Obviously it’s nice to have, but it’s a distant third priority. Fighting as self-defence should be treated strictly as a last resort. Especially for a sleepy woman in her night clothing.
It might not even be “nice to have” as such—the mere presence of (e.g.) a firearm, even your own firearm, would probably make it much more likely that you would get badly injured or killed in any potential home-invasion incident.
In case the guy hasn’t noticed or recognized the webcam, what about a “premises are under 24-hour video surveillance” sign?
It’s prohibitively difficult to locate statistics hosted by unbiased sources; but the rational response here would probably be to try to locate such statistics and decide whether the costs of firearm ownership outweigh the benefits, given AdeleneDawner’s elevated risk of home invasion.
Personally, I’d go with “large, well-trained dog” if allowed by the landlord, but I can’t show my work—it’s just an impression I’ve picked up from casual research into personal and home security over the years.
Personally, I’d go with “large, well-trained dog” if allowed by the landlord.
There’s a 50-lb limit for pets here, so basically it’s not. (For reference, Labs run about 55-80 lbs.) I have seen electronic gadgets that simulate a barking dog when they detect someone nearby, but that might be too disruptive in an apartment complex—there’s not a lot of foot traffic at night, but even rare false positives would be unpleasant for myself and my neighbors.
In general, I’m wary about threats in general and especially bluffs against an opponent of unknown rationality; but how about an electronic gadget that simulates a barking dog when you detect someone nearby?
I’d worry that scaring him away from your home with a barking dog would only enourage him to target you at your works parking garage, or something like that.
Right now you have the advantage of knowing where the enemy is going to attack.
I work from home and can be fairly accurately said to never go out except to the grocery store. Scaring him away from here, if done effectively, should be sufficient.
Weapons have come pretty far. My woman in her night clothing could deal with an intruder with out a whole lot of “fight”. It wouldn’t be pretty, but less effective solutions should be used before someone breaks in to your house to see you.
If you have to choose between a second locked door and a boomstick… go with the one that doesn’t try the same thing twice. Independent solution paths are good.
If you have to choose between a second locked door and a boomstick… go with the one that doesn’t try the same thing twice. Independent solution paths are good.
If the intruder had come through the door, I would agree with that assessment. But right now, all that stands in his way is a window. Breaking through that is not at all the same as breaking through a reinforced door. And a reinforced door is much easier to use in a panic, plus not nearly as likely to get you killed or injured—and note that at no point did I take mêlée weaponry into consideration. For someone who is new to firearms, putting one in your room can go wrong in so many ways that it probably decreases your chances of survival.
For someone who is new to firearms, putting one in your room can go wrong in so many ways that it probably decreases your chances of survival.
I agree. I’m essentially not even willing to consider getting a gun over this—by the time I’d be trained well enough to break even with it safety-wise, I expect to be out of here one way or the other. (If the house falls through, I’m going to look for another apartment. Also, I’m fairly clumsy and not good at the fine motor skills that I assume are involved in aiming.)
I am considering pepper spray, though using it indoors seems suboptimal in terms of living here afterward. A friend also suggested getting a stun gun… I’m not sure quite what to think about that one yet.
by the time I’d be trained well enough to break even with it safety-wise...Also, I’m fairly clumsy and not good at the fine motor skills that I assume are involved in aiming
For what it’s worth, you’re overestimating the difficulty of using a firearm safely.
If you’re anything like any of the people that I’ve seen pick up a gun for the first time, you really can just talk to the guy behind the counter for 5 minutes about gun mechanics/safety and be proficient enough for home defense.
It’s easy to hit your friend with a squirtgun before he can get to you. The only real question is whether your mindset allows you to do it with a real gun when it matters.
A friend also suggested getting a stun gun… I’m not sure quite what to think about that one yet.
Tasers actually fire darts up to 15 feet, and if both darts connect the person will stiffen and drop. They won’t be able to get up for 30 seconds, but they will be fine and capable immediately after the shock stops (keep pushing the button?). You only get one shot though.
Stun guns that don’t fire darts are basically toys. The current path is too short to lock up enough muscles to bring the person down, the shock stops as soon as the person moves off the end of the stun gun, and you have to be within touching distance.
For what it’s worth, you’re overestimating the difficulty of using a firearm safely.
I may be. Even so, it’s not really something I’m comfortable with (which I didn’t know before—it’s getting clearer the more we talk about it here) and I doubt I’d benefit from having one. It’s not just that I think I’d freeze rather than using it, it’s also that the idea of having one close enough to me that I could grab it in an emergency kind of freaks me out, and I expect I’d start keeping it stashed uselessly on a shelf in a closet at the first excuse.
and (c) a workable weapon?
