Chalk one up for the good guys

UPDATE on this story

I found the latest on this:

"Cleared Of Wrong Doing
No charges will be filed in connection with last weekend's fatal home invasion. A 16-year-old was shot and killed while trying entered a home near 26th and South Sheridan. The home-owner shot the teenager. The District Attorney's office ruled Friday afternoon that the homeowner broke no law"

I found it on a talk news web site below:
http://krmg.com/
 
Glad I live in Texas!

§ 9.22. NECESSITY. Conduct is justified if:
(1) the actor reasonably believes the conduct is
immediately necessary to avoid imminent harm;

§ 9.32. DEADLY FORCE IN DEFENSE OF PERSON. (a) A
person is justified in using deadly force against another:

(b) The requirement imposed by Subsection (a)(2) does not
apply to an actor who uses force against a person who is at the time
of the use of force committing an offense of unlawful entry in the
habitation of the actor.
 
this was a home invasion, plain and simple. i live in new york and although you have a duty to retreat there is one exception. "a person has no duty to retreat if he or she is in their own home."
 
Quote:
"I still feel (whether 'legal' in the state or not) to shoot someone for simply breaking into your home is paramount to manslaughter - or worse."




I guess we should just wait until we become the victim until we take action. I don't think so. 16 or 86 that kid broke into someone's home with the intent of stealing and or doing physical harm to it's occupants. He got what he deserved.

Will there be a civil suited filed? Absolutly, that's the sad part. Another frivolous law suit and they will probably win because of a bunch of bleeding heart liberials sitting on the jury. :mad:
 
"I still feel (whether 'legal' in the state or not) to shoot someone for simply breaking into your home is paramount to manslaughter - or worse."
Click to expand...
At nighttime, even the Bible disagrees with you, in Exodus 22:1.

Someone breaking in at night has a reasonable expectation to find someone in the home, and that goes to their state of mind - it is a strong indication that they are ready to confront, threaten, and harm someone unless they get what they want.

Burglars here in New Hampshire, where gun ownership is common and CCW is shall-issue, tend to carefully case homes and burglarize them only when they are absolutely certain nobody is home. Often they even knock on the front door on some pretext, and only break in if nobody answers, as happened to a friend of mine's home.
 
Most people who are sued for wrongful death, never even make it to court. Their homeowner insurances make a token payment, the bad guys suck it up, the lawyers take their cut, and life continues.

Its the 1-2% which actually end up in a court room you have to worry about. You can think I am full of it, all you want, however I've been in the court rooms, federal and state lawsuits. They aint fun...I'm just giving you my two cents worth.
Click to expand...

Well, give me more than your two cents worth and back it up with some cases. That shouldn't be too hard if lawsuits (even the kind that resulted in no award or a token award) were as prevelent against people killing burglars in their bedrooms as some of you guys (not necessarily you) are implying. Try findlaw.com. And where did you come up with the figure of 1-2%??? What's that based on?
 
John, whatever your position is, please do not resort to personal attacks. That would generally include calling your fellow members Rambo wannabes.

Furthermore, if staying in your own bed is "lying in wait," please tell us what you think the homeowner should have done. Remember that, for all he knew, staying in the bedroom was his best chance to avoid contact with the intruder altogether. A burglar who was willing to carry out his burglary and knew the house was occupied would presumably not go to the bedroom late at night, since that's where you'd expect the occupants to be.

I'm a little bothered that he shot at "a shadow" but it seems to have worked out. But the concerns you've raised are simply irrelevant as far as I can see.
 
ouch I think I have been hit by a liberal jab...

I must admit I didn't blink....... my friend you must hit harder.... You have all the rights as American as I do.... I then intend to ask again.....Are you the property owner, home owner, have a family, girl friend, partner, dog, anything you consider worth protecting... no? how about yourself? My pond scum or lawyer feeding pond scum wasn't anyway putting you down as a person. Everyone has to be something....heck I admit it - I'm a redneck -but one who follows all laws to the best of my ability and for you to state something about dragging the BG's dead body back inside the house is way out back.... see that would be tampering with a crime scene and that is one of the laws a good guy wouldnt do. No reason to do that if it was a self defending action. The crime lab can sort the evidence out. Oh yes I still need to have you answer (please) do you own a gun or ever shoot one and become trained with it? Why won't you answer a few questions for us rednecks? We love to debate and who knows you might change one of our silly uneducated minds............ ;) PS... an adult conversation as you put it is one that only those like minded people will agree with you????
 
