PDA

View Full Version : Archery for home defence?



ScottNT
12-21-2014, 05:28 PM
I just bought my first bow, a recurve 35# sage. Know nothing about archery, but it seems like itīs quite challenging. Iīm surprised at how powerful the "starter bow" is.

Would it not be a good tool to use for defence in general....Iīm thinking about the proīs and conīs.

Pro is no storage regs, or maybe stopping power? have only target arrows.

Conīs might be slow follow up shot.......lack of tri-rail for "tacticool" accessories.

lone-wolf
12-21-2014, 05:37 PM
out gunned, by a gun.
i'd imagine it'd be hard to keep at ready? ready to shoot. not sure of proper bow terms.
not maneuverable as a handgun
short range
no flashlight mount?
arrows don't fit in your pocket like a spare magazine does.

pro:
internet hero if you shoot a robber in the knee

Strewth
12-21-2014, 06:01 PM
Home defense?
Errrr...if someone shot me with a target point anywhere but the eye or heart, I'd be pretty ticked. Even with a crazy-wicked hunting head, arrows are not a one-shot stop. You NEED two hands to be a credible threat, and the second shot would be impossible to nock and fire in any sort of time. Better off with a bat, or golf club.
Archers were replaced with musketeers for a reason....

Waterloomike
12-21-2014, 06:34 PM
If that's what you have, use it. You can't miss from 20'.

Stevebot-7
12-21-2014, 07:06 PM
Depends on many factors.

Not least of all is the size of the bow. They come in many different sizes, mine when strung is something like 5'4" not a small bow by any means. There are shortbows, and most compounds are quite a bit more compact as well.

Traditional bows can be damaged if left strung for too long, which gives a point in compound's favour as they are designed to be strung for the duration of their service life.

As mentioned, much like a single shot rifle, a single shot bow is generally quite slow to reload and make ready. With practice it can be cut down quite a bit, and there are a few techniques such as holding a few arrows in your off hand, allowing you to pivot them into position on the riser and be ready to go. Fat risers make it difficult, and the extra vibrations can bugger with long range accuracy which is not much of a consideration for close range "defense".

Tip/head choice would be a huge consideration. Something like a bunny buster would suck majorly to be hit by but it would be a pain compliance tool essentially a ranged punch, a razor sharp broadhead could do some serious tissue damage but much as like anything else unless you get a central nervous system hit it will take time. Think of how many deer/moose or whatever can run for kilometers before dying. In a defensive situation that very well could mean the predator has more than enough time to kill you before it bleeds out. Field tip/target point would pretty much be a slow bullet with a non-expanding head, would not be fun to get hit with, but effect varies based on the draw weight of the bow and the exact impact location.

I'm a traditional guy myself, and I love me my takedown bow. Packs up nice and small so I can just slide it into my backpack. Compound bow would be better for general "defensive" use though, smaller and more maneuverable and able to be left strung and ready to go.

On the issue of bows vs. muskets though, there is a lot of research indicating they were replaced for shock and awe purposes. A troop of musketeers all firing in a volley was like the thundergod given form, even though the muskets were very slow to load, inaccurate, and produced a lot of smoke. They were however easier to learn to use. Being a professional archer takes a whole lot of time and is a very physically intensive activity. However at the time archers generally had a faster rate of fire, making them more functionally viable in terms of warfare.

Nowadays modern firearms kick the crap out of bows in pretty much every category.

Edward Teach
12-21-2014, 08:54 PM
If you don't want to use a firearm, melee is your best bet. Preferably with something that has a benign 'other' purpose.

Petamocto
12-21-2014, 08:56 PM
If a gun isn't an option, in my opinion a bow is a very bad choice for defence against humans. If your first shot isn't absolutely perfect, he's going to close the distance on you well within the time it takes you to reload.

You'd be much better off with something like a bat or hatchet.

Forbes/Hutton
12-21-2014, 09:04 PM
Home defense?
Errrr...if someone shot me with a target point anywhere but the eye or heart, I'd be pretty ticked. Even with a crazy-wicked hunting head, arrows are not a one-shot stop. You NEED two hands to be a credible threat, and the second shot would be impossible to nock and fire in any sort of time. Better off with a bat, or golf club.
Archers were replaced with musketeers for a reason....


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1o9RGnujlkI

kennymo
12-21-2014, 09:25 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1o9RGnujlkI

How very Katniss. As far as trying to wield a longbow in your upstairs hallway, I can't even imagine trying to fire my much shorter compound bow in that sort of space. And yes, an arrow will penetrate like the biggest magnum rifle cartridge you've ever seen, but even with a razor sharp 1-1/4" cutting diameter broad head it's more of a shoot then sit around and wait for them to bleed out a few minutes kind of weapon. You might be better off just trying to stab them with a shaft, or switching to another breed of sporting good....putter? Five iron?

Foxer
12-21-2014, 10:07 PM
but even with a razor sharp 1-1/4" cutting diameter broad head it's more of a shoot then sit around and wait for them to bleed out a few minutes kind of weapon.

I dunno. Deer are pretty hard to drop, and i've seen them go down HARD from a bow hit. Admittedly it was more than a 35 lb bow but i have to think having a good broadhead arrow sticking out of your chest would pretty much discourage someone from further action and i wouldn't expect it to take 'minutes' for them to bleed out. Arrow damage from the right arrow tends to be underrated. I know, because I underrated them till I saw the damage they could do.

You're still stuck with the 'one shot' issue. Some homes would likely be better suited to a bow than others. Certainly there are historic accounts of bows being used inside, so it's hardly impossible. But - I have to say a bow would be better than going one on one with an intruder of unknown strength if you can make it work in your circumstances. It's easy to keep a bow ready to use and no storage laws to worry about so there's that.

With practice and in the right circumstances i'd have to say it actually does sound viable. A gun is better, obviously, but I bet with a little practice a bow could do a huge pile of damage. Especially if the invader was french. (Oh come ON - someone was going to say it :) )

BrotherRockeye
12-21-2014, 10:47 PM
I think a judo point would have a more immediate and less permanent effect.
Getting pounded by a blunt at close quarters would likely curl you up in a little ball pretty fast.

ScottNT
12-21-2014, 11:08 PM
I just got my authorization to carry from the CAO (Chief Archery Officer) !!!

Some interesting points, I think skill is the biggest con. I know I would rather have a bow (or crossbow) ready to use than a gun thatīs trigger locked in a safe. But of course, given the same access the firearm would be a better choice.

