I see you're missing the point. And yes, an escape route should be used long before a confrontation. I am a very pro-gun person, but this logic of "intent to harm or kill" is just disturbing. You might have a legal right to kill an intruder, but you don't have a moral right to arbitrarily shoot-first, ask questions later. A simple discharge of any weapon, whether its a .22 or 45, will scare off the vast majority of threats. For the rest of the Billy the Badasses, good luck to you in the event you should ever get into that fantasy shoot out, or much more likely, accidentally shooting a friend or relative.
Truth is, from a practical standpoint, if you're going to shoot a home invader, you should definitely shoot to kill. If you wound them, you leave a witness and open yourself up to a lawsuit (in addition to making it harder to "play" the law, like our friend JD88). From a moral standpoint, you should shoot to incapacitate. But that's really not all that feasible unless you're Annie friggin' Oakley. Most people, even shooting to incapacitate someone, will likely (and rightfully) err towards the side of killing them.
If you're goal is to shoot to kill for fear of a lawsuit, then that is nothing more than murder. If you don't know the law, then you probably shouldn't be drawing your gun in the first place. Again, its fun to think about fantasy shootouts against the half dozen home invaders (que your favorite movie in which this fantasy derives from), but the simple reality is this: Most people are not psychologically ready for these types of circumstances and not capable of making sound judgement of a split second decision. If a person is willing to pull a trigger that quick and they are not trained, they WILL eventually hurt someone innocent.
The way JD88 described the situation (i.e. shooting an unarmed person running away from you, likely off your property, and presumably not carrying your goods), yes. But you and I both know it's a lot more nuanced than that. You're shooting to kill for multiple reasons. Morally speaking, it's dicey, but from a legal and practical standpoint, it's completely valid and defensible. This is why I would rather avoid the situation all together. I have no desire to get into a gunfight, kill anyone, or be "judge, jury, and executioner". I have even less desire to maim someone and get dragged into court over it. Err, I don't think people consider their knowledge of the law when their life is in danger, and rightfully so. I absolutely agree, but this has nothing to do with the point at hand.
I was going to post that you use your handgun to fight your way to your shotgun. If you decide handgun, go to range, shoot different calibers and brands. Shoot what you are most comfortable with, but practice practice practice.
I think you should really have to take a basic safety course before being able to purchase one, but ^^^this^^^
I shoot twice a week and have had quite a few combat shooting classes so I agree.. practice is what most people need. I have no fantasy about armed guys kickdooring my house. I had it actually happen when I was at a friends house back in high school (who's brother happened to be in the vietnamese mafia) so I don't speak in hypotheticals. For the people that aren't prepared.. and/or want to be comedian .. that's your choice. Hopefully it doesn't burn you in the future.
pretty sure OP needs to buy one of these: <iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/Th1vqQuJnY8" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
It is a gun. If you aren't willing to kill someone, then you probably shouldn't use one for home defense. Nothing wrong with that, if that is your choice. Maybe a taser would be a good option if you are uncomfortable with the full ramifications of shooting someone. There is a reason that the police don't "fire warning shots in the air" or try to wing people in the leg. They aim for the torso and when they pull the trigger it is done with the expectation that the person they are shooting will die. Half measures get people killed. It's how you alert the intruder that he should point his gun at you and pull the trigger before you get a chance to fire again. If you aren't in a situation where it is appropriate to kill someone, it is not an appropriate situation to be using a gun. You can google "Why don't police shoot to wound" or "Why don't police fire warning shots" if you need more elaboration. Its also the logic behind the fact that CHL's aren't allowed to fire warning shots or brandish their weapon to intimidate. If anybody else sees your concealed weapon, you better have just shot someone in self defense.
