By Brandon at concealednation.org
A man credits his firearm for saving both his life and his wife’s during a scary home invasion that could have been much worse. Instead of crediting his firearm for saving their lives, he should instead credit his decision to arm himself to protect his family . . .
“Three people ran in and grabbed my wife,” Eddie Gilmore said. “She stood up.”
Eddie Gilmore says as his screaming wife was taken to a back room by a masked intruder who was holding a gun to her head, another intruder told him to get on the floor in the living room. “And I got over between the couch and the coffee table and when I did I went down and put my arm on the coffee table to kind of hide myself and I pulled the drawer open because I had a gun in there,” Gilmore said.
That’s when, Gilmore says, he started shooting in every direction he could, hitting two of the subjects. The suspects fired back, but neither Eddie or Cindy were hurt.
“They had a gun to her head,” Eddie Gilmore said, “They could’ve killed her and come right in here and killed me if I hadn’t had a gun.”
Three of the suspects were picked up later, and it seems that they were simply bored and randomly looked for a home to rob. The suspects claim “…they were out in a wooded area shooting their firearms and looking for a place to rob and I think just because of the secluded area of this house is why it was targeted.”
It can be a scary thing when criminals are bored.
While Eddie successfully scared off the bad guys, he did notice one important thing that happened while he was shooting: “I had some re-loads in this one gun and they mis-fired…next time they won’t misfire.”
Note to the world: Never use reloads in a self-defense firearm.
Note #2 to the world: Carry while inside your home. While Eddie was able to get to his firearm, let’s be honest… he was lucky. Had he not been forced onto the floor in the spot he was, he wouldn’t have been able to get to his firearm as easily as he did.
While I agree with reloads and home carry, being critical about his choice of words seems petty. He had a gun, so he obviously made the decision……
Agreed. It’s unnecessary nit-picking.
It’s a good point to make about self-defense preparation, though. Civilians don’t get after-action reviews, so it’s good to learn from what’s happened to others in defensive situations. I think this is a lot different than from when RF was criticizing Darren Wilson’s aim.
For this same reason, my wife, daughter and I always carry, even in the house. And yes, we train regularly at the range as well as practice (unloaded) maneuvers (how to move around without shooting each other) inside the house if the SHTF. And no we’re not paranoid, we live in a rural area with NO local police department. Kudo’s to this guy who at least had the ability and wherewithal to defend both he and his wife with a firearm. Despite our rural location or should I say ‘because of’, there have been home invasions within walking distance of here in the past.
Sorry, “maneuvers” are purely paranoid. Overplanning leaves you defenseless when a scenario unfolds which does not correspond to your planning. Can you hit your target while moving? Have you studied carefully (read; memorized) all the people authorized to be in your house? Do you have a gun with you at every moment, with larger guns available at different spots in the house? Do you understand that a home invasion trips the switch to “kill or die”? Then your training is done. An actual invasion will never coincide with your plans, so drop it.
LarryinTX,
It sounds to me like Sam the Man is describing “shoot, no shoot” dry-fire drills as well as practicing the well established hunting practice of defining shooting lanes. I can imagine any ideas of shooting lanes would probably not make much sense in a dynamic home invasion but “shoot, no shoot” drills are always a great technique to practice.
Maneuvers are paranoid? (I disagree, but you don’t know me or what I do for a living). Tell that to cops, soldiers, etc…who need to practice ‘moving around’ in a confined area without shooting each other. But perhaps my word ‘maneuver’ and your word ‘maneuver’ mean something different. My daughter knows what to do, and where to be and stay if someone comes in so she won’t be in cross fire. She knows the code words we use and what to do. My wife knows exactly how I will move if it is dark, so she won’t shoot me in the back. Will these ‘plans’ work perfectly in the event we need them? Maybe, but maybe not. And your comment ‘over planning leaves you defenseless..etc…’ Well, again, you don’t know me, my family, my background, etc… So, I won’t take your comment as an insult. I’ll keep planning and practicing for as many possible scenarios as I can, and you rely on whatever it is you rely on, and if the SHTF at the same time at both our houses, we’ll have great stories to share. And yes, we have the ‘kill or die’ switch deeply ingrained, as well as multiple other ‘weapons’ within grasp, both firearms and non-firearms. Peace. Out.