Foxer
12-21-2014, 11:11 PM
I think a judo point would have a more immediate and less permanent effect.
Getting pounded by a blunt at close quarters would likely curl you up in a little ball pretty fast.

Also, guy whips out a bow and takes a shot at you. Do you, y'know, REALLY want to screw around with a guy like that? :)

RELOAD
12-21-2014, 11:37 PM
i'm to poor of a shot with a bow and since a gun cannot be used my only choice is to hide under the bed and wait for the rcmp......what a sad little life.

BrotherRockeye
12-22-2014, 06:08 AM
i'm to poor of a shot with a bow and since a gun cannot be used my only choice is to hide under the bed and wait for the rcmp......what a sad little life.

on a tv show...I saw a guy shoot 3 arrows at once...you could practice that... :p

coastal
12-22-2014, 08:27 AM
I think the only practical use is if you had an outdoor alarm and you could be alerted early and be waiting from up on a porch. I lost 7 arrows trying to get my nemesis squirrel that rips apart the garbage...once the adrenaline kicked in I couldn't hit that stupid thing for the life of me....he just sat there and laughed.

kennymo
12-22-2014, 08:51 AM
on a tv show...I saw a guy shoot 3 arrows at once...you could practice that... :p

http://i1328.photobucket.com/albums/w534/kennymo81/Mobile%20Uploads/548752A8-B16F-4EA5-9EDE-4CEE691EDEDB_zpslkdhvaj9.jpg (http://s1328.photobucket.com/user/kennymo81/media/Mobile%20Uploads/548752A8-B16F-4EA5-9EDE-4CEE691EDEDB_zpslkdhvaj9.jpg.html)

ScottNT
12-22-2014, 09:55 AM
3 arrows at a time is illegal....one pull of the string - one arrow. Otherwise itīs prohibited as full auto. Also quivers must not hold more than 5 arrows, unless itīs a pistol crossbow then you can have 10.

Candychikita
12-22-2014, 10:07 AM
arrows don't fit in your pocket like a spare magazine does.

Meh. You can stuff arrows in a sock or a boot if you have to. I did an entire 3D competition with my arrows shoved in my boot because I had a quiver issue. I looked like a absolute doofus, but it did the trick.

If you're set for a decent poundage and you have some nasty heads on it, you can do some damage. Target points can do a decent number at a short distance. The lighter poundage your bow is set, the less power you've got...as well your arrows catch the wind and the trajectory changes. When you crank the poundage you have to reset your sights. Right now I've got a sight peg set at 10 yard increments for 50 yards and I dread resetting them all :( :(

Reloading would be the biggest issue. Since my bow is light, it wouldn't make a very good bludgeoning tool after the first shot.

TractorPappa
12-22-2014, 11:49 AM
I use a crossbow now because of a shoulder injury

BrotherRockeye
12-22-2014, 11:52 AM
I came across model 1908 Mauser chamber 300 Win Mag with scope mounts and it appeared to have had open sites added. Would this have been a custom or altered rifle?


edit:
asking a question on an entirely different subject than the original post is considered hijacking a thread.
...best to start your own and ask the question there...in the appropriate forum if possible.

Welcome to GOC




That's better.
When I reread my original post it didn't strike me as neighborly...

Stevebot-7
12-22-2014, 01:47 PM
3 arrows at a time is illegal....one pull of the string - one arrow. Otherwise itīs prohibited as full auto. Also quivers must not hold more than 5 arrows, unless itīs a pistol crossbow then you can have 10.

Actually pistol crossbows are Prohibited. We all know that a small one-handed crossbow with a draw weight of 20 pounds is far more deadly than a two-hander with a draw weight of 200 pounds.

Now I really want to set up a archery 3gun type competition. Bow, sword, and spear perhaps.

OEM
12-22-2014, 02:03 PM
What? You guys never watched Lord of the Rings? The guy with the bow is amazing at using his bow to beat ogres with. I think you need pointy ears to be able to do that though.

Seriously, in terms of ability to kill, a bow is severely under-rated. There people out there who hunt bears, moose and other large game with trad recurves. Shot placement is key though. And I've read of many that don't run for kilometers. They literally drop right there or maybe just a few steps. Go sign up to an archery forum to read the stories and see the pictures.

Inside the house, I think a field point would be devastating. There's nothing quite like having a stick sticking out of the chest to stop someone...physically as well as mentally. One need not have it pulled...just nocked. If threatened the draw and release can be literally done in the blink of an eye.

If your assailant has a gun, all bets are off of course. For multiple assailants in a large house where one could hide, a bow would be amazing because of its silence. Geez, haven't you guys seen walking dead? A recurve reloads much faster than a crossbow though.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

blacksmithden
12-22-2014, 02:27 PM
Pick up the bow. Throw away the arrows. Quietly wait around a corner for the guy. Belt him over the head with the bow. :)

Forbes/Hutton
12-22-2014, 03:20 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E3ykihXBp5Q

And you're all forgetting about the about the exploding arrowheads taking out the Hind-d in the 2nd movie.

Or there's always flaming arrows, if a flaming arrow sticking out of the chest doesn't cause someone to run away, I don't know what will. Other than maybe following up the flaming arrow with a balloon filled with gasoline. That should be enough to communicate "get off my lawn" to anybody.

Candychikita
12-22-2014, 03:26 PM
Stevebot7, if you did a 3gun style competition using any 3 weapons of choice, I'd be down for that. That might actually make an interesting new thread...what 3 weapons of choice.

ScottNT
12-22-2014, 03:49 PM
Iīm just saying if itīs good enough for the Dukes of Hazzard.....might need a permit for the dynamite tips though.

Iīm actually not sure if the silence of a bow is a pro or a con?

Stevebot-7
12-22-2014, 04:02 PM
Stevebot7, if you did a 3gun style competition using any 3 weapons of choice, I'd be down for that. That might actually make an interesting new thread...what 3 weapons of choice.
Done. I dunno if that's the best location for the thread, but it would seem to fit.
http://www.gunownersofcanada.ca/showthread.php?19244-3gun-style-competition-with-traditional-tools&p=204739#post204739

Bows can actually make quite a bit of noise. Not anywhere on par with a firearm, but depending on exact circumstances you can get some loud "Thung! Whack!" going on.

