previous post next post  

House Guns

By The Armorer on February 24, 2006 | | Comments (22)

There's a meme running around the Gun Blogs that's interesting.

House Guns, started by Say Uncle, who further elaborates here.

The house gun is merely the gun you keep accessible at your home in case something goes bump in the night. I think there are generally three schools of thought on the house gun: handgun, carbine and shotgun.

The recent escape of a murderer from the Kansas State Penitentiary in Lansing, Kansas (the little town south of us that butts up against Leavenworth), brought about a relook at the issue here at the Castle. Nothing changed in my choices, but it's always good to revisit key things like that.. The prison is only about 4 miles away from us - though, in truth, the last place escaping inmates want to be is here, hiding in an area that has 6 incarceration facilities...

Here at the Castle, we do two out of the three choices Uncle lays out. Pistols and shotgun. And we do both major varieties of pistol, auto and revolver.

The Castle's

The shotgun is a Winchester Model 97 full-choke 12 gauge, loaded with 00 buckshot. It's the "Fort Up" weapon you'd face if you were to come through the door or windows of the bedroom at SWWBO. The Polish Tokarev, seen here with a magazine of Soviet service ammo in it, is the primary 'roaming gun'.

Polish copy of the Soviet Tokarev T-33

Here is where I will get snarked by the Home Defenders. The revolver. The load for the revolver is... shot.

Smith and Wesson

Why? I understand *all* the arguments about "In the house and advancing, dead on the floor". Got it. I'll carry the revolver loaded with one round of shot for *two* reasons. 1. It's a critter that has gotten inside. 2. It's a kid. Yes, I know that the feral little savages may be packing and may happily shoot me for a thrill. They could also just be stupid punks. If they're being stupid, they get a "whiff of grape" so to speak, and the chance to leave, and live. If they don't surrender, or run, but come forward after that, or reach for anything, then the Tokarev will speak. And in any situation, if the Tokarev jams, the Smith will bark at least twice in quick succession, and six times if yer stubborn.

That's how I plan to defend the Castle. And with classicly Armorer-style armament, tried, true and proven. None of that new-fangled stuff here. Heck, I was reluctant to put up the flintlock saddle pistols... 8^D. And as our targets show, We can do it. SWWBO - she's just going to turn you into hamburger. Life's tough when yer stupid. Better hope you run into me.

Others blogging their thoughts on house guns are Jeff at Alphecca, Tamara at View From The Porch, Jay, at Toys in the Attic, and South Park Pundit. I'm sure there are more, I'll add 'em if I find 'em.

And with that, and the discussion developing in the comments - it's time to Re-run the Notices (in the Flash Traffic/Extended Entry).

Visitors should also note the following caveats:

Periodic Goblin Warning (SM)

As a service to Goblins who are considering Seizing The Arsenal (this excludes LE types: y'all come with a warrant, knock [no no-knocks, please, the front door is expensive], take what the warrant specifies and we'll talk about it in court - just please take care of 'em, you know, periodic cleaning, oiling, etc. They're used to being spoiled like that) here is a periodic warning on Why Trying To Steal My Collection Isn't A Good Idea.

Note to thieves trying to figure out where I live: Once you do that, you've got to get past the living interior and exterior guard, the security system (hint, cutting the phone and cable WON'T help), and finally, if I'm home - me. WonderWife (TM) v3.x is also right handy with the Winchester M97 trench gun. I like that one because it's handy, will blow you into large chunks, but not pass through the walls of the house to annoy my neighbors. Hardwood floors, so clean-up is easy. I'm a reasonable fellow, if you surrender meekly or run away, that will be fine. Not interested in killing or maiming anyone unless you are dumb enough to attack me or my family. The furry members count as family, BTW. Do that, then I will clean the gene pool. Plus guys, impressive as it looks, it's not as valuable as you might think - and it would be very hard to move, since you would be flooding the market. Not to mention the fact that every dealer within a (classified) radius would have a list of serial numbers and descriptions within 24 hours (ain't the internet great?). Oh, yeah - did I mention that robbing licensees is a federal offense? The feds don't go overboard after little stuff, but whacking this collection would likely garner their interest - so choose your accomodations! Plus 'bangers won't like these - the ones that look like they can shoot a lot - can't, and many of them won't work properly if you hold them sideways like they do in the movies.

So, go find an easier target, eh? No - better yet - get a real job that has better fringes.