/sarcasm/ Wow, you just saved the military and police millions “wasted ” in training. After all why train in different scenarios, it will never be the same as your trained. Heck, you might have also solved the ammo shortage problem. No need to go to the range and waste ammo putting lead through a paper target. Real criminals do not act as the paper targets do. Just make sure you know how to load the ammo in your gun, what to press to make it go bang, and which end needs to be pointed at the BG’s. Good work. /end sarcasm/
Yeah, it’s a good thing that Seal Team 6 hadn’t trained much for the OBL mission. After all, one of the choppers went down, and one of the planned entry points was unusable. If they’d actually trained for that, they would have been defenseless.
Okay – sarcasm off. I actually think I know what you were getting at. Bad situations are fluid and dynamic, and if you map things out to unfold in EXACTLY a certain way, you can be sure that your plan is going to have to change. That said, it doesn’t leave you defenseless, it just means you have to go with the flow. You might have to shoot a couple more people than you planned – maybe you find concealment behind the couch instead of hard cover behind the bookcase – but training the family on how you’ll initially react to a situation is a good thing. Better to plan that one spouse stays in the bedroom with the shotgun than having both of you get tied up in the doorway. Better to figure out a codeword in advance so she knows it’s you at the door than getting blasted through the veneer…
General Eisenhower put it well: “In preparing for battle I have always found that plans are useless, but planning is indispensable.”
This is a variation of an older quip (Moltke the Elder) that “no plan survives contact with the enemy.”
What it boils down to is that you need a plan so you can deviate from it as needed. If you have no plan, everybody will be milling around in mass confusion.
…
Or as Mike Tyson said:
Everyone has plan ’till they get punched in the mouth”
…
Good job Larry. Thanks for weighing in on just how much training is OK without “going over the line.”
Larry probably breaks into people’s homes at night and doesn’t want them to be practicing…
Dry fire drills are purely “paranoid”? Umm, no.
I work in EMS and I’ve volunteered as a firefighter.
We train constantly with “what if” scenarios. We have basic protocols that we have for most every scenario that involves medical, trauma of individual persons, MCI or mass casualty incidents like train wrecks and airplane disasters, natural disasters or fire.
We train with what are essentially “dry fire drills” so that when the real scenario happens, which will be unique and not match exactly what was the scenario we trained for, we can modify, adapt and overcome much more easily than if we didn’t train at all.
Which is what Swat, military and police do as well.
The more “sweat and pain in training, the less blood on the battle field” is true for any life or death scenario.
This diatribe against having a basic tactical framework from which to defend shows LarryinTX likely does little training and enjoys justifing it.
Good for you Sam. Ignore larry.
Great ending to a crazy story……. 2nd amendment in full effect……..
Yep. Home carry. Even a pocket .380 if you don’t want to carry a full sized pistol all the time.
As for me, I just have a pocket .380 and a full sized OC gun on me until I go to bed. I feel lopsided if I take it off before then.
I am curious to know if the homeowner actually locked his doors or if the home invaders ran inside unimpeded.
If you refuse to carry a handgun on your hip while inside your home, at least lock your doors to provide some advanced warning and possibly an extra few seconds to arm yourself should home invaders come to “visit”.
Important note: a fit 200+ pound man with strong legs can kick most doors open with one good kick. If such a man were cunning enough to approach your door silently, your locked door really wouldn’t slow his entry any more than an unlocked door. The only thing it would do is alert you to his entry.
I appreciate that you said “most” doors. Like people, some doors and frames are built much stronger than your average Home Depot special. A good door can buy time against even a strong man with a sledgehammer.
Exactly … that is why I said “most doors”. Readers who have real security doors (and reinforced frames around their door) know what they have and approximately how much time it buys for them.
Other people, unfortunately, probably have no idea that a fit man can come through their locked door almost as fast as he can come through their unlocked door.
Yea, the commercial with the glock girl always kills me. She has the wimpy special door and sadly that is what many people would consider secure. Unfortunately most of them don’t have some blue steel quickly available to back it. In real life I doubt most thugs would give her time to get to her man stopper.
LOL. I got a Home Depot “special”. I wanted a secure outer screendoor so I could leave my main door open during the day, (I have a gorgeous mountain veiw) without having to use a iron bar security door. So I went with a reinforced screen door with shatter proof safety glass and with a down ward push of the handle three locking lugs secure the door to the reinforced frame.
Beautiful, with an elegant finish, but strong and makes a good defense. (Hmm, that also is the kind of woman I like.)
I have many small dogs that alert me when someone is within 75′ of my house well before I am even aware. They have been 100% consistently reliable no matter if it is a small child or a large roofer. I do lock my doors, but I always investigate what my dogs are barking at, be it a squirrel, the mail man, neighbor kids, or otherwise.