Foxer
12-22-2014, 04:18 PM
Iīm just saying if itīs good enough for the Dukes of Hazzard.....might need a permit for the dynamite tips though.

Iīm actually not sure if the silence of a bow is a pro or a con?

Well - if you felt the need I suppose you could always shout "BANG!" after you nail the guy?

Petamocto
12-22-2014, 05:17 PM
The primary mistake some of you are mistaking is confusing the question of an arrow's potential lethality with a good shot, and the decision as to whether a bow makes a good defence weapon.

Yes an arrow would have devastating consequences if it hit someone in the vitals, but that is the end of your argument because nobody on this forum could pull that shot off under the circumstances.

Regardless of what you can do in daylight with a relaxed pulse against a still target, you could NOT achieve the shot required under a realistic home defence situation. First, your pulse will be at 200 and your brain and body won't be working properly; I doubt the average person would even be able to hold an arrow with their fingers. Next, you're talking about a smart human target that is going to be extremely close to you, and isn't going to stand still while he's looking at you pointing a bow at him, if you can see each other at all because it may be dark.

This thread has two conclusions:

1. An arrow would certainly incapacitate a human if a perfect shot were achieved; but

2. A bow is still a stupid choice, because not only could nobody pull that shot off in real life against a human moving target, the fact that you're limited to one shot makes it worse than other practical options.

Stevebot-7
12-22-2014, 05:21 PM
The primary mistake some of you are mistaking is confusing the question of an arrow's potential lethality with a good shot, and the decision as to whether a bow makes a good defence weapon.

Yes an arrow would have devastating consequences if it hit someone in the vitals, but that is the end of your argument because nobody on this forum could pull that shot off under the circumstances.

Regardless of what you can do in daylight with a relaxed pulse against a still target, you could NOT achieve the shot required under a realistic home defence situation. First, your pulse will be at 200 and your brain and body won't be working properly; I doubt the average person would even be able to hold an arrow with their fingers. Next, you're talking about a smart human target that is going to be extremely close to you, and isn't going to stand still while he's looking at you pointing a bow at him, if you can see each other at all because it may be dark.

This thread has two conclusions:

1. An arrow would certainly incapacitate a human if a perfect shot were achieved; but

2. A bow is still a stupid choice, because not only could nobody pull that shot off in real life against a human moving target, the fact that you're limited to one shot makes it worse than other practical options.

Challenge accepted. On my next trip to the range I'll see what sort of snap shooting results I can get.

Petamocto
12-22-2014, 06:04 PM
???

Did you miss the entire point that you can't achieve real life results at a range?

Your life isn't in imminent danger at the range, and your body reacts very differently when you are under threat than when you are calm.

Range results are useless. To get even close, you'd have to sprint for several minutes before conducting your "test" to bring your pulse up, but it still wouldn't be accurate because there would be no fear.

In a real life threat incident, your fingers wouldn't even work when you went to grab an arrow. Before you respond acting tough and saying "Yes I could", realize that you are going against a mountain of evidence the army has conducted stating that under high stress situations, only large muscle groups can work, and even then, only if you have trained for years and years.

Your average person would be totally useless with a bow if an intruder were in the house, so go do your range test and you'll validate what you can do on a range, not in real life.

coastal
12-22-2014, 06:31 PM
The only way to prove this, is a showdown between a paintball gun wielding assailant, vs a larping arrow equipped archer. Mythbuster time.

Foxer
12-22-2014, 06:31 PM
The primary mistake some of you are mistaking is confusing the question of an arrow's potential lethality with a good shot, and the decision as to whether a bow makes a good defence weapon.

Yes an arrow would have devastating consequences if it hit someone in the vitals, but that is the end of your argument because nobody on this forum could pull that shot off under the circumstances.

Regardless of what you can do in daylight with a relaxed pulse against a still target, you could NOT achieve the shot required under a realistic home defence situation. First, your pulse will be at 200 and your brain and body won't be working properly; I doubt the average person would even be able to hold an arrow with their fingers. Next, you're talking about a smart human target that is going to be extremely close to you, and isn't going to stand still while he's looking at you pointing a bow at him, if you can see each other at all because it may be dark.

This thread has two conclusions:

1. An arrow would certainly incapacitate a human if a perfect shot were achieved; but

2. A bow is still a stupid choice, because not only could nobody pull that shot off in real life against a human moving target, the fact that you're limited to one shot makes it worse than other practical options.

I'm not at all certain that is accurate. I don't know that it would be any harder to do than with a gun. You're talking about pretty short ranges here - 15 feet or so - it's not hard to hit a target at that range and given the constraints of a house he's probably moving directly towards you. i've seen people shoot skeet with a bow (regular event out this way) and i'm thinking a human sized target wouldn't be much harder. Even if you wing 'em in the leg or something that's still got to slow them down a hell of a lot. You can draw and fire pretty damn fast in one fluid motion. Light doesn't seem like more of a problem than it would be with a gun - lots of simple solutions there.

Might be fun to try a simulation in a few layouts to see where it would and wouldn't work.

Foxer
12-22-2014, 06:33 PM
In a real life threat incident, your fingers wouldn't even work when you went to grab an arrow.

I don't believe THAT for a second. That's like those who claim that nobody can work a shotgun properly in a high tension situation. Oh hell yeah you can :)

It's like anything - practice and it probably won't be a problem. Frankly i'd rather have the shotgun obviously, but i don't know you'd lose MUCH ground at all with the bow, for the first shot at least.

coastal
12-22-2014, 06:35 PM
If you had time... But trying to string an arrow in a panic, in the dark while fearing for your life would be a very humbling and potentially fatal experience. ;)

Stevebot-7
12-22-2014, 06:43 PM
Results on the range are just as real as results at 3am in the dark, unless either of the incidents happens to be a dream or hallucination or something. They may not be identical, but nonetheless it will still be an interesting test. Much the same as how some people will practice opening their gun storage container, inserting a magazine, and firing. There's just as many fine motor skills involved with that as with grabbing a bow, nocking an arrow, and making a snap shot.

The only useless thing would be for me to say, "There's no point in even trying." and never even make the attempt.

Progress requires experimentation. I am mildly familiar with some of the research into survival stress responses, operant conditioning, and "breaking the freeze", and one of the constants is to cultivate a mindset that you can do whatever it is that you're trying to do. Yes, fine technique goes out the window for all but a few special people, but significant strides can be made with dedication. Perhaps I'll never be able to nock and release a second arrow, but I won't know that for sure until I try. Who knows, maybe I'll be able to reliably put that first arrow into a fist sized target at 10 meters and it may save my life some day from a charging bear, or maybe I'll never be in such a situation and I'll live to be the oldest man in the world. We won't know for sure until I'm dead.