What Has This Guy Been Smoking????

He should be arrested and tried for manslaughter.

Tell me you are joking.... you are...right? Manslaughter? Scumbag breaks into the victim's home... and the poor homeowner, an old man defends himself... how could this be manslaughter???

He effectively ambushed the kid - no warnings - no nothing - just waited and then shot him with intent to kill (head shot).

I have somehow missed the existance of a legal duty to give warning before defending yourself. Doing so increases your danger... and I don't know of any state that requires you increase your exposure to danger. Where he shot him doesn't matter... he used lethal force... and it is lethal force anywhere he shoots the scumbag... head, COM,little toe... all lethal force. The law doesn't recognize any degree "sorta lethal force"... Force is binary. As an aside, an ambush involves someone PLANNING to attack someone by surprise... it is not reacting to a surprise attack. If we accept your logic, we ambushed the poor Jap planes we shot down at Pearl Harbor

Not reading anything into the story but going on the info that was posted - he should go to jail and then prison.

You need to study the law if you actually beleive what you posted herer... the victim committed no crime... the scumbag committed the crime.

Plus, I hope he's got a pot full of money saved up to pay attorneys and then give to the kids family after they win a civil suit against him for wrongful death.

Still smoking funny cigarettes? This guy will be "no billed"; he will not be sued ... even a trial lawyer like John Edwards would decline this case on contingency... it is far too open and closed. Ever hear of what the libs like to call "Make My Day Laws? Do you know which states have them?

One of the good guys? Hardly.

I can't say if this guy is a good guy or not... but there is no reason to suppose he is not a good guy. One thing is sure, he is a victim... happily a victim who was prepared to defend himself when his life and that of his family depended on him.

I assume you are from Kerryland... or someplace similar... I can't imagine where else you would come up with such utter trash (being polite there.)

N/r

Chuck
 
Well, who cares about law suits after the fact. Believe me if you were in that homeowners position you didn't have time to think about the future, only the present and staying alive.

Where I live, breaking the glass is forced entry. I don't understand how anyone can conclude that a guy in his bed, minding his own business, suddenly becomes Rambo and Dirty Harry, especially when there is no evidence of anyone hearing him say, 'well do ya punk! or 'make my day' Remember, Harry's .44 was empty. (A Little Dirty Harry humor there).

I admire your Texas gunlaws. You guys who live in Texas, be watchful some liberal group doesn't sneak up and take your gun rights away, as they have elsewhere.

The elderly are many times victims of home invasion. We don't run so good and we don't have the physical strength we once had and the BG's know that. I guess we could just lay there and sweat and let the home invasion criminal decide our future. I don't think so!

Maybe someone who disagrees can inform me at what point, and under what circumstance is it acceptable (in today's society) for me to protect my life and the lives of my family, in my home, with my handgun. Please make it good because if there are no circumstances, then I can sell my guns and use the money for prescription medication...

John, do you really own a handgun? And if you do, what for?
 
Good or bad, for all you Rambo and Clint Eastwood Wanna-A-Be's out there, the day of shoot first and ask questions later – shoot ‘em on the porch and drag ‘em into the house – rig a trap on the basement door with a shotgun, etc., - - are gone – good riddance.

Welcome to the new "PC" (Politically Correct) world – for better or worse it’s here to stay.
Click to expand...

You know, I just honestly don't understand these types of people. I kinda feel sorry for them in a way, because they are the ones who are victims most often for being to soft, or afraid, or ignorant to defend themselves.

Personally, if I'm asleep and someone comes into my darkened bedroom, is getting shot. They are an immediate threat to my life, and if they get past me, they could have their way with my wife and children. This is NOT going to happen, good Lord willing, be it by gun, fists, or TEETH.....

And as to your comment on name calling, thankfully I don't have to insult your intelligence, you have done that for me......
 
Justified shooting

In my home state (Oklahoma) a law was passed aptly named the "make my day law". If someone breaks into your home while you are there you are legally justified to use deadly force on them. I was working as a homicide detective at the time. We rarely arrested someone under the circumstances described even prior to the make my day law. Manslaughter? I dont think so. Of course things vary from state to state and as expressed here opinions vary.
 
