Chances are you're close enough to the car to use the key fob.  Hit the panic button if there is one to set off the alarm.  Or, if they manage to get the car started, keep using the fob to turn it off on them.   

If you have ON*Star, you can call and have the car disabled.  Just have ON*Star do it about 2-3 minutes after they leave so they're not close enough to can get to you.   A Lo-Jack would also be nice to have. 

Every car has different ignition and alarm systems.  Plan ahead and keep the thieves busy until the Cops show up.  Make sure to tell 911 the thieves are armed and threatening your life.  Quicker response than a theft in progress.

He could access his cars climate control and put it on the hottest setting.  At least the thieves would be sweating.  Then set the valet speed limit to 5mph so the get away will be funny.  Then remotely open the frunk and trunk. ANd then close the trunk. Then open it again. And close it again.

It's sad that this is what our nation has come to.  Thieves have more protections than their victims.

I guess we need Texas property protection laws and stand your ground. 

If I don't see any weapons on them wouldn't it be safe to assume they are bluffing.  Don't go out with any weapons drawn.  You are not looking to fight.   Most criminals would give up just from you showing up. 

I guess we need Texas property protection laws and stand your ground. 

If I don't see any weapons on them wouldn't it be safe to assume they are bluffing.  Don't go out with any weapons drawn.  You are not looking to fight.   Most criminals would give up just from you showing up.

They are yelling to not come out -- the car isn't worth DYING over.  That's a death threat. 

If you want to confront multiple criminals who are threatening you with death to see if they are bluffing, then I guess you're free to try it. 

You might be right, but you only get to be wrong once.

Bwahaha I'd tell the dumb asses ur exactly right. It's not worth dying over a car. Are u guys willing to die over a car???

I'd line up the 3 on the right n let him one of my big wildcats eat  then wen the guy on the left shits himself n tries to run. I'd let think he got away before sending him to the judgement seat with his buddies.

Sick of these clowns n the clowns who keep us with our hands tied behind our back without being allowed to protect what's ours. If someone is threatening to kill me then sorry not sorry. You chose the wrong person to call out I take that as a direct threat to my life. I'm not gonna cower in my house n let punks do what they want.

That being said zippz probably had the best response for us here in Hawai'i to follow... 

Bwahaha I'd tell the dumb asses ur exactly right. It's not worth dying over a car. Are u guys willing to die over a car???

I'd line up the 3 on the right n let him one of my big wildcats eat  then wen the guy on the left shits himself n tries to run. I'd let think he got away before sending him to the judgement seat with his buddies.

Sick of these clowns n the clowns who keep us with our hands tied behind our back without being allowed to protect what's ours. If someone is threatening to kill me then sorry not sorry. You chose the wrong person to call out I take that as a direct threat to my life. I'm not gonna cower in my house n let punks do what they want.

That being said zippz probably had the best response for us here in Hawai'i to follow... 

Nope.  Yours is.  But zippz's response is probably the best logical one.  Because we live in Hawaii, the banana republik.  Law abiding citizens are screwed by default.

I wonder what would.happen if you shot the tire on your own car.  It's your own car on your own property.  Maybe you could get hit with reckless endangerment, but have a possible defense if you have a good backstop and people aren't in the way.  It's not terroristic threatening if the objective is to disable your car.

I wouldn't recommend it, but how would it play out legally?

i believe that any discharge can be considered reckless endangerment, no matter where you are aiming and hitting...

I wonder what would.happen if you shot the tire on your own car.  It's your own car on your own property.  Maybe you could get hit with reckless endangerment, but have a possible defense if you have a good backstop and people aren't in the way.  It's not terroristic threatening if the objective is to disable your car.

I wouldn't recommend it, but how would it play out legally?

Let's keep the hypotheticals churning ....

With the number of non-lethal/less-than-lethal weapons around, what if you used a shotgun with a beanbag or rubber bullet round?  It's a firearm by definition, but loaded with shells that don't contain shot pellets, would it not be considered less of an escalation than using an actual shot shell?

And discharging it should have the type of round taken into consideration when looking at any charges.

