Tasers are very illegal in many states, they are also not completely L-T-L. Especially if the person is wet, has a pacemaker, ect. It also relies on batteries being charged and kept topped off. It isn't something like OC or L-T-L shotgun rounds that can be bought and left alone for years until it is needed. Also, they are one shot only unless you keep changing the front piece, many people can get up again and keep fighting a few seconds after being hit, and they arn't very accurate.

Re: less than lethal rounds: they are a) factually misplaced, and b) legally irrelevant.

Factually: any round intented to be sub-lethal can be lethal, and in a self defense scenario they are dumn. If you are in a lethal force situation, use lethal force. Get used to the idea.

Legally: the 12 bore from which you are fieing that round is an inherently lethal weapon. If you kill someone with a round intended to to be sub-lethal, your intent will not save you from a felony murder charge. The circimstances of trhe shoot may, i.e., clear self defnese or defense of other persons and property, in which case it does not matter what you used -- you were privielged to shoot to kill.

Pay no attention to the stories about folks tht were sued for everything they own because they shot burglar that lived. Those stories are for the most part tort reform propaganda. I have made this offer for over ten years: if you get sued in a civil court for shooting a burglar, tresspasser, or other assailant in your home, I will represent you for free.

Lastly, talk to cops. A good way to get killed is to try to shoot NOT to kill. Get over it, or don't buy the gun. Center of mass or nothing, folks.

I agree....tasers are illegal in many places....so are stun guns. The new(er) taser use electricity in the frequency range of what our bodies use to transmit nerve impulses. The new tasers use the same frequency and it causes our muscle to massively contract....involuntarily. There is no physical way to prevent it. That is why the taser works on the druggies when stun guns don't. Stun guns just give the massive shock and temporarily 'stun' you. Some people aren't affected by it.

Yes I agree that they are not the most accurate too....My point is just that I don't think someone should be using a firearm when all they want is something LTL.

My father is a paramedic and has had 100's of conversations with peace officers on this topic. He has always gotten the same response, (paraphrased)
"If you are in fear of you life or the lives of the people around you, you can use lethal force without reservation."
That is my basic rule on useing leathal force.

With all due respect, I'm not an attorney and I agree with you on most of this but the problem here in <img src="/images/graemlins/laugh.gif" alt="" /> Richies Republic, unlike Texas, IIRC, You probably be in deep do-do for using lethal force for defending of property. Nice offer, hopefully none of us will have to take you up on it someday.

I'm not trying to be argumentative, but if there really is a CLEAN case [unprovoked] out there where someone was found liable for a shooting in defense of home, I would like documentation of it, if for no other purpose than to pass it on to many other lawyers who keep track of such things.

When hunting deer, many think that the mature buck is the smartest animal on 4 legs. The truth is, a mature doe is a hunters greatest adversary. Everyone agrees that a female bear would rip you apart if you came near her cubs, but most don't give doe the same credit. Why? They're both female. Doe are extremely wary and closing in on them, with their young, is very difficult. I think that fact that there are more doe to see and shoot gives them the "easy" rap.

My wife is not much of an outdoorswoman and the sweetest woman you could meet. She should really have been a kindergarten teacher. But come near one of our daughters in an unkind way and she would grab her 357 from under the bed, blow your head off, and have dinner on the table by 5. She absolutely adored our dog (1/2 Rott and 1/2 Lab). He was really her first child in a sense, until he growled at our first daughter. That happened one time. A couple broom sticks later and he's our girls best friend. Don't screw with mom. Truth is, she'd probably shoot you before I would. And I'm still not certain who the better shot is.

Guns are not for everyone and I never tried to talk anyone into to getting one. I don't know if your sister is a mother, but if she is, and the time came, I think she'd have a harder time stopping after the the third or forth shot.

Let me also comment on the litiguos liability of shooting someone. I am well aware of the potential liability. If you are involved in a justified shooting, you'll spend about $70,000 defending yourself and getting cleared. Not mention the social repurcussions of those who label you a killer. But my fear of using pepper spray is twofold.

First, pepper spray probably won't stop someone on crack. Do you want to take that chance as they're charging you? Are they on drugs...aren't they? Too many decisions in an already stressful situation. Rack the slide on your 12 gauge and you probably won't have to find out. It's amazing how quickly that sobers them up.

Second, if you use pepper sray, then your life must not have been in danger, at least in the educated opinion of 12 people who were too stupid to get out of jury duty. So, if the spray doesn't work and you were lucky enough to get a second chance at doing the job right with your 44, how will you explain that "all of a sudden" your life was in danger.

Guns are a last resort and I will always run if I can. But if I have to fight, unfortunately, it will be to the death. And I pray it never comes to that, because although better off alive, my life would never be the same.

My understanding has always been that so long as the invader is inside your home there fewer legal issues, but that shooting someone outside your home is much tougher to justify. Protecting life is OK - protecting property is not OK.

I think that difference is what makes the NO "shoot to kill" order a big deal since they could then shoot to protect property (though it sounds like they didn't). Normally police can only shoot to protect life.

<< SOAP BOX MODE ON >>

Please, if you have a gun in a home where there is even a remote chance of children being present, make sure the guns are stored unloaded and locked up (safe and/or trigger lock).

When your kids get old enough to show interest in guns - or even if they don't show an interest - please enroll them in a gun safety class. I had a friend in high school that blew a hole in his head while trying to clean a loaded gun. Just a bit of good training would have easily prevented his death. Guns in knowledable hands are really safe, but in the hands of the untrained they are very very dangerous.

<< SOAP BOX MODE OFF >>

You are entirely correct, for a majority of states. Once upon a time there was an intuder into my parents home - some 11 miles out of town - the Texas DPS Trooper told her, 'well, Betty you could have just killed the son of a [censored], after all he, he came in the house.' She said that she didn't want to mess up the carpet. She talked him down - with a gun in her hand.