The first step to performing a technique under stress is to be able to it while calm. If you can't shoot a gun worth crap on a calm range, it's unlikely your results will improve under stress. Same principle applies here. In any case, I lose nothing by making another trip to the range and trying to improve my skills.

ScottNT
12-22-2014, 06:44 PM
I tend to agree about the close quarters and as mentioned before about the skill or learning curve required for a bow over say a rifle....however I would argue that 99% of gun owners do not train in dynamic situations. I donīt think the majority of firearms owners conduct 2 am drills clearing room to room.

I do think the majority of bow hunters would be pretty good under stress.....maybe not the hungry ones.

Petamocto
12-22-2014, 06:45 PM
I don't believe THAT for a second.

Really? Do you want to go there? You really think you know more than the combined conclusions of the Army and numerous universities?

If you'd like to continue acting like you know more, I'll invest the time to dig out all of the references and studies. Please don't go there, you'll end up getting served and looking bad.

Gaidheal
12-22-2014, 07:11 PM
I would never choose a bow for inside the home defense. I'd grab a machete before that.

I shoot a traditional recurve - instinctive shooting where I don't take time to aim... I keep my eye on the target, draw and release almost immediately.

That said I recently broke a fight between my dog and one that roams the neighbourhood with a shot to the other dog with a bunny buster. Followup shot got it up the ass at a dead run 50-100 feet away.

If I happened to use a bow inside the house at a human-sized target: If I could see the target it would get hit hard.

But I would never choose that over an SKS or handgun.

Foxer
12-22-2014, 07:43 PM
Really? Do you want to go there? You really think you know more than the combined conclusions of the Army and numerous universities?
If they're going to claim that you can't handle something like an arrow when you hear a noise in your home at nite, then yup. That's just not reality based.


If you'd like to continue acting like you know more, I'll invest the time to dig out all of the references and studies. Please don't go there, you'll end up getting served and looking bad.
Knock yourself out. I suspect if you think about it a little, you'll figure out how that's going to end for you but what the heck :)

Foxer
12-22-2014, 07:45 PM
But I would never choose that over an SKS or handgun.

I doubt anyone would. I think the bow would be the option you went to if a firearm wasn't available.

Strewth
12-22-2014, 07:54 PM
I doubt anyone would. I think the bow would be the option you went to if a firearm wasn't available.

Best medieval weapon for home defense thread? Halberd tomahawk?
https://encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQYrzeLeeR2fFFi8E_wp0eP9waDscai_ EywZz2oTJWXJlthp4d1

Foxer
12-22-2014, 07:57 PM
Best medieval weapon for home defense thread? Halberd tomahawk?


http://www.mariuszkozik.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/005_Roman_soldiers_operating_the_ballista.jpg

ScottNT
12-22-2014, 08:05 PM
I think itīs interesting some people have said they would choose a machete/bat...axe....I really donīt think I would do that well at hand to hand combat. If you were going to use a machete or a sword letīs say how would you even practice that?

I know in the heat of things one would have no shortage of adrenalin,,,,but you may well be up against somebody who is a better fighter than you and you have no advantage of distance.....just thinking out loud

lone-wolf
12-22-2014, 08:16 PM
If you were going to use a machete or a sword letīs say how would you even practice that?

With a partner. Also knife based self defense training would likely apply.

Strewth
12-22-2014, 08:24 PM
I think itīs interesting some people have said they would choose a machete/bat...axe....I really donīt think I would do that well at hand to hand combat. If you were going to use a machete or a sword letīs say how would you even practice that?

I know in the heat of things one would have no shortage of adrenalin,,,,but you may well be up against somebody who is a better fighter than you and you have no advantage of distance.....just thinking out loud

Well....that's why (in some countries) people use a firearm for home defense; it mitigates a lot of the physical advantage your attacker may have.

I used to "practice" with a sword in the backyard, lots of fun! You could lay out your interior hallways and rooms in tape on the lawn?

Foxer's idea has merit, but I'm not sure I could lace up my sandals quickly enough; also the hobnails would play hob (haha) with my tile floor.

Foxer
12-22-2014, 08:28 PM
Foxer's idea has merit, but I'm not sure I could lace up my sandals quickly enough; also the hobnails would play hob (haha) with my tile floor.

Well you gotta 'modern' it up a little bud. Go with flip flops.

lone-wolf
12-22-2014, 08:33 PM
Well you gotta 'modern' it up a little bud. Go with flip flops.
http://i27.tinypic.com/1zqujux.jpg

Foxer
12-22-2014, 08:35 PM
http://i27.tinypic.com/1zqujux.jpg

LOL - of COURSE someone makes tactical flip flops. What was I thinking. :)

FALover
12-22-2014, 09:09 PM
If home defense is a priority get a well trained attack dog or two. I worked for a well to do Texan years ago who imported Arabian horses from the Saudis. He had a pack of Great Danes that were not to be phucked with. They would corner you and wait. I was told that as long as they did not hear the 'secret' attack word there would be no problem. The dogs were trained to kill on command. I never asked what the word(s) were but they were something that would not come up in general conversations.

Stevebot-7
12-22-2014, 10:14 PM
I think itīs interesting some people have said they would choose a machete/bat...axe....I really donīt think I would do that well at hand to hand combat. If you were going to use a machete or a sword letīs say how would you even practice that?

I know in the heat of things one would have no shortage of adrenalin,,,,but you may well be up against somebody who is a better fighter than you and you have no advantage of distance.....just thinking out loud
The primary thing I have learned from my self defense class is that blades are terrifying. I would rather face down someone who has a gun and wants to hurt me than someone who has a knife and wants to hurt me. Blades are always "loaded", and unlike anything else the hysterical sissy fit of flailing your hands is both effective and extremely hard to defend against.

Many people will see it the other way though, and they'll worry more about a guy who has a gun versus a guy who "just" has a knife.


The biggest issue for us would be accessing it quick enough before our brain shuts off and we go monkey mode. That is where women have the advantage, their SSR almost always occurs after a delay of a few minutes, us guys tend to peak fast and blow our load all at once. Trust me man, fighting a woman is pure evil because they can still use their brains while you're flailing, and then when you start to get exhausted they're just now hitting their adrenaline peak. It's also the basis for why men almost always "lose" arguments with women, you get mad, then start to calm down, and she gets mad, and stays mad for a lot longer than most guys can.