If you walk out with a shotgun and start pumping rubber bullets into the thieves, that might be enough to get them to vacate.  And, if they try to return fire with real bullets, you're then able to justify use of deadly force.  You just might want to stack a few slugs behind the rubber bullets in the tube just in case and/or have a pistol on your hip.

The first time you let off a shotgun round from behind cover, there's a good chance that's all that's needed.  I've not tried them, but they have to be pretty loud.

Let's keep the hypotheticals churning ....

With the number of non-lethal/less-than-lethal weapons around, what if you used a shotgun with a beanbag or rubber bullet round?  It's a firearm by definition, but loaded with shells that don't contain shot pellets, would it not be considered less of an escalation than using an actual shot shell?

And discharging it should have the type of round taken into consideration when looking at any charges.

If you walk out with a shotgun and start pumping rubber bullets into the thieves, that might be enough to get them to vacate.  And, if they try to return fire with real bullets, you're then able to justify use of deadly force.  You just might want to stack a few slugs behind the rubber bullets in the tube just in case and/or have a pistol on your hip.

The first time you let off a shotgun round from behind cover, there's a good chance that's all that's needed.  I've not tried them, but they have to be pretty loud.

Would the C&C ordinance for bb gun projectiles come into play? 

And see my post above about if they are armed and see you come out the door in the open.  Would you risk your life?  There are 3 aggressors outside that you can see (assuming your looking at the camera feed). Unknown if there's others. Unknown if all have weapons, but they did state that your car isn't worth your life. Most are behind some cover and you have none.

i'd bet it's still brandishing
bad guys don't know what types of rounds you have loaded...

Let's keep the hypotheticals churning ....

With the number of non-lethal/less-than-lethal weapons around, what if you used a shotgun with a beanbag or rubber bullet round?  It's a firearm by definition, but loaded with shells that don't contain shot pellets, would it not be considered less of an escalation than using an actual shot shell?

And discharging it should have the type of round taken into consideration when looking at any charges.

If you walk out with a shotgun and start pumping rubber bullets into the thieves, that might be enough to get them to vacate.  And, if they try to return fire with real bullets, you're then able to justify use of deadly force.  You just might want to stack a few slugs behind the rubber bullets in the tube just in case and/or have a pistol on your hip.

The first time you let off a shotgun round from behind cover, there's a good chance that's all that's needed.  I've not tried them, but they have to be pretty loud.

Let's keep the hypotheticals churning ....

With the number of non-lethal/less-than-lethal weapons around, what if you used a shotgun with a beanbag or rubber bullet round?  It's a firearm by definition, but loaded with shells that don't contain shot pellets, would it not be considered less of an escalation than using an actual shot shell?

And discharging it should have the type of round taken into consideration when looking at any charges.

If you walk out with a shotgun and start pumping rubber bullets into the thieves, that might be enough to get them to vacate.  And, if they try to return fire with real bullets, you're then able to justify use of deadly force.  You just might want to stack a few slugs behind the rubber bullets in the tube just in case and/or have a pistol on your hip.

The first time you let off a shotgun round from behind cover, there's a good chance that's all that's needed.  I've not tried them, but they have to be pretty loud.

I'm not sure what happens if you use one for self defense against a non-deadly threat here.  They can still be lethal.

You need dedicated shotguns that can only be used with less lethal ammo.  Can't load regular shells into them.  Nor should you have another long gun loaded with regular ammo.   To avoid using lethal ammo when you meant less lethal.

I'm not sure what happens if you use one for self defense against a non-deadly threat here.  They can still be lethal.

You need dedicated shotguns that can only be used with less lethal ammo.  Can't load regular shells into them.  Nor should you have another long gun loaded with regular ammo.   To avoid using lethal ammo when you meant less lethal.

Police protocol (if I'm not mistaken) is to use LTL firearms only if there is another officer there giving you cover in case the LTL fails.  So, I believe you can have both lethal and LTL at hand as long as you are certain which is being used.

I don't see much difference between having birdshot and buckshot both loaded vs. rubber rounds with slugs.  You are responsible for which round is used, so having them both loaded should be of no concern.  May be a prudent tactic to have separate firearms, but shouldn't be mandated.