Periodic Disclaimer for anti-gunners and law enforcement surfers (I don't mind you LE types) Heck, I don't mind the anti-gun types until they start trying to send LE types to take 'em away... here we go with the Periodic Disclaimer (TM):

Everything you ever see in photos here that I own is fully legal to own, federal, state, and local - WHERE I LIVE! Your mileage may vary, such as living in the Borg Collectives of California, Massachusetts, Maryland, New Jersey, etc. Though ya might be surprised to find out what's legal where you live. I am a licensed collector (which isn't a license to collect, just to receive via the mails), and that only applies to curio and relic firearms. Fortunately, that's about all I want to own.

Share This Article:

Categories:

22 Comments

By Pogue on February 24, 2006 10:42 AM
I am not a lawyer, nor do I play one on TV... but you may want to talk to one about your choice of shot in your revolver. In my state when you pull a gun you are engaging in lethal force. The use of shot as "a warning" indicates you did not really feel the need for lethal force. Same applies for shooting to wound. Either you need lethal force or you don't. The rules may be different in your state. This could be the difference from "clearly self defense, no charges will be filed" and "You have the right to remain silent..." I would hate to have one of the good guys go to jail over something like that.
 
By John of Argghhh! on February 24, 2006 10:48 AM
Good point Pogue, and readers who don't live around here should take that into account. The shot would be a deliberate miss, and not damage near as much as a bullet ricocheting around would, while still having all the salutary effects of noise and flash (and if it's dark, *my* eyes are closed at the right moment, theirs aren't). And, I'm still thinking that locally at least, if I did it the way I described, a jury around here would be cool with it. But, when you get into those kinds of things, you're taking risks anyway. But at least you're alive to discuss the relative merits of a particular approach after the fact. I find that interpretation interesting. So, rather than try to deal with the problem at the lowest level, they pretty much assert you have to go nuclear or surrender. I suspect that approach came from cases where people were shooting at people when they shouldn't have been, justifying it by saying there were only shooting to wound, etc. I'm thinking I can make this work, because of my other ROE, but it's *still* worth a specific check.
 
By John of Argghhh! on February 24, 2006 11:04 AM
While you *always* have to be careful when cherry picking through legal decisions (and thus far, there ain't no lawyers, and therefore no legal advice being given, either), in 2000 the Kansas Court of Appeals had this to say on self-defense (admittedly in a case not like the instance outlined above): "One fending off an attack does not have a 'reckless disregard' or a 'indifference and unconcern' over consequences to the attacker--the victim intends [emphasis in original) to inflict injury on the attacker, and is legally justified in harboring that intent. Where self-defense is found to exist, the only element which would render the victim's conduct criminal is the use of excessive force, not the victim's state of mind." Which can be spun either way, so *that* ain't definitive, fer sure.
 
By jim b on February 24, 2006 11:20 AM
Bzzzzzzzzzz The correct answer is: Blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam Sound of reloading Blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam blam Wow nice group!!!!
 
By John of Argghhh! on February 24, 2006 11:21 AM
Then there is this: The general theory of self-defense is provided in K.S.A. 21-3211: "A person is justified in the use of force against an aggressor when and to the extent it appears to him and he reasonably believes that such conduct is necessary to defend himself or another against such aggressor's imminent use of unlawful force." K.S.A. 21-3214(3) sets the underpinnings of "mutual combat" by providing that using force in self-defense is not available to a person who: "Otherwise initially provokes the use of force against himself or another, unless: "(a) He has reasonable ground to believe that he is in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm, and he has exhausted every reasonable means to escape such danger other than the use of force which is likely to cause death or great bodily harm to the assailant; or "(b) In good faith, he withdraws from physical contact with the assailant and indicates clearly to the assailant that he desires to withdraw and terminate the use of force, but the assailant continues or resumes the use of force." The text of K.S.A. 21-3211: 21-3211 Chapter 21.--CRIMES AND PUNISHMENTS PART I.--GENERAL PROVISIONS Article 32.--PRINCIPLES OF CRIMINAL LIABILITY 21-3211. Use of force in defense of a person. A person is justified in the use of force against an aggressor when and to the extent it appears to him and he reasonably believes that such conduct is necessary to defend himself or another against such aggressor's imminent use of unlawful force. History: L. 1969, ch. 180, § 21-3211; July 1, 1970. I dunno. I think, given the ROE I set forth in the Periodic Disclaimers, I'm on pretty safe ground.
 
By John of Argghhh! on February 24, 2006 11:22 AM
And Jim - I got that bit covered already.
 