You could easily get a trainer machete or some such made out of wood or dull metal, just keep in mind that even one of those can cripple or kill if you hit the right spots or pretty much any spot at high enough speed. I love partner drills, in my class we primarily focus on starting unarmed such as if you were ambushed. For any training though you need to introduce a flaw or handicap. Otherwise when you practice breaking somebody's legs with your baseball bat you'd quickly run out of training partners. Evidence has taught me that going slow is the least worst option. Never heard of anyone moving in slow motion under stress, but I have heard of people going full speed and light contact. You really don't want to condition yourself to quickly hit someone lightly. It looks fancy in the dojo, but it's not effective for stopping threats against you. The most effective defense is to render the attacker incapable of continuing to attack you, and the best way to train for that is full contact low speed. Slow is smooth, smooth is fast.

This is deviating somewhat from the main topic though, and I'm really hungry so I'll stop now.

Strewth
12-22-2014, 10:20 PM
LOL - of COURSE someone makes tactical flip flops. What was I thinking. :)

Not enough picatinny rail. How can I mount my tactical toenail clipper? Maybe there's a secret compartment....?

Foxer
12-22-2014, 10:40 PM
Not enough picatinny rail. How can I mount my tactical toenail clipper? Maybe there's a secret compartment....?

No no - you're supposed to be able to fling it off thus surprising the intruder when it hits his face, thus distracting him long enough for you to get a flying scissors butt kick in.

Beware my dancing crane flip-flop-foot-fling mortal. Few have faced it and lived to tell the tale.

(Ok - admittedly they died laughing except for one guy who died much later from a bad case of athlete's nose, but still... pretty deadly)

Foxer
12-22-2014, 10:41 PM
The primary thing I have learned from my self defense class is that blades are terrifying. I would rather face down someone who has a gun and wants to hurt me than someone who has a knife and wants to hurt me. Blades are always "loaded", and unlike anything else the hysterical sissy fit of flailing your hands is both effective and extremely hard to defend against.

Many people will see it the other way though, and they'll worry more about a guy who has a gun versus a guy who "just" has a knife.


The biggest issue for us would be accessing it quick enough before our brain shuts off and we go monkey mode. That is where women have the advantage, their SSR almost always occurs after a delay of a few minutes, us guys tend to peak fast and blow our load all at once. Trust me man, fighting a woman is pure evil because they can still use their brains while you're flailing, and then when you start to get exhausted they're just now hitting their adrenaline peak. It's also the basis for why men almost always "lose" arguments with women, you get mad, then start to calm down, and she gets mad, and stays mad for a lot longer than most guys can.

You could easily get a trainer machete or some such made out of wood or dull metal, just keep in mind that even one of those can cripple or kill if you hit the right spots or pretty much any spot at high enough speed. I love partner drills, in my class we primarily focus on starting unarmed such as if you were ambushed. For any training though you need to introduce a flaw or handicap. Otherwise when you practice breaking somebody's legs with your baseball bat you'd quickly run out of training partners. Evidence has taught me that going slow is the least worst option. Never heard of anyone moving in slow motion under stress, but I have heard of people going full speed and light contact. You really don't want to condition yourself to quickly hit someone lightly. It looks fancy in the dojo, but it's not effective for stopping threats against you. The most effective defense is to render the attacker incapable of continuing to attack you, and the best way to train for that is full contact low speed. Slow is smooth, smooth is fast.

This is deviating somewhat from the main topic though, and I'm really hungry so I'll stop now.
Dude - you realize you're making the idea of just nailing him with a pointy stick at a distance look pretty damn attractive :)

Gaidheal
12-22-2014, 10:45 PM
The primary thing I have learned from my self defense class is that blades are terrifying. I would rather face down someone who has a gun and wants to hurt me than someone who has a knife and wants to hurt me. Blades are always "loaded", and unlike anything else the hysterical sissy fit of flailing your hands is both effective and extremely hard to defend against.

My go-to bump-in-the-night blade. Would be my 1911 but that might not be completely legally defensible so this is it. yeah...

http://gearpatrol.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/Gerber-Gator-Machete-Pro-Gear-Patrol11.jpg

SpenceyHR
12-22-2014, 11:09 PM
My go-to bump-in-the-night blade. Would be my 1911 but that might not be completely legally defensible so this is it. yeah...

http://gearpatrol.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/Gerber-Gator-Machete-Pro-Gear-Patrol11.jpg

Sorry to keep the derailment going but; I keep seeing this machete in the stores and wonder: "what the hell is this thing designed for?" what with the weird hook part.

Foxer
12-22-2014, 11:13 PM
Sorry to keep the derailment going but; I keep seeing this machete in the stores and wonder: "what the hell is this thing designed for?" what with the weird hook part.

brush and bramble cutting. It's a modern take on an old proven design called a woodsman's pal. You can use it to clear brush for your campsite or hack down larger branches and small trees. Very effective for that - probably wouldn't do a badguy any good upside the head either :)

Stevebot-7
12-22-2014, 11:14 PM
Dude - you realize you're making the idea of just nailing him with a pointy stick at a distance look pretty damn attractive :)

Yeah, the other main thing I realized is that "fighting" in the sense of mano-e-mano I hit you you hit me is stupid. Hunters will always beat fighters, killers will always beat hunters. In as much as there are no absolutes, that is one of the few that comes closest. As an example, everyone wants to see Mayweather fight the Pacman dude whose name I don't really care about enough to google...yet any of us could take either one of them down if we decided to hunt them. They may be superb fighters, perhaps some of the best currently alive in their respective sports, but a pimply ten year old girl with a stolen bottle of high proof alcohol, a rag, and a lighter could barbecue either of them.

The only advantage to handling a self defense situation at close range is because there's more case law precedence and there's a lot of paperwork and miscellaneous relatives coming out of the woodwork to say what a sweet young child you murdered. The most intelligent option is to nuke them from orbit, but that generally doesn't go over so well on the PR front and then you get stuck into a bad position of trying to say you were not trying to kill them, but you felt the need to use lethal force, to wit a firearm.

