flechero wrote:I don't disagree with you. My point was that a "highly trained" individual would know better than us what the risks are... which is why I think there is probably more to the story.Excaliber wrote:You're right in that news accounts are never complete and are rarely completely accurate. Articles based on initial reports are usually less complete and less accurate than the original. However, with that said, there are lessons to be learned here. The first is that even a highly trained individual can be much more easily successfully attacked outside than inside.flechero wrote:I'll give the trooper the benefit of the doubt- I bet there are facts not in the written story that could be important.
Coming up with the best response is not as simple as it might first appear. As some have pointed out, a farm family faced with an adversary who is stealing livestock or critical equipment in an area where law enforcement response won't get there in time to make a difference is in a very different situation than a suburban homeowner who hears noises outside.
Letting the dogs out from a door away from the intruder's suspected location is a viable tactic that should quickly reveal if there is a problem out there or not and where it is likely to be. They also give an intruder a problem he didn't have before and may inspire him to find another place to be. If things work out this way, it neatly resolves the problem and you simply owe your faithful companions some treats.
If a decision to go outside is made, thought needs to be given to how and where to exit the home. Out of sight, quietly, and well away from the intruder's suspected location is much preferred. Planning needs to include how you will search for the adversary without making a target out of yourself with a flashlight. Keep in mind that there may be multiple adversaries, they may be in different locations, and their night vision will be keen while yours will likely be poor if you have been in a lighted area of the home just before your exit.
Your plan needs to include how those left inside will be protected while you are outside, what you will do if you do encounter the adversary, how you will communicate with persons still inside the home and law enforcement, and what those inside the home will do if you are engaged and downed by the adversary (good guys don't always win).
When you think all this through, staying inside starts to look like a really good idea even for highly trained folks except in the most extreme circumstances.
Along with the fact that, with no more info than has been provided, our thoughts and opinions are not much more than conjecture.
Highly trained individuals, are not immune from complacency, and had he been on duty, and performing normal patrol/enforcement activities, his SA would have been heightened, the fact that he put on body armor, gives the indication that he believed there to at least be a potential threat, but he may have believed, that he held the upper hand since it was his home, and he believed himself to be more familiar with the surroundings.
Putting dogs out may not have been an option if he was not a dog owner,
Most DPS troopers, that I know, take their cars home with them, I don't know if that was the case in this instance, but if so, an intruder, must have been pretty brave in the first place, so attacking a known LEO, would have, for most criminal, not been a wise move. Again, this is all conjecture.