Obviously it’s nice to have, but it’s a distant third priority. Fighting as self-defence should be treated strictly as a last resort. Especially for a sleepy woman in her night clothing.
It might not even be “nice to have” as such—the mere presence of (e.g.) a firearm, even your own firearm, would probably make it much more likely that you would get badly injured or killed in any potential home-invasion incident.
In case the guy hasn’t noticed or recognized the webcam, what about a “premises are under 24-hour video surveillance” sign?
It’s prohibitively difficult to locate statistics hosted by unbiased sources; but the rational response here would probably be to try to locate such statistics and decide whether the costs of firearm ownership outweigh the benefits, given AdeleneDawner’s elevated risk of home invasion.
Personally, I’d go with “large, well-trained dog” if allowed by the landlord, but I can’t show my work—it’s just an impression I’ve picked up from casual research into personal and home security over the years.
There’s a 50-lb limit for pets here, so basically it’s not. (For reference, Labs run about 55-80 lbs.) I have seen electronic gadgets that simulate a barking dog when they detect someone nearby, but that might be too disruptive in an apartment complex—there’s not a lot of foot traffic at night, but even rare false positives would be unpleasant for myself and my neighbors.
In general, I’m wary about threats in general and especially bluffs against an opponent of unknown rationality; but how about an electronic gadget that simulates a barking dog when you detect someone nearby?
Very good idea.
It’s a bit surprising that I’m having trouble finding a useful sound clip online, but I’ll definitely be implementing this one as soon as I do.
I’d worry that scaring him away from your home with a barking dog would only enourage him to target you at your works parking garage, or something like that.
Right now you have the advantage of knowing where the enemy is going to attack.
I work from home and can be fairly accurately said to never go out except to the grocery store. Scaring him away from here, if done effectively, should be sufficient.
50 lbs isn’t tiny. That’s a dog which could sound an alarm, and be no pleasure for an attacker to deal with.
A dog is a large commitment, but might be worth considering.
Good idea.
Weapons have come pretty far. My woman in her night clothing could deal with an intruder with out a whole lot of “fight”. It wouldn’t be pretty, but less effective solutions should be used before someone breaks in to your house to see you.
If you have to choose between a second locked door and a boomstick… go with the one that doesn’t try the same thing twice. Independent solution paths are good.
If the intruder had come through the door, I would agree with that assessment. But right now, all that stands in his way is a window. Breaking through that is not at all the same as breaking through a reinforced door. And a reinforced door is much easier to use in a panic, plus not nearly as likely to get you killed or injured—and note that at no point did I take mêlée weaponry into consideration. For someone who is new to firearms, putting one in your room can go wrong in so many ways that it probably decreases your chances of survival.
I agree. I’m essentially not even willing to consider getting a gun over this—by the time I’d be trained well enough to break even with it safety-wise, I expect to be out of here one way or the other. (If the house falls through, I’m going to look for another apartment. Also, I’m fairly clumsy and not good at the fine motor skills that I assume are involved in aiming.)
I am considering pepper spray, though using it indoors seems suboptimal in terms of living here afterward. A friend also suggested getting a stun gun… I’m not sure quite what to think about that one yet.
For what it’s worth, you’re overestimating the difficulty of using a firearm safely.
If you’re anything like any of the people that I’ve seen pick up a gun for the first time, you really can just talk to the guy behind the counter for 5 minutes about gun mechanics/safety and be proficient enough for home defense.
It’s easy to hit your friend with a squirtgun before he can get to you. The only real question is whether your mindset allows you to do it with a real gun when it matters.
Tasers actually fire darts up to 15 feet, and if both darts connect the person will stiffen and drop. They won’t be able to get up for 30 seconds, but they will be fine and capable immediately after the shock stops (keep pushing the button?). You only get one shot though.
Stun guns that don’t fire darts are basically toys. The current path is too short to lock up enough muscles to bring the person down, the shock stops as soon as the person moves off the end of the stun gun, and you have to be within touching distance.
I may be. Even so, it’s not really something I’m comfortable with (which I didn’t know before—it’s getting clearer the more we talk about it here) and I doubt I’d benefit from having one. It’s not just that I think I’d freeze rather than using it, it’s also that the idea of having one close enough to me that I could grab it in an emergency kind of freaks me out, and I expect I’d start keeping it stashed uselessly on a shelf in a closet at the first excuse.
Useful, thanks.