At the end of the day, fighting is a social tool used to establish tribal dominance. It's designed to be relatively safe, because the species that tears itself apart is putting itself at a serious disadvantage. Think about how we humans fight, usually lots of puffing yourself up, shouting, trying to make yourself look tough. Now try that on a deer. Go out to the forest and start yelling, "Hey Bambi! Yeah you, you antler'd pile of crap. You think you're so tough? Come over here and prove it!" You would probably be the worst hunter in history. In all likelihood you would never manage to kill a single deer in your whole life.

Other animals do it as well, the way dogs fight with lots of barking and growling and posturing is completely different from how canines hunt. They are quiet and employ stealth up until they are in position. Same with mountain goats, they butt horns together, they don't sneak up on eachother and push the other off a cliffside even though it would be most effective for ensuring you get the sexy goat ladies.

Steveo9mm
12-23-2014, 10:07 AM
12 gauge slugs

BrotherRockeye
12-23-2014, 10:23 AM
???

In a real life threat incident, your fingers wouldn't even work when you went to grab an arrow. Before you respond acting tough and saying "Yes I could", realize that you are going against a mountain of evidence the army has conducted stating that under high stress situations, only large muscle groups can work, and even then, only if you have trained for years and years.

Your average person would be totally useless with a bow if an intruder were in the house, so go do your range test and you'll validate what you can do on a range, not in real life.

I've been charged by a bear at short range and my fine motor skills remained functional even with the adrenaline rush involved...with a bow in my hands...my body reacted exactly as it always had, due to muscle memory. I drew and dropped my pin on target. Fortunately it was a mock charge so I didn't have to test accuracy or stopping power.

so... I disagree with your statement and would like to voice my disappointment at your attitude in this thread...I don't recall you behaving like that before.
XMas stress there bud? :)

Foxer
12-23-2014, 10:37 AM
12 gauge slugs
Out of a bow? I gotta tell ya, i don't get much 'pull' room even out of the 3,5 inchers :) :) (Baddda bing! Tip your waitresses folks, i'm here all week!)

Stevebot-7
12-23-2014, 10:55 AM
Out of a bow? I gotta tell ya, i don't get much 'pull' room even out of the 3,5 inchers :) :) (Baddda bing! Tip your waitresses folks, i'm here all week!)
It'd actually be pretty easy to rig up a shotgun bow. Sort of along the lines of a paintball bow, except with a steel barrel and some sort of firing pin assembly that the string hits. Would be an interesting test, if pretty damned weird.

Foxer
12-23-2014, 10:58 AM
It'd actually be pretty easy to rig up a shotgun bow. Sort of along the lines of a paintball bow, except with a steel barrel and some sort of firing pin assembly that the string hits. Would be an interesting test, if pretty damned weird.

Well, i suppose on the upside it would probably take a lot longer for the police to figure out exactly how to write up the charges :) Gives you more time to consult with your lawyer and all.

kennymo
12-23-2014, 11:25 AM
It'd actually be pretty easy to rig up a shotgun bow. Sort of along the lines of a paintball bow, except with a steel barrel and some sort of firing pin assembly that the string hits. Would be an interesting test, if pretty damned weird.

http://youtu.be/6bxE7rxY6fU

Maybe we're approaching this from the wrong angle....

(Hope this guy's not too annoying, I watched with the sound off. Head to about halfway for relevant footage)

Haywire1
12-25-2014, 04:01 PM
In all honesty a bow would not be an effective tool for home defense for a couple reasons.
#1) a bow kills by bleeding out a target, rather than hydrostatic shock. An arrow simply does not carry anywhere near enough energy to stop its target instantly.
#2) it is well documented that over the distances involved in a home defense scenario, an assailant can cross that distance before you get the bow drawn, never mind loose a shot. I am extrapolating here, but it is fact people can cross home defense distances fast enough to beat a drawn gun in many cases never mind nocking and drawing a bow.

3) if a bow was suitable, then the entire middle ages, with their using archers as artillery, equiping archers with both hand weapons such as axes or swords, and detailing infantry to protect the archers, were mistaken. Is a bow effective? Certainly, but a close range weapon it is not. If it was, then it would have been archers that were used on the front lines rather than pikemen, swordsmen etc. Not to mention the difficulties involved in moving and aiming with a fully drawn bow in the dark in your house.

Foxer
12-25-2014, 04:14 PM
#1) a bow kills by bleeding out a target, rather than hydrostatic shock. An arrow simply does not carry anywhere near enough energy to stop its target instantly.

Bullets rarely do either. Unless you get in a lucky cns shot the bad guy doesn't exactly expire when you pull the trigger. Yet they are affective - in fact most bad guys give up after being shot once even if they are not seriously injured or incapacitated.

And if your choice is bow or melee - you're STILL way better off doing hand to hand with a guy who's going to bleed out entirely in about 20 seconds than someone perfectly healthy :)


#2) it is well documented that over the distances involved in a home defense scenario, an assailant can cross that distance before you get the bow drawn, never mind loose a shot.


I'd like to see the research on bow vs charging lunatic timing :) provided the arrow is nocked and you're holding the bow in a relative state of readiness, it should take well under a half second for an instinctual shooter to draw and fire - and you're not likely to miss entirely on a closing target at those ranges.


if a bow was suitable, then the entire middle ages, with their using archers as artillery, equiping archers with both hand weapons such as axes or swords, and detailing infantry to protect the archers, were mistaken.

Well first off - different bows, and different opponents (granted - if you're attacker shows up with a heavy sheild or suit of armour you may have some challenges). And different arrows of course. If we were to go with that logic we'd have to say that shotguns are ineffective because they're not a primary battle rifle of modern armies.

And - in japan there were indeed recorded cases of bow use inside buildings effectively (smaller bows than the regular ones).

But again - there is a difference between addressing an intruder and warfare.

In all cases and in all ways a gun is a better choice. I think that's obvious. But it would be very interesting to run some simulations and see how effective a bow might be for those who can't or don't have firearms readily available.

Gaidheal
12-25-2014, 05:07 PM
Yay Xmas... got another 'bump in the night" option today - actually this might be a new carry item for the vehicle...

http://www.coldsteel.com/images/products/92BS_m.jpg
http://www.coldsteel.com/images/Riposte/brooklyn-smasher.jpg

Petamocto
12-25-2014, 06:11 PM
I disagree with your statement and would like to voice my disappointment at your attitude in this thread...I don't recall you behaving like that before.
XMas stress there bud? :)

Any condescending tone I've had in this thread had nothing to do with Chrisrmas, and everything to do with being shocked that anyone would actually try to defend/recommend the use of a bow for home defence.