Police protocol (if I'm not mistaken) is to use LTL firearms only if there is another officer there giving you cover in case the LTL fails.  So, I believe you can have both lethal and LTL at hand as long as you are certain which is being used.

I don't see much difference between having birdshot and buckshot both loaded vs. rubber rounds with slugs.  You are responsible for which round is used, so having them both loaded should be of no concern.  May be a prudent tactic to have separate firearms, but shouldn't be mandated.

Good luck finding less lethal rounds in HI.  In Vegas, they had those, breacher rounds, deer, bear, dog rounds, and dragons breath.

Good luck finding less lethal rounds in HI.  In Vegas, they had those, breacher rounds, deer, bear, dog rounds, and dragons breath.

Logistics are one thing.  This is more about legalities.

Gee just by reading this thread no wonder the criminals do what they do.

They have the stacked deck.  Law abiding citizens have squat.

"Your life aint worth a car".  F you you stack of sh*t.  Lucky you that the laws of justice feel your life is worth something......

Gee just by reading this thread no wonder the criminals do what they do.

They have the stacked deck.  Law abiding citizens have squat.

"Your life aint worth a car".  F you you stack of sh*t.  Lucky you that the laws of justice feel your life is worth something......

I'm reminded of the first Die Hard movie when Bruce (McClain) tells the first "terrorist" he comes across he's the police.

"You won't hurt me."

"Oh no?  Why is that?"

"Because you're a policeman.  There are rules for policemen."

"Yeah,  that's what my captain keeps telling me."

When the good guys play by the rules, the criminals have the advantage. 

Same thing applies to politics.

Police protocol (if I'm not mistaken) is to use LTL firearms only if there is another officer there giving you cover in case the LTL fails.  So, I believe you can have both lethal and LTL at hand as long as you are certain which is being used.

I don't see much difference between having birdshot and buckshot both loaded vs. rubber rounds with slugs.  You are responsible for which round is used, so having them both loaded should be of no concern.  May be a prudent tactic to have separate firearms, but shouldn't be mandated.

That is police procedure.  And another reason why civilians shouldn't use it as they don't have backup.

There's a few things wrong with using a mix of rounds:
1.  People forget under stress and can forget what round is loaded.  It's like people who carry pistols with an empty chamber and think "there's no way I'll forget to chamber a round".  According to ASP, most people forget to rack the slide and some people died because of it.

2.  If you have a less lethal round loaded, and you suddenly need a lethal round.

3.  You shoot the less-lethal and kill the person you may get into trouble.

4.  If you decide to use lethal force, the prosecutor or suing attorney can say you meant to use non-lethal when you used lethal.

That is police procedure.  And another reason why civilians shouldn't use it as they don't have backup.

There's a few things wrong with using a mix of rounds:
1.  People forget under stress and can forget what round is loaded.  It's like people who carry pistols with an empty chamber and think "there's no way I'll forget to chamber a round".  According to ASP, most people forget to rack the slide and some people died because of it.

2.  If you have a less lethal round loaded, and you suddenly need a lethal round.

3.  You shoot the less-lethal and kill the person you may get into trouble.

4.  If you decide to use lethal force, the prosecutor or suing attorney can say you meant to use non-lethal when you used lethal.

That's why it's called less-lethal and not non-lethal.  Even tasers have killed.

If you need a lethal round in a pump shotgun, it's only a racking or two away.  You aren't required to discharge the less-lethals before getting to the man stoppers.

All good asvie about making things simpler for you so you don't make a mistake in a pinch.  But that's tactical planning, not legal mandates. 

if i shoot 2 LTL/LT rounds and then shoot a slug killing the attacker, it can be argued my intention was to merely stop the person, not to kill them.  Only when it became necessary did I fire a lethal round.

As for not having one in the chamber, well that's not debatable in my mind.  A gun without a round chambered is a conversation piece.

I had a KSG 14 with 2 tubes.  I loaded slugs in one and buckshot in the other.  In this hypothetical, it's a matter of flipping a switch to choose which one you want to send to your target.  The nice thing is you have that option, whereas the mixture in a single tube becomes a "hope it plays out this way" method.