In a recent opinion piece for The Washington Post, a former staff writer described his harrowing experience with a home intruder and his decision not to use his firearm. While the writer’s restraint is commendable, the situation sheds light on several misconceptions and tactical errors regarding home defense.
The op-ed mentions the writer’s hesitation to use his gun, stored trigger-locked and unloaded in a case, which he struggled to ready during the stressful encounter.
“So I decided to get my gun. It’s a .357 magnum Smith & Wesson revolver, which I kept trigger-locked and unloaded in a case in a walk-in closet. I retrieved the key hidden nearby but then truggled to find the trigger lock’s pinhole opening without eyeglasses. My nerves were jangling, too, as I huddled against a shirt rack, straining to hear whether anyone was still in the house and wondering where the cops were. After I fumbled with the key some more, I finally turned on a
light and unlocked the gun. I loaded the revolver, grabbed a flashlight and moved quietly toward the stairs.”
This highlights a crucial oversight: the importance of having quick access to a functional firearm in an emergency. Proper storage that balances safety and accessibility is key, and in this case, the writer’s storage method nearly cost him valuable response time.
Furthermore, the decision to seek out the intruder rather than securing himself in a safe room contradicts basic self-defense principles.
“I left the house dark to give myself an advantage but turned on the flashlight so I could
see.
At the bottom of the stairs, I shone the flashlight around the entry hall, into the dining room, toward the kitchen. Suddenly, as I stepped off the stairs, I realized the guy, who appeared to be in his 20s or 30s, was hiding in the living room, pressed against a doorway.”
Confronting an unknown threat increases the risk to the defender’s life. By closing the distance to the intruder, the writer exposed himself to unnecessary danger. It’s recommended to maintain a safe distance and a position of advantage whenever possible.
Lastly, the op-ed touches on a valid point about not wanting to use lethal force over material possessions. However, it’s imperative to understand that defensive actions should be driven by the immediate threat to life or serious bodily harm, not property.
This incident serves as a real-life example of why comprehensive training and understanding of self-defense laws are vital for gun owners. Being prepared means more than owning a firearm; it’s about having the knowledge and skills to use it safely, effectively, and legally, only when necessary.
Glad the homeowner survived, but it’s a great example of how to do all the wrong things.