That said, I am sorry if I came off as overly snippy.

BrotherRockeye
12-25-2014, 10:47 PM
Any condescending tone I've had in this thread had nothing to do with Chrisrmas, and everything to do with being shocked that anyone would actually try to defend/recommend the use of a bow for home defence.

That said, I am sorry if I came off as overly snippy.

I think one of us misread, as I thought it was a "tongue in cheek" type thread...maybe I was wrong...

No matter, it's only seconds out of our lives.

Happy Holiday!

Brad
12-26-2014, 05:11 AM
Out of a bow? I gotta tell ya, i don't get much 'pull' room even out of the 3,5 inchers :) :) (Baddda bing! Tip your waitresses folks, i'm here all week!)

Post of 2014 I almost laughed out loud.

ScottNT
12-26-2014, 09:47 AM
Thanks everybody for all the comments...a lot of good points. I take away two things from the original question...one being a bow is a more effective weapon than I originally thought and two being that difficulty in using it in close quarters (inside a house) would be a major negative.

A big plus in my mind that I have not seen mentioned is the re-use of ammo. While not 100% true due to breakage or loss, you could survive quite along time on say 10 arrows (Full disclosure...I would not as I seem to lose 1 arrow per 3 shots)

Foxer
12-26-2014, 11:18 AM
Thanks everybody for all the comments...a lot of good points. I take away two things from the original question...one being a bow is a more effective weapon than I originally thought and two being that difficulty in using it in close quarters (inside a house) would be a major negative.

A big plus in my mind that I have not seen mentioned is the re-use of ammo. While not 100% true due to breakage or loss, you could survive quite along time on say 10 arrows (Full disclosure...I would not as I seem to lose 1 arrow per 3 shots)
Well... technically true I suppose but how long were you planning on being home invaded for? :) If you get thru ten arrows and have to start 'recycling', that's a lot of bad guys :)

Edward Teach
12-29-2014, 12:45 PM
Yay Xmas... got another 'bump in the night" option today - actually this might be a new carry item for the vehicle...

http://www.coldsteel.com/images/products/92BS_m.jpg
http://www.coldsteel.com/images/Riposte/brooklyn-smasher.jpg


If you're going to carry a bat, it might also be a good idea to carry a ball and a glove as well. Then it looks more like your intended use is 'sport' and not 'smash'. You never know when you're going to run afoul of overzealous cops or prosecutors.

soopercooper
07-15-2015, 04:56 PM
I just bought my first bow, a recurve 35# sage. Know nothing about archery, but it seems like itīs quite challenging. Iīm surprised at how powerful the "starter bow" is.

Would it not be a good tool to use for defence in general....Iīm thinking about the proīs and conīs.

Pro is no storage regs, or maybe stopping power? have only target arrows.

Conīs might be slow follow up shot.......lack of tri-rail for "tacticool" accessories.

First rules of defense I learned was
-dependability and ease of use,maneuverability
-Intimidation factor. *A BIG ONE* Even if You just got off the boat from portugal when You look down those two pipes of a sawn 12 You just know that what comes outta there is final
-Home defense is not about actually hitting him it's more about how much drywall You bury him under. The bigger the pile of drywall the less likely he'll be to want to stay.
I love my bows, but my cut SXS W exp hammers does the above mentioned WAY better than a bow

Picture this scenario. You come to the top of my stairwell only to hear the hard crisp click click of the two hammers being drawn back. At quik notice it's not one of these outlaw cheapies, no.It's a 1800$ collector grade gun cut to worthlessness just to spray Your grey matter should You happen to break in. The nearly toothless mid 50's hillbilly is standing there wearing nothing but his toothless grin and dirty underwear. Telling You what? He don't care what you just saw cause he ain't planning on letting you leave to tell anyone. With those pipes a foot from Your head are you getting a tad nervous? Then he touches the first off beside your head which sends you flying down the stairs from literal shell shock. Thinking bout the door yet?

I won't go further

Scenario two,,,,,,Twang :rolleyes:

Foxer
07-15-2015, 04:58 PM
First rules of defense I learned was
-dependability and ease of use,maneuverability
-Intimidation factor. *A BIG ONE* Even if You just got off the boat from portugal when You look down those two pipes of a sawn 12 You just know that what comes outta there is final
-Home defense is not about actually hitting him it's more about how much drywall You bury him under. The bigger the pile of drywall the less likely he'll be to want to stay.
I love my bows, but my 16" cut SXS W exp hammers does the above mentioned WAY better than a bow
I don't think you meant you're "16 inch CUT sxs" did you? That was probably a typo

soopercooper
07-15-2015, 05:09 PM
Sorry, missed a digit 18.6"

Foxer
07-15-2015, 05:38 PM
Sorry, missed a digit 18.6"

I was sure that was the case :)

Ben79
08-27-2015, 06:03 AM
you can get all sorts of stuff for bows, I don't know about recurves but my comp is set up with a drop away arrow rest, range finder, quiver with a variety of arrow heads, but for self defence,,,,, NO. it is for hunting and targets.

Ben79
08-27-2015, 06:19 AM
stopping power is incredible from a bow, accuracy only takes practice, a crafty person could fashion a bow out of junk in the city or wood in the bush, could feed yourself and others, I wouldn't grab for my bow in the middle of the night as a defensive tool to hard to handle in a confined space.

Foxer
08-27-2015, 10:30 AM
stopping power is incredible from a bow, accuracy only takes practice, a crafty person could fashion a bow out of junk in the city or wood in the bush, could feed yourself and others, I wouldn't grab for my bow in the middle of the night as a defensive tool to hard to handle in a confined space.

Y'know I tested that a bit the other day at a friends place (bigger than mine). Everybody says 'too hard to handle in a confined space' but honestly, it sure doesn't seem that way. Sideways wise It's no more than a pistol or rifle. Length wise it is but so are you - my shorter compound bow doesn't need any more space than i do. So..... I think that the whole 'confined space' thing might be a bit of a myth. The only thing you had to watch for at all is your elbow no the draw and that's not too much.

Petamocto
08-27-2015, 11:50 AM
I think that the whole 'confined space' thing might be a bit of a myth. The only thing you had to watch for at all is your elbow no the draw and that's not too much.