“Note to the world: Never use reloads in a self-defense firearm.”
Spoken like a novice reloader.
If you reload with cheap components on a progressive press, you can expect trouble. Reloading for volume at the range is one thing, but it’s not everything. When I load up rounds, I load them each knowing that my life may depend on them. I’d trust my loads over any factory round, any day. Careful, meticulous, consistent. Quality components, precise measurements, lots of testing. To this day, I have yet to have a round fail to fire, or not impact exactly where I am aiming after it has been tested for a couple hundred loads.
I’m with you on this. I have never had a failure to fire from my reloads but I have had them from factory new. (mostly rim fire but twice I have seen it on center fire)
Massad Ayoob would disagree with you.
http://www.gundigest.com/gun-blogs/books/handloads-not-a-good-idea-for-concealed-carry
With respect to Mr. Ayoob, I would rather be alive because I carefully crafted my own defense (physically) than worry about my defense (legally) and be dead due to it. His fears may have merit, but are a stretch in most courts. The only case where this would be an issue is one with questionable circumstances surrounding the shoot.
1. I have never had a factory loaded self-defense round fail to fire. I’m sure it happens, but the probability that this will occur while you are in the middle of a shootout is essentially nil, such that your risk of death in a DGU whether using hand loads or factory loads is essentially equivalent. 2. Whether or not there are “questionable circumstances” is something completely out of your control, but instead in the complete discretion of the district attorney. (Exhibit A: George Zimmerman.) Are you willing to risk 20 years to life over the use of hand loads?
At Mark N:
What on earth are you talking about??
@Mark, A DGU is like driving, flying, skydiving, etc. If you are going to worry about everything that can go wrong, you are probably better off not doing it. If your handloads are the best that a DA has against you, his case is weak, and a good defense council will rip it apart. I make my preparations by crafting my own ammunition, and having the best attorney in my area on speed dial.
Yeah, no one is going to jail because they specifically used a handload as opposed to a regular bullet. If you’re that worried about being convicted for self defense maybe there’s other things you need to be evaluating about yourself, your behavior, or your conduct.
To Mark N:
If it’s to the point that you feel a firearms is necessary, what does it matter if you used reloads or new manufactured rounds? Using that logic, a shotgun is excessive/negligent when a handgun would do.
Is there any case history where an otherwise legitimate DGU was prosecuted simply because the victim used handloaded rounds? I have never heard of such a case, but I admit I haven’t exactly gone out of my way to look for one.
It’s the “never” part that I have trouble with. If one has a 5.7×28 or .338 spectre weapon, for instances, handloading provides much more effective rounds (esp. with the likes of Lehigh projectiles) than the very limited factory offerings.
Have to agree.. In over 20 years of reloading, I have never had a misfire with my reloads in any caliber whether they are rifle or pistol… I cannot say as much for factory ammo…
This event reveals the redolently flawed logic of those who believe that private citizens should not be able to arm and defend themselves. I once talked to a guy from NYC who described always carrying a “mugging wallet” with $20 in it and nothing else. His rationale was that if he were robbed on the street, they’d take the $20 wallet and leave him alone. But what if they didn’t leave him alone? When I asked him that, he had no answer. Instead, he insisted that all the street thugs want is some money. Give them some and they’ll go away.
People who believe these things, think there is some kind of tacit compact between thieves and victims that will somehow protect them from physical harm. Personally, I think it’s both naive and stupid to put that kind of trust in someone who breaks into your home and points guns at you. Yet, at its core, this is the flawed logic of anti-gun people who argue that armed households are too dangerous. They want us to trust the very people who seek to do us harm.
“Instead, he [man living in New York City who carries a ‘mugging wallet’ with $20] insisted that all the street thugs want is some money. Give them some and they’ll go away.”
Hmm, I wonder why that did not work with this home invader that nearly killed a mother in front of her toddler — but decided it was better to just throw her down the basement steps after beating her nearly to unconsciousness? After all, he got jewelry.
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/crime/beating-caught-homeowner-nanny-cam-article-1.1381703#
Too many cases out there of mugging victims, carjack victims, store clerks, etc. following that “just give them the money and they’ll leave you alone” advice, only to be shot dead in the head for their cooperation.
In our family, we’ll all about awareness, avoidance, and de-escalation so as not to become involved in such situations. That said, if someone’s coming in hot, whether in our home or at a restaurant (not at all unusual in Houston), or similar, where we have some slight warning and reaction time, we’re unloading in response. Texas law is clear on what constitutes a lethal threat, and we believe every single word of it.
