Hilarious! Crook caught

Status
Not open for further replies.
WTF? Just shoot him.
Click to expand...
When you are sitting in jail awaiting trial for homicide, for shooting an unarmed person who willingly surrendered, you will be saying "WTF? WHY did I shoot him?"
Once the threat ceases, so does your right to use deadly force. What you are suggesting is murder.
That is the reality of the situation.
 
There's a gap in the story between the BG strolling into the room and the homeowner having him covered, but we can assume the burglar was surprised and surrendered quickly. Why shoot? If I came upon someone in my home, I would be aiming and yelling "freeze" or "down on the floor" franticly and repeatedly while on a hair trigger to fire at any moment if he busts a move, but I wouldn't shoot a man who doesn't have a gun in his hand unless he makes a move for his shirt or waist or has brought company.
 
It's obvious some of you didn't read what the LEO said; "anybody else would have shot him dead." He's in my home illegally! He's a dead man! And I live outside Montgomery, Al. And yes it would be legal. See below:

"Section 13A-3-23 of Alabama Code
Use of force in defense of a person.
(a) A person is justified in using physical force upon another person in order to defend himself or herself or a third person from what he or she reasonably believes to be the use or imminent use of unlawful physical force by that other person, and he or she may use a degree of force which he or she reasonably believes to be necessary for the purpose. A person may use deadly physical force, and is legally presumed to be justified in using deadly physical force in self-defense or the defense of another person pursuant to subdivision (4), if the person reasonably believes that another person is:

(1) Using or about to use unlawful deadly physical force.

(2) Using or about to use physical force against an occupant of a dwelling while committing or attempting to commit a burglary of such dwelling.

(3) Committing or about to commit a kidnapping in any degree, assault in the first or second degree, burglary in any degree, robbery in any degree, forcible rape, or forcible sodomy.

(4) In the process of unlawfully and forcefully entering, or has unlawfully and forcefully entered, a dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle, or federally licensed nuclear power facility, or is in the process of sabotaging or attempting to sabotage a federally licensed nuclear power facility, or is attempting to remove, or has forcefully removed, a person against his or her will from any dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle when the person has a legal right to be there, and provided that the person using the deadly physical force knows or has reason to believe that an unlawful and forcible entry or unlawful and forcible act is occurring. ...............
 
Get a grip

Some say that shooting him was clearly not needed in this case. But had the criminal pulled out a hand gun in a moment of distraction of the homeowner, and killed the homeowner, you would all say that killing the burglar had been the right thing to do and that the homeowner hadn't been in touch with the harsh reality.

You don't know the mentality of a burglar. You don't know if he is armed. All you know is that he is a criminal. In your home.

Do the math.
 
could ve gone either way, lucky the home owner made it out alive. i agree, a burglar in your home is most likely armed. i wouldnt risk it. id be scared if I saw someone in my house, would probably shoot then ask questions later.

that's how it is in TEXAS.
 
Well, Yee-Ha! You just shot a drunk neighbor stumbling into the wrong house, or your teenager returning late, or a sleepwalker, or...

Yee-ha! Who's the criminal?
 
You don't know the mentality of a burglar. You don't know if he is armed. All you know is that he is a criminal. In your home.
Click to expand...

"All you know is that he is a criminal". Yup, solid ground to take his life.
I think some of you people need counseling, and should only have sling-shots!
 
And yes it would be legal. See below:
Click to expand...
Nobody's debating that point.

But you don't shoot someone just because it's legal. You shoot someone when you believe there's no other reasonable option.

The law you quoted makes this clear: "...he or she may use a degree of force which he or she reasonably believes to be necessary for the purpose."

It's also a mistake to confuse deadly force self-defense with the right to kill. Self-defense is about stopping or preventing injury or death, it's not about the law giving a you the right to kill someone.
 
I think we can all assume that what ever happens shooting-wise in your house is your responsibility and everyone has the inherent right to protect themselves and their families. But before we pass judgement one way or another we should have a better understanding of the situation. were there guns stored in the house when they left? If so then wouldnt it be a given to assume the bad guy was armed? I realize that just because this guy happened to be in the house and he might not have been the only one to break in that it doesnt mean he took a gun but is that a chance you would be willing to take? dont get me wrong, I think the homeowner did the right thing, and i would like to think that i would have shown the restraint not to shoot, but i guess im undecided. how many of us have shot someone or even at someone in their life? I know a lot of us are current and/or former Law Enforcement and Military but the feelings and the memory of an accidental or needless shooting can be a horrific thing. just my opinion, but if you dont need to kill to preserve life, limb and eyesight, then use less-than letal if available (like the threat of force) and some common sense.
 
Quote:
You are in the green. Shoot to kill.

Quote:
I agree with "ActivShootr" why not just shoot the guy?

Quote:
WTF? Just shoot him.

Ever wonder why so many non-gun owners hold shooters in such low regard?

"We have met the enemy and it is us". Pogo
 
Again alot of tough guys who cant wait to pull the trigger. Thats a LAST option. If shooting some one is not for protecting your life or that of another then you should not be allowed to carry a gun. No glory in killing another human being. Thats what seperates us from the criminals and gang bangers. Killing is no big deal for them. It does to me. Having been there i would have not a problem shooting some one who gave me no other option.
 
Quote;

Almost anything you say on the internet is public and saved, and saying something stupid isn't all that smart.

Yogi, is that you?


All kidding aside, some of you people scare me. It appears that the homeowner did not fear for their lives and used the appropriate level of self defense to contain the situation. If someone breaks into my home I too would like to think that I could show the restraint to use the necessary amount of self defense/force to contain the situation, and hopefully not have to kill anyone. Of course, if they are armed, or multiples, chances are going up that I will shoot you, and not in the leg.
 
Homeowner did the right thing and the burglar should be thankful to him for his life.

Cool Story, now .....

FESS UP ... Did the story make any of you Yankees or California-types jealous of the deep south ?:D
 
I am jealous that the laws in some parts of the South tend to be more favorable to the law abiding person facing criminal attack.

I am disheartened that so many confuse should with could. I never had to shoot anybody. I have a good friend who did, and had to fire a good man that alcohol got after he did.

I know one of them would take it back if he could. The other one never talks about it.

I own guns because I like them. I enjoy target shooting and the occasional hunt.
Keep them handy around the house because bad things happen sometime. But wanting a chance to shoot somebody? Nope.

There can be a sense of helplessness that builds up until one feels anger and righteous indignation. Don't let these cathartic feelings trick you into thinking you actually want to shoot a "BG". The ability to control counterproductive impulses separate us from the guys in the orange jumpsuits.

Or not.

Shoot if you have to. Not because you can.

I want to be the guy known for mowing targets in IDPA or something, not mowng down badguys. :cool:
 
I can imagine that the last thing you ever want is to have to shoot someone, because that means something really bad has happenned. Even if it's to prevent something bad from happenning; you or others still get left with bad memories. No way to avoid that.
 
Quote:
You are in the green. Shoot to kill.

Quote:
I agree with "ActivShootr" why not just shoot the guy?

Quote:
WTF? Just shoot him.

Ever wonder why so many non-gun owners hold shooters in such low regard?

"We have met the enemy and it is us". Pogo
Click to expand...
Bagtic summed it up better than I could've. For the life of me, I can't figure out how I missed this one, but.... better late than never.

Closed.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top