You're assuming that a person is going to stand still long enough for you to sit there and draw off a perfect shot (possibly in the dark).

All it takes is one small creak for him to know you're there, and then he's likely charging at you.

Extremely improbable for anyone to pull off a perfect shot under those circumstances.

Even if he hadn't noticed you yet and he was not moving, an average person (even a great hunter) would have a pulse of 200 with an intruder in their home, and they'd be shaking all over the place.

People can think they're tough, but I see big tough people crack under stress and pressure all the time.

Foxer
08-27-2015, 04:33 PM
You're assuming that a person is going to stand still long enough for you to sit there and draw off a perfect shot (possibly in the dark).No, that has absolutely nothing to do with whether or not the 'space' is 'confined'. My original statement that the average home is somehow 'too confined' to use a bow is still accurate. And why would you need the 'perfect shot'? Put a good sized broad head in his gut and it's probably all over just as fast. :) I mean, you could say the same thing about a gun - "the guy's not going to stand there while you line up the perfect shot". Yeah - so, shoot quick and go with 'good enough' shots if you have to.


All it takes is one small creak for him to know you're there, and then he's likely charging at you. Well we know that's not the case at all. There's quite a few police reports on that kind of thing to suggest otherwise. In fact - bow or gun in most cases the bad guy is going to be looking to leave if they hear you coming. And again it would be just as true with a gun.


Extremely improbable for anyone to pull off a perfect shot under those circumstances.Yeah i hear the same thing about guns.


Even if he hadn't noticed you yet and he was not moving, an average person (even a great hunter) would have a pulse of 200 with an intruder in their home, and they'd be shaking all over the place. People can think they're tough, but I see big tough people crack under stress and pressure all the time. Again - exactly word for word the arguments anti's use about guns.

None of that is particularly bow specific. In a high adrenaline situaiton whether you use a gun or a bow or anything else, all of those things will be true. And yet, somehow, a lot of people every year manage to defend their homes with such weapons. The only real significant difference that I can see is rate of fire over most guns. It'd be line using a single shot. Which doesn't mean that won't work, just one of the considerations.

ScottNT
08-27-2015, 05:06 PM
I still think the biggest advantage is I can prop it up in the closet and forget about it, rather than the guns that are 1 floor away and 3 locks deep. It would be better in your hands than nothing. If your not competent to use it under stress, then the same could be said for a firearm. Slippery slope on that one, so I donīt consider it a knock on archery for self defence. Follow up shots, yes your gun has the edge.

As well if you went outside to investigate a "bump in the night" donīt think they could charge you with anything as long as you didn't fire it or point it anybody. Do the same with your gun and see what happens. I think your average homeowner is more likely to be charged with unsafe storage then ever have to use a weapon against an intruder.

Foxer
08-27-2015, 05:52 PM
I still think the biggest advantage is I can prop it up in the closet and forget about it, rather than the guns that are 1 floor away and 3 locks deep. It would be better in your hands than nothing. If your not competent to use it under stress, then the same could be said for a firearm. Slippery slope on that one, so I donīt consider it a knock on archery for self defence. Follow up shots, yes your gun has the edge.

As well if you went outside to investigate a "bump in the night" donīt think they could charge you with anything as long as you didn't fire it or point it anybody. Do the same with your gun and see what happens. I think your average homeowner is more likely to be charged with unsafe storage then ever have to use a weapon against an intruder.
Well i'd rather have a gun, period. But - I get that it's an alternative for conditions where it's impractical to have a gun.

Edenchef
08-27-2015, 08:40 PM
All it takes is one small creak for him to know you're there, and then he's likely charging at you.

I do believe that the racking of a slide, to put one in the chute, is a MUCH more intimidating sound. Given that most (90%) robbers are opportunistic cowards, IMHO that sound has a better chance of scaring them off. Remember, stealth is much more difficult to justify in a Canadian court of law, unfortunately.

Foxer
08-27-2015, 08:49 PM
I do believe that the racking of a slide, to put one in the chute, is a MUCH more intimidating sound. Given that most (90%) robbers are opportunistic cowards, IMHO that sound has a better chance of scaring them off. Remember, stealth is much more difficult to justify in a Canadian court of law, unfortunately.

Again, that's something we hear said but I have never been able to find one case where the issue of stealth or anything has come up. Or type of ammo or gun for that matter, other than the storage of the gun. presumably bow or gun you're going to challenge an intruder before firing anyway. Maybe rangebob has a case.

Edenchef
08-27-2015, 09:02 PM
Challenging an intruder is really not stealth now, is it, Foxer? My point is, that the racking sound of the slide becomes another defensible part of a logical escalation of force, especially in the case of an intruder. Of course challenge is a key part of a defense plea. If you sneak up on them (stealth), even as an intruder, under current Canadian law, you will be in big do do, in the courts. We have no "castle doctrine" as a defense in Canada. We are obligated to provide adequate, fair warning to an intruder and be able to show a logical, progressive escalation of force.

In Canada, the survivor is presumed guilty, especially as a gun owner, unless you are an LEO. You will be subjected to "punishment by process". This is legal reality.

Oh yes, another thing. Tough talk on the forum is cheap. When you actually take the life of another human being, even in combat/home defense conditions; you will pay for it....emotionally. Just ask a combat veteran. You will never be the same again.

Foxer
08-27-2015, 09:10 PM
Challenging an intruder is really not stealth now, is it, Foxer? Well i assumed the 'stealth' part was sneaking into position where you can see the bad guy and draw a bead so to speak and then challenge him - not that you were going to just jump out and open fire on someone before you knew who it was :)


My point is that the racking sound of the slide becomes another defensible part of a logical escalation of violence, especially in the case of an intruder. Sure.


Of course challenge is a key part of a defense plea. If you sneak upon them, even as an intruder, under current Canadian law, you will be in big do do, in the courts. Well i take it from your comment you mean sneak up and shoot them without them knowing your there, so based on that yes the courts would not like as a rule :)

Swampdonkey
08-27-2015, 09:18 PM
I'm about to acquire a crossbow and nightvision to deal with pests at my rural residence. It'll be awfully tempting if I see someone breaking into my truck. . . No need to wake the neighbours.

ScottNT
08-27-2015, 10:24 PM
As far as stealth goes, if somebody break into my property and I happen to be in my bedroom tree stand with my bow they will not be subject to a warning shot. Assume I am in my Realtree jamies....cuz most nights I am.