If you shoot someone in NYC you WILL go to jail. No one except criminals and certain politicians and their cronies are allowed to carry. The average person has no options except to move.
H.L. Mencken
“Gun-Control Laws Deprive Reputable Citizens of Protection” (November 30, 1925)
http://fee.org/freeman/detail/the-uplifters-try-it-again
Nice to see that back then, reputable journalists did not feel the need to be politically correct. Sad to see that absolutely nothing has changed in 90 years, especially for the “uplifters”.
When will people learn to stop invading homes in Oklahoma? It’s hazardous for your health!
Yea I disagree. My reloads are superior to cartridges in the store. Nothing wrong with reloads. A better statement is: Never use questionable ammo in a self defense firearm.
Glad Mr. Gilmore and his wife made it through this situation, relatively unscathed. Unless Mr. Gilmore is retired Special Forces, it also shows that someone with only a modicum of experience and tactics can prevail.
“That’s when, Gilmore says, he started shooting in every direction he could, hitting two of the subjects.” I’m surprised that no one has yet pointed out that if that was actually true, he could easily have hit his wife. So, somewhere between the operationally operator-aimed headshots and a bullet hosing episode in homage to Arnie, Jesse, and the rest of the Predator gang, is the median armed citizen. Who can do quite well without mandatory training or spending thousands at Gunsite, Thunder Ranch, etc.
Is it better to be trained? Of course – but folks like Mr. Gilmore show what one armed, determined persona can do (presumably without any training at all, other than perhaps some infantry training completed several decades ago….)
Eh, he could have done whatever that competition event (turn and rapidly Mozambique drill three targets) is called, like something out of Collateral and still described in reckless terms. This is a news story after all, so of course he was blindy shooting in all directions like a madman.
At our now defunct LGS I recall seeing a box of “reloads” for sale. I wonder if that’s what is being referenced in the article, as opposed to someone’s personal roll-your-owns.
Yeah, me too. I learned me lesson shooting someone else’s reloads years ago.
I can’t recall one of mine ever failing to fire. That’s with around 40 years of rolling my own.
This couldn’t happen. Guns are just for shooting up schools and to serve as penis replacement. (/s)
Hmm, What I have learned is that factory loads especially the critical defense loads are 99.99% good against reloads @ 98.5%. My Arizona ccw instructor (FBI, Ret.) showed us the stats. I don’t remember where he got them. I now live in LV, Nev. classes there say same thing, just saying. I have reloaded for years and I did have some failures myself, I’m not good at it I guess. Watch your six out there.
When I’m not reloading, I keep my primers cool and dry sealed in an ammo box with desiccant. I don’t use walnut for cleaning media (sometimes little bits if walnut get in your flash hole). I use citric acid (cleans inside and out) followed by a rinse and dry. I clean every primer pocket and every flash hole. Never once had a misfire. Lots of time and a single stage press.
Loading ammo that shoots 100% of the time requires 100% of your attention.
This cannot be repeated enough. I guess there should be a distinction between handloaders and reloaders. Handloaders are anal and would drive most people nuts with their attention to detail. Reloaders slap rounds together for cheap range fun, and malfunction drills (inadvertently).
I tumble with corn cob media, resize and decap, trim, chamfer/debur, clean each pocket, uniform the pocket and flash hole, and then ultrasound with oneshot. When I’m done with a case, it looks new and measures better than new (since it’s custom to the chamber of the gun I am loading it for).
I didn’t think to store primers with desiccant, but I do keep them in a sealed/gasketed container. I guess I have another detail to add to my setup.
I have the same success as a RELOADER, but don’t make a big deal of it. You guys act like it’s some high level expertise or something. And your advice about using reloads is dangerous. I know a factual case about a man being put on trial and the prosecution tried to make it seam like the bullets were more lethal and that was his intent for using them. He got off, spent 10’s of thousands and suffered the humiliation and stress in his life cause he wanted to save some pennies. Not worth it!
The biggest flaw that people have in self defense thanks to libturd logic is that if you give them their demands they’ll leave. WRONG. There’s a reason the government used to say they don’t negotiate with terrorists. Used to, because Dear Leader thinks its okay to swap terrorists for a traitor, but that’s another story.
If someone bursts into your house through your locked front door, they don’t want $50, they want your life. No one barges into the unknown expecting not to die, so if someone kicks in your front door, it’s always your life on the line.
When family visited for the weekend recently, my brother-in-law asked my wife why I carry at home.
I may need to send him a link to this story.
Comments are closed.