I think it's a case by case basis and as I see it, she had other choices including announcing that she was there which would most likely have scared him away in the first place.
I think it's a case by case basis and as I see it, she had other choices including announcing that she was there which would most likely have scared him away in the first place.
Good point here. Isn't this the gun advocacy's argument as to why guns are the best and most effective form of personal/home protection in the first place? So, again why are high capacity magazines needed if the gun is so effective as to quickly defend one's self or end a situation?
It's really hard to find stats that reflect what a minute chance there is of being caught in one of these "randomly". That means the intruder just picked a house and broke in. Most of these types of things that get put in this statistical category wind up being the result of drug deals gone wrong or the people involved knew each other in some way. In fact, roaming bandits doing invasions for the purpose of personal harm are so rare in my experience on Earth that when they do happen, they are big local (and sometimes national) news stories.The chance of either type just happening to break into a house where the owner is home and armed with a 30-round mag is... well, it isn't going to happen to you.
When I was a kid, there was a guy that had been breaking in and raping women when they were showering, or if they weren't, he would force them to shower to wash away all the evidence. Most times he would then burglarize their homes too. The local news outlets dubbed him "The Shower Stall Rapist". I remember that there was a lot of talk of women getting guns, taking self defense classes and such. This is in a state where most people already own guns. In the end, someone called in a tip and they caught him. He was charged with 27 rapes they could piece together. They suspected he was guilty of some other similar cases and other burglaries, but they couldn't muster the evidence to get more convictions. After he was initially convicted and sentenced to a total of 800 years in prison, he escaped and kidnapped a woman and raped her. He was caught and received another 250 years or something like that. In most of his assaults he used his size to overpower the women. He used a knife in a couple of cases, and a gun once, but never shot or stabbed the women. In most of the cases, the women had guns in their houses. Not one of them was able to get to their firearm, much less defend themselves with it. This guy did these acts well over 40 times in a 6 month period the authorities believed. At one point, he was averaging a rape/break-in every 3-4 days. And not once did a single person pull a gun on him, get a single shot off, nor was he captured due to the magic of a gun.
I guess I have two points with my story. First, this kind of thing is so rare in most places that here I am remembering it 30 years later with some detail. Second, it is another example where it's illustrated that the fact one has a gun, regardless of magazine size, still doesn't help them. At the very least, it shows just how weakly supported the case for high capacity magazines is by the random home invasion argument.
I will say it again, if one would learn to shoot, they wouldn't need more than one or two shots to stop an intruder or hit a hunting target.
How is that relevant? You're desperately grabbing at straws to avoid admitting that you're wrong. The bottom line is that a person shot multiple times with handgun bullets can sometimes persist in an attack. If the guys is physically able to get up and get into a car and drive off, he's still potentially dangerous. The more rounds you have, the better your chances of stopping an attacker. The larger the caliber, the better your odds are of stopping an attacker as well, though there's a trade off in ammo capacity and greater recoil, that can limit your ability to rapidly and accurately, place consecutive shots into the attacker.
I've beaten several people within an inch of their lives. And they had it coming.
Years ago when I was sharing an apartment at college, a couple of morons kicked my door in. I was upstairs about to drift off to sleep at the time. Heard the noise and came down the stairs to see one of them bolt through the door, and the other one trying to get my stereo receiver out of the cabinet. He bolted after his partner in crime, after dropping my amplifier to the floor, and I sprinted down the sidewalk in bare feet wearing nothing but a pair of tighty whities. Tackled him at full bore, and grabbed him by his hair and beat his head against the concrete curb in front of throngs of shocked/delighted street revelers. Halloween is a big deal at this University, and the whole town is full of crazed college kids high on everything natural or synthetic known to man. I dragged his unconscious ass down the sidewalk back into my apartment, leaving a nice blood trail for the cops to follow. I was bench pressing nearly 400 lbs at the time, and still come pretty close to it these days. Had I owned guns at the time, I would have saved myself a run, and shot them both dead on the spot. Sadly, the first one out the door got away. As for the second...he narrowly escaped being tortured to reveal the name and address of the first, because my roommate was a little more soft hearted, and persuaded me to just call the cops.
But no, I've not personally been in any gun fights. Not yet. Only an idiot would really want that to happen, but I'm capable of it, if I have to.
The cases I've mentioned show why you can't always count on one or two or three, or even five, rounds effectively stopping an attacker. As the title of my thread states "sometimes" 10 rounds is not enough. A single .22LR to the head would probably instantly stop an attacker. 9mm rounds to the heart and lungs, penetrating sufficiently deep to perforate major arteries and cause massive rapid blood loss and deprive the attacker of the use of vital organs would most likely quickly end an attack. But, the more rounds you have, the better your odds are of causing enough damage in the right place to put the bastard down and save your life.
Perhaps because his victims were unarmed, and unprepared. If he'd broke into my house, his raping days would have ended instantly. Merely having a gun is not a magic talisman. You have to be able to get to it, and you have to be prepared and willing to use it. It's better to have a gun, and not need it. Than to need a gun, and not have one. Same goes for "high" capacity magazines.
Spoken like someone who has never shot a pistol in his life. I've had guns since I was a kid, and I'm a damn good shot. But, I recognize the limitations of accuracy with pistols, compared to long guns. The tiniest flinch when squeezing the trigger disrupts your sight picture and causes the round to be way off. And shooting at a live moving target that is trying to hurt you, is a bit different than punching holes in static paper targets. Sure, practice will make you better. But, it's still better to have all the rounds you can, when your life, and the lives of your loved ones are at stake.
Bookmarks