The only thing wrong here is that the lawyers will be fighting among themselves about who to charge and why! Lawyers are a bunch of sneaky creatures some good and some bad! I hope the homeowner gets off, maybe the DA has a mind, and not looking for glory and headlines. :confused:
 
I have two things to say,first to Chrisinva,It's better to be tried by 12 of your peers than to be carried by 6 friends and laid to rest.Now to JohnStlmo,you must have a crimminal past or have family that is, cause a break in by any at any age is a crime.That man did something no judge or laywer could ever do,he stopped the thieve from thieving anymore,and I can't feel anything for the kid.I hurt for the parents.My kids were taught from an early age to respect other peoples property as well as the person.If that would have been me I would have emptied my clip and grabbed another.I'm sorry you can't see that,mabe you know something we don't?Did you know the man or the kid?I've worked a lifetime to accumulate a few things and would die or kill to keep them,just my opinions,and opinions are like elbows,we all have more than one and lean on them too much some times.Drop-Shot
 
Phil306,

I am (pleasantly) surprised by the information you gave. I had thought we are a limited retreat state. Our handgun defense instructor at Chabot Gun Club gave us info on establishing a safe fallback area and stressed the cost of legal defense so I probably saw that as a statement that the law required retreat.

That and we were told that if gangbangers walked in and did nothing more than steal your television it is illegal to use lethal force. Course I'm not sure how the home owner goes about determining whether the television is the only object of the entry.

Hmmm. What IS forceful? Breaking down the door like a home invasion or forcefully removing the door lock with a crowbar? Or both?

Personally I would assume the worst in the case of an intruder as juveniles are used for capital crimes by gangs with the idea that the juveniles are less likely to get stiff sentences. I am under the impression that the largest percentage of breakins are done by BGs on drugs. Some of these speed freaks exhibit super human abilities due to their temporary ability to ignore pain and I wouldn't want to waste time in slowing them down or in conversation to determine whether they are feaked out. Safe assumptions or not?

The law you cited says that the intruder is only liable to deadly force if they realize they have made forceful or unlawful entry. Seems the resident might be put in a postition of being responsible to determine whether the intruder has blundered in due to an overdose of merlot or is a full scale freak??
 
Last edited:
The kid got what he deserved, I would not have arrested the guy either, I have actually been called on something very similar here in Arizona. The kid had ample time to grab something steal it and run, its not like the home owner went around his house looking for someone to kill, he only shot the kid when he entered the bedroom.
 
i'd say the fact that he only fired 1 shot was evidence that he didn't intend to kill (regardless of using deadly force and shooting at shadows...)

of course, he could have been trying to empty the magazine, but using a jennings bryco or something


and I'd cut John a little slack. i don't think the homeowner should be charged of anything, but some of us seem a bit too cavalier about taking another life. i certainly would have shouted at the guy when i heard the glass breaking. i don't think it would put me in more danger and it stands a real good chance of scaring the BG off. if the BG entered the bedroom after my warning, I'd still hesitate to shoot at a shadow.

sure would suck to kill a "BG" and find out it was just a relative or neighbor coming in drunk to the wrong house. IDing a target is a good rule. Bad things happen when you break it, especially under duress
 
The pure fact the intruder entered the bedroom is very odd, I don't know how is home is laid out, but something does not smell right.
 
I can tell you that this fellow would be fine in Georgia. My brother in law, just the other day, had a man sneak into his house. He has no gun but he is a fairly skilled jiujitsu fighter/wrester. After a judicious application of "whoop-ass," he called the cops and told them to come collect the trash. I'm sure some think he should be jailed for battery. Luckily, Georgia is pretty sane when it comes to defending one's self/home.
 
Because of the "liberals" I have reached the point in my life, that if the neighbor is being "raped/killed" and their screams are disturbing my sleep, I might pick up the phone and call 911...because I know a liberal court will inform me while I am sitting in jail, that "I" didn't have the right to take the law into my own hands!

Therefore, in today's society, I turn a blind eye unless it is affecting me or mine!

Yes, your honor I though I "heard" something, but just figured they were watching a scary movie or something...no, your honor, I didn't go and investigate, I'm not a LEO and I'm not qualified to "get" involved.

Yes, I understand that the noise from the biker gang breaking into my neighbor's house should have raised an alarm, but at 02:30, just figured they were having some kinda party...

So, that "person" who feels that the homeowner wasn't justified in shooting a home invader, just reafirmed my decision not to get involved...so, if I happened to live next to a "liberal" and his house is being broken into I certianly wouldn't want to be the cause of so much grief...break into my house and you will discover a 357 mag. and I will pull the trigger, not once, but until there is only one moving thing in the house (myself)!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top