arrested development and people who go through their lives thinking like children are - almost entirely - what's wrong with the eroding future of western civilization.

As for the OP's question: sure, if it was a good self defense shoot, the owner can get that gun back. Might take months or years, and it might be covered with rust, but generally speaking it's still in storage and can get back to the owner.

But this is why most of us don't keep are BBQ-Rated custom 1911s with Mastodon Ivory Grips next to the bed as bump-in-the-night insurance. That's what Glocks and vanilla Rugers are for!

 

[4g64loser]

Just curious.

If you shoot an intruder in Maryland, what then? Do they take your gun? And if so, do you get it back?

Years ago, in the 70s, I was told by an anti-gun woman that it shouldn't even be a consideration. But what if the intruder died?

"I don't think any gun used to take a human life should ever be returned to the pool of privately owned handguns," she replied.

How about "non-privately owned handguns," I asked. Should they be returned to police use?

She thought a few seconds. "No, I don't think so."

Your mileage may vary but I consider any weapon used in violent defense expendable at least in the short term. I typically carry weapons that I can replace at an acceptable price point with an acceptable level of aggravation. 3

I've had weapons returned from cops after investigation (not always related to actual violence) and they required repairs at minimum. These were relatively short time periods, not year long.

I have several primary sources who have had to fight very hard to get weapons back from various law enforcement agencies. Some of the weapons being very valuable (transferable machine guns, for example) one might think due care would.be exercised. It was not. Not in any of the examples known to me.

In short, if it becomes evidence you can essentially consider it lost or, at minimum, will require repairs and testing before going back "in your holster".

I have no "moral" reservations about carrying a weapon that has been "used". If you do, then retire it or sell it. It's your weapon. Do what you want with it.

 

[rbird7282]

If I’m involved in a self defense shooting, getting my gun back is pretty freaking far down on the list of things I’m worried about.
Whether it’s a $300 gun or $1,200 that pales in comparison to your other issues, including financial ones.
Don’t know why people obsess over this.
Your life is at stake, use the best tool for the job for you, whether it’s a $400 Glock or a $1,200 1911.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Boondock Saint]

If I'm using a handgun for home defense, a number of errors have been made on my part.

May I never need to defend my home.

 

[Cold Steel]

Thank you for your replies.

The woman I was talking to was a defense attorney and I was interviewing her for a story I was writing. Her comments led me to using a reliable but inexpensive revolver for home defense.

Her attitude (at the time) wasn't all that unusual.

 

[miles71]

This is something left out of the new lesson plan for the wear and carry permit that I plan on leaving in my course. How to deal with the aftermath and law enforcement.

TD

 

[DutchV]

First, be happy you survived.

My house gun is a police trade-in Glock 17. There's no sentimental attachment. It's a good, reliable tool, but still just a tool. I can find another one pretty quickly if I ever have to.

 

[Mark75H]

This is something left out of the new lesson plan for the wear and carry permit that I plan on leaving in my course. How to deal with the aftermath and law enforcement.

TD

Agreed.

 

[Blaster229]

Just use your generic, out-of-the-box standard fare $600 pistol for around the house and call it a day.

 

[Bountied]

I only shoot people with my Staccato XC. I feel I owe them that much.

 

[jr88]

Wonder if she voted for George "W" Bush ?

 

[FN509Fan]

Three or four hours of lawyer's time will eclipse the cost of any gun in my possession. If my favorite gun protects me, it's done it's job.

 

[Cold Steel]

Three or four hours of lawyer's time will eclipse the cost of any gun in my possession. If my favorite gun protects me, it's done it's job.

Yeah, but why lose a great gun you may not be able to replace? Why grab your mint Colt Python or Browning Hi-Power when you hear a bump in the night? There are too many other options. If you need to grab a gun for any reason, there are so many other good guns one can use, why not? If the only gun you own is a Colt Python, yes, of course, use it, but better to use an [ ugh! ] Taurus revolver if you can.

And not every Taurus is bad. Some are reliable. The Taurus PT-92/99 is an outstanding gun. But for around the house, any reliable revolver will do. Years ago, a friend had just moved into a new house. Everything was still in boxes. The first night my friend's wife got him up, saying she heard someone moving about downstairs.

After a while, he heard it, too. Someone was downstairs. With nothing else at hand, he grabbed a baseball bat and made his way to the stairs. He had no flashlight, either. Moving down the stairs, he would pause every few steps, listen, then continue on as quietly as he could. As he got to the first floor, he moved, then listened, then moved. It was then that it happened. So suddenly that he barely had time to react. He came face to face with the intruder, a man, also with no flashlight of any kind, but he could see well enough that it was a man.

Quick as lightning, he lashed out and hit the man in the face with all the fury he could muster...and hit the full-length mirror full on! His wife spent the next hour removing glass shards from his fist (the baseball bat survived just fine). The culprit turned out to be the cat, which was curious and exploring. It took awhile before my friend was able to see the humor of the situation, but he finally did. His hand was bandaged, and trying to unpack was a problem. The lesson he took away from this was, don't try to clear a house by yourself, and especially not with a baseball bat. Massad Ayoob offers some great advice on how to handle these things, even if you're armed to the teeth!