By Blake Kirk on February 24, 2006 11:51 AM
The immediate response guns at our house are a Webley Mark VI (modifed to shoot .45ACP with half-moon or full-moon clips,) and a 1943-production P-38 from Oberndorf. We have no children about the house so the pieces stay loaded. And there are loaded spare mags and clips stored with them. "Too much ammo" is an oxymoron. And my lovely wife is, I must admit in all honesty, a BETTER pistol shot than I am. She used to shoot intercollegiate NRA small-bore pistol, while I had to settle for practical marksmanship with the clunkers we had in the company arms room.. On the rifle rack in the stairwell, placed where it is accessible from the landing outside our bedroom is a loaded SMLE No. 4 Mk II, with the Mk9 bladed socket bayonet. I've always figured that a bayonet would be a real useful persuader. And Tennessee law does not place an obligation of retreat on a householder within the limits of his homestead. We've considered getting a shotgun, but decided that what with the pistols, the Enfield, the swords, and the kukri, it would sort of be gilding the lily.
 
By jim b on February 24, 2006 11:57 AM
What no one uses claymores and grenades anymore?
 
By John of Argghhh! on February 24, 2006 12:03 PM
Heh. Blake, I oughta get my SMLE with the Mills Bomb cup on it, and load with launcher blanks and a rodded No.5 Mills in it...
 
By John of Argghhh! on February 24, 2006 12:09 PM
Jim - see my latest. As for Claymores... out in the yard, mebbe. But certainly not downstairs in the Arsenal!
 
By ry on February 24, 2006 12:21 PM
Heh. A buddy of mine sent a couple of days ago what SPECIFIC ammo he has loaded into the magazines he uses for home defense in his Tokarev. 2x frangible(he's got kids). An AP round. 2x ball. Repeats pattern. HAd outlined the dozen or so most likely scenarios he'd face and how he'd expend it too. Typical boyscout he is, always prepared. Me? I gotta tussle. Wife's scared to death of firearms(damn in laws and their benighted ways) and she is iffy on me having serious cutlery. So, I gets to tussle. (Snif).
 
By John of Argghhh! on February 24, 2006 12:23 PM
We do, however *have* a Claymore. And an S Mine. And a Glasmine. A Stockmine (one the right in the pic, that's the dummy TNT charge in the middle), these nice little Elsie toe-crackers... and others too numerous too mention. We have a nice selection of grenades to choose from too, as this sample illustrates...
 
By Blake Kirk on February 24, 2006 12:38 PM
jim b wrote: +++What no one uses claymores and grenades anymore?+++ Claymores are big dam unwieldy two-handed swords that aren't all that much use in a stairwell fight. On the other hand, Carol has a properly forged and tempered Irish leaf-blade short sword and I have an MoD-pattern kukri. Not to mention the estoc with the 32-inch blade. The approved technique is steel in the dominant hand, pistol in the other. My experience has been that most people would much rather be shot than carved up with cold steel. "Cut 'em if they stand, shoot 'em if they run." I'm not allowed to have grenades: the Wildlife Management Resources Agency insists that they aren't legal fishing tackle in this state.
 
By jim b on February 24, 2006 1:16 PM
This just in: Former U.S. Attorney General Ramsey Clark, an anti-war activist who now serves as one of Saddam Hussein's defense attorneys, said Saddam "posed no threat whatsoever" to the United States. President Bush’s reaction was to slap his forehead and say, “Well hell now you tell me.” Clark an expert on nearly everything has appointed himself to defend “Ole Sot” as Mr. Clark calls Saddam. Clark and Saddam forged their long time friendship while students in the ABA University (Anything But America), where they were both members on the ABA Shotput team, spending endless hours on the weekend packing cabbages and cabbage launchers for shipment to deserving 3rd world countries, like Allgeekistan. Clark said "brutal sanctions" and "constant bombings" by the United States turned Iraq into "a country that was barely functional and in dire straits. They were no threat whatsoever, and our government had to have known that. That country was stuck on its back." There was not a dry eye in the room, as Cindy Sheehan lead the huddled masses in group cryin sessions. This reporter would have stayed around till the end of the session but he had to go take a crap. Now back to our regularly scheluded Home Invasion programming already in progress.
 
By 74 on February 24, 2006 2:05 PM
John, I'm with you. My house gun is a S&W .45 revolver, half-moon clips; but I've loaded mine with ball only.
 
By Justthisguy on February 24, 2006 8:35 PM
Blade Kirk, that's the reason *I've* always thought that the Single-Action Army was obviously meant to be used left-handed. JoA, I see that yer scattergun comes from the factory without a disconnecter; I won't have to take it apart and put it back together for you. Ever fire it in that, uh, idiom? If so, how hard is it to hold steady while pumping rapidly with the trigger held back?
 
