TexasCHLforum.com

Rrash wrote:

Charles L. Cotton wrote:While I'm happy to see some of these public service spots acknowledging the use of firearms for self-defense, I strongly disagree with the recommendation to announce that you have a gun. The attackers may leave or they may not and I'm not willing to give them tactical intel to use against me if they aren't feeling particularly charitable that day. They will learn of my presence and that I'm armed when the first rounds slam into their chests.

Chas.

. . . With two small children and a wife, its very likely I would have to clear the house myself, and tactically speaking, I don't like how our home is setup.

This reminds me of a statement Clint Smith made several years ago in response to a question by a student. When Thunder Ranch was in Texas, most classes (24 students) were made up of LEOs and non-LEOs on roughly a 50/50 ratio. One of the LEO students asked why he was teaching house-clearing tactics to non-LEOs when he should be telling them to call 911 and stay put. Clint's response was classic: "You can do everything right [clearing a house] and still get killed. You should stay put and call 911 if you can, but when you hear 'Daddy, Mommy HELP!!' you going to be one house-clearing son-of-a-gun, so you better know how to do it right. It won't guarantee you will survive, but it will guarantee a better chance of survival."

Chas.

Abraham wrote:Are there any statistics regarding home invasions being primarily done by criminals involved in drugs?

Or, no, home invasions are done for a wide variety of reasons, i.e., sexual assault, torture as a motivator, mostly done for monetary gain, etc.?

Anyone know?

I don't know of those stats are collected, but either the DPS or the FBI would be the first agencies I'd think might do so. It would be difficult to classify many such crimes. Anecdotally, most TV reports of home invasions I see in the Houston area are motivated by theft of money or property. This could well be to buy drugs, which is why I think it would be hard to determine which crimes involved drugs. Home invaders that don't fall into this category seem to enter either to commit rape, retaliation, or both, but they are relatively few in comparison to those committed for financial gain.

Chas.

While I'm happy to see some of these public service spots acknowledging the use of firearms for self-defense, I strongly disagree with the recommendation to announce that you have a gun. The attackers may leave or they may not and I'm not willing to give them tactical intel to use against me if they aren't feeling particularly charitable that day. They will learn of my presence and that I'm armed when the first rounds slam into their chests.

Chas.

howdy wrote:Another Houston TV station has chimed in. This is from KHOU the local CBS affiliate.


http://www.khou.com/story/news/local/20 ... /27153043/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I saw that one too. As Excaliber noted, attitudes about home defense and even self-defense in general among the media seem to be changing.

Chas.

Excaliber wrote:The article actually describes a viable basic plan - quite surprising considering the usual bias of the media.

This may be an indication that it's getting harder to hide the truth by advocating tactics that will get you killed when used, and still retain viewers / readers.

I think you absolutely right on all points.

Chas.