By Scott from Oregon on February 24, 2006 9:19 PM
A small JC Higgins 22 semi-auto. Holds 17 I think, in the tube and one in the chamber. Small, light, easier to point blind around corners. Easier to aim than a pistol in the dark. Easier to grab in a panic, and at night, in the dark. Small enough to hide down the out of sight side of a leg. Useful as a bludgeoning tool. Not so macho that a lawyer can claim I meant to inflict death. Lethal enough to do so if necessary. What would behandy would be a recording of a twelve guage pump action being pumped. Just push a button and "kashink"... See yas....
 
By Pogue on February 24, 2006 9:22 PM
"I find that interpretation interesting. So, rather than try to deal with the problem at the lowest level, they pretty much assert you have to go nuclear or surrender" Arizona is a open carry and shall issue concealed carry state, so it's safe to assume lot's of people are armed. This has more or less been the case since statehood. As such they don't really distinguish between lethal force in the home from on the street. The training in CCW is basically you should have already done everything possible to deescalate before the weapons come out. Also defending your home against an intruder is not grounds for lethal force here unless you are afraid for your life or the live of another, the intruder has the ablility to do you grave harm, and shows hostile intent. There are some other situations lethal force is justified for example to prevent arson of an occupied dwelling. Note this is just for lethal force - I notice the laws you mentioned reference use of force. I'm not sure what the legal definition of use of force is in Kansas - it may or may not be the same thing. The Arizona law doesn't prevent me from beating the hell out of an intruder using less that lethal force if that's what it takes to deescalate but I would still have to worry about excessive force. Of course the recommended path is always to use the minimum... Aren't laws fun? But like you I'm comfortable that my decisions would stand up to a Grand Jury in my state. And just so I'm on topic for once in my life :-) my house gun is my 1911 Officers model loaded with ball and backed up with my 870 using the ever popular Federal H132 Tactical Buck loads. Her Accuracy has her Sig P239 and her Benelli M1 Super 90.
 
By Jon The Mechanic on February 24, 2006 9:27 PM
I was wondering when someone would bust out the "A Claymore is a sword" comment. And my toll of choice for clearing my home of Vermin is a nice little 12 guage that was passed down to me from my grandfather. My house has nice wide hallways and I also have a Tanto knife for backup that is almost always within reach. The pistol permit is clearing my necessary background checks and once I get that, I plan on getting myself a nice little .40 cal S & W, something in formal black for nights when I am entertaining in the house. As for pistols vs long guns, you have to remember the old story about the mountain man who came down from the hills to do some shopping in town. He was wearing a pistol on his hip and one of the women asked him if he was expecting trouble. He replied that if he had been expecting trouble, he would have brought his long gun.
 
By MCart on February 25, 2006 3:01 AM
Goblins making the mistake of forcing their way into my home will be faced with whichever .45 is closest to me in whatever room I happen to be in. Given access to my armory, i'll come out with my 'AA' gun. Mossberg 835 Ulti-Mag, loaded with 3 inch shells in 4-OT buck. Unfortunately, that barrel won't feed slugs safely, because its overbored out to basically 10 gauge dimensions. VERY nice pattern at close to intermediate range. In truly dire straits, I'll fetch the .45-70 Government, but only in the WORST of situations, because that thing has the potential to go through several walls intact. Possibly several walls of my neighbor's house too. Not a good thing. I have a 'childs' prison not far from my home. "Echo Glen". Home to, among other things, an 11 year old muderer. Plenty of juvenile car thieves and other aggressive specimens as well. We're also getting a sex offender halfway house. I love it when the city exports it's problems to the 'wilderness'. Granted, we probably have some sick buggers out here too. But still, handing it off to the smallest population you can find because they'll complain less is kinda cheap. But no worries. I'm well equipped to handle most eventualities.
 
By John of Argghhh! on February 25, 2006 8:42 AM
JTG - you just let it *float* a little. Gives a nice circular pattern with excellent overlapping coverage.
 
By cw4(ret)billt on February 25, 2006 9:33 PM
From one of the Jersey troopers I pal around with: 1. If he makes it outside, drag him back inside. 2. Flip him face up. 3. Make sure there's an *obvious* entry wound in front. 4. Make sure the knife you leave next to him is one you don't mind losing. Don't be chintzy--choose a big one. I prefer blades to bullets--the personal touch, ya know? Says you *care*...
 
© 2008 John Donovan
All rights reserved.