Burglar Shot Dead

[Darkwing Duck]

I hope one of you gun toting, trigger happy, good ole boy hicks will be willing to explain to my kids why Santa wasn't able to visit our house - after he runs into one of you during one of his annual Christmas eve "home invasions"

... sure hope he wears a bullet proof vest under his red suit.

How many news stories have there been of Santa getting blown away?

 

[G-O-A-T]

According my coworker, once somebody has entered your fenced back yard, it's a home invasion (I believe the Kearns home in question was fenced). He said anything such as a fence, barn, deck, etc. are considered extensions of the home. If you tresspass onto one of these areas, legally it can be considered a home invasion.

. . .

He said from the eyes of law enforcement (at least Weber County's take on it) is that the homeowner acted 100% within the realm of law. He said if this was their case, not only would they not seek to prosicute the home owner, he should be given a pat on the back for how he acted under duress.

So... when the annoying neighbor kid hops the fence in my backyard to grab his football, I can legally shoot him down in the name of "self defense" because he was committing a "home invasion"?

For some reason I question the logic of extending a fenced-in yard to the actual home. On the other hand, actually trying to break into someones home likely does give the homeowner the privilege to shoot the would be thief in self defense.

 

[Qman]

The owner was not wrong, per se, but legally he can be. There is a huge responsibility that comes with being a gun owner. It's not just buy a gun and shoot if you have to. It's knowing the laws of your state, it's knowing the particulars of self defense and knowing the your rights. Hence, my initial post of not talking to cops when they get there. Protecting your family is one thing, but the litigiousness of our society is another. No one wants to go to jail for any amount of time for protecting your family.

This is a very good thing to look into. Texas thankfully is a very good place for a self-defense trial.

 

[G-O-A-T]

How many news stories have there been of Santa getting blown away?

So... I guess he already does wear a bullet proof vest???

Lucky he hasn't been shot in the head yet!

 

[franklin]

Clearly shoot first, ask questions later is the best plan *sarcasm

any dumbass who's first instinct is shoot first belongs in prison. Those are the people who are a threat to society, not home burglars.

You mean the entire police force? ******* with guns.

 

[Scat]

So... I guess he already does wear a bullet proof vest???

Lucky he hasn't been shot in the head yet!

 

[franklin]

I'm only on page 4, but you're so completely retarded that I'm not reading to the end before responding.

Those look small enough to be inflicted by small arms. And yes, if you are buying a weapon for your protection, you should buy something designed to harm somebody rather than designed to kill somebody. I don't think I need to bring up the statistics on weapons in the home discharged on people living within the home versus actually dangerous people, do I?

No I don't. I would want to cease the threat immediately and permanently. Take your rubber bullets to the naive channel. There are these easily acquirable things known as force dispersing vests, and burglars are wearing them.

I mean, it's your right to do whatever you want to an intruder. But, it'd be easier living knowing you shot the **** out of somebody with a stun gun and got them arrested versus killing them and dealing with knowing you took a life of a civilian. I don't need to kill somebody to appreciate that every life is important to somebody, and that ending it unnecessarily is going to cause ripples that you are, in more than one way, responsible for.

Why would I feel bad about *killing* a personal/family threat? Na. I'll sleep good after the adrenaline wears off. I'm an animal. If it's me or you then it's gonna be you. Why would that bother my conscience? I wouldn't worry for the rest of my life over a split second decision. That's moronic. I had to make a quick, necessary, life saving choice. What good is second guessing a split second decision? If it happens fast then I'm allowed error. I don't really care if I made a less than perfect decision. It's game theory and that dude forced me into it. Emphasis on that dude forced me.

Now back to page 4.

 

[C l u t c H 385]

I accord your judgement with all the seriousness your posting history has earned.

We can't all be a beacon of ****in awesome.

 

[7StraightIsGreat]

So... when the annoying neighbor kid hops the fence in my backyard to grab his football, I can legally shoot him down in the name of "self defense" because he was committing a "home invasion"?

For some reason I question the logic of extending a fenced-in yard to the actual home. On the other hand, actually trying to break into someones home likely does give the homeowner the privilege to shoot the would be thief in self defense.

I'm simply passing along what was told to me by an actual police officer.

If you want to insert common sense into your argument, it obviously boils down to intent. A neighbor kid getting his football from your backyard at 4pm is obviously not a home invasion. I'm pretty sure the 19 year old kid trying to jimmy open the sliding glass door at 3am had not lost a football.

I would guess the police logic in extending the fence as part the home stems from the fact that a home intruder would basically have to breach an area that had obviously been secured by the home owner. Even if your gate does not have a lock, whats the difference in a stranger simply opening your gate and walking into your backyard and opening your front door in the middle of the day and walking into your living room? To me, including a fenced off area as part of the home seems like pretty sound logic.

And again, let's try to remember that it sounds like the homeowner actually did yell at the intruder and brandish his gun before firing. If that's the case, it obviously didn't deter the kid. It doesn't seem like this was a case of the homeowner shooting at the first shadow he saw.

 

[franklin]

You've obviously haven't read the thread. I've already explained how that would effect me, and I've said I understand why people shoot home intruders. It has nothing to do with me acting like I'm a tough ***.

But he wanted to define your Christian values as his values as applicable to your religion.

 

[Archie Moses]

So... when the annoying neighbor kid hops the fence in my backyard to grab his football, I can legally shoot him down in the name of "self defense" because he was committing a "home invasion"?

For some reason I question the logic of extending a fenced-in yard to the actual home. On the other hand, actually trying to break into someones home likely does give the homeowner the privilege to shoot the would be thief in self defense.

Common sense, dude. There's a difference between some kid getting a ball and some kid trying to break in your back patio door with a screw driver.

 

[G-O-A-T]

I would guess the police logic in extending the fence as part the home stems from the fact that a home intruder would basically have to breach an area that had obviously been secured by the home owner. Even if your gate does not have a lock, whats the difference in a stranger simply opening your gate and walking into your backyard and opening your front door in the middle of the day and walking into your living room? To me, including a fenced off area as part of the home seems like pretty sound logic.

I used to live in a house where kids would cut through our back yard all the time (jumping the fence and walking through our yard was much faster than taking the sidewalks from school to their own houses). Yet, none of these kids - ever - tried to break into our house. I was never that bothered with the kids cutting through our yard, but if one of them had ever tried coming in our house... well he would have been in a world of hurt. So, what I'm saying is that breaking into someones yard and breaking into someones home are completely different scenarios.

Further, there are some serious differences with regards to your self defense rights when it comes to home invasions vs. yard invasions (trespass). For instance, in a home invasion case, you can use deadly force if you reasonably believe the person broke into commit a felony and the force was necessary to prevent the felony. (In many cases, theft/burglary is a felony). On the other hand, if the person is in your yard you can only use deadly force if you are doing it to protect human life. You can look at sections 405-407 here to read the details.

Thus, if you extended the confines of your home to include your yard it would allow you to shoot and kill otherwise harmless lawnmower and bike thieves. *Yeah, OK, my football example wasn't very good* This is why I don't think it's good logic to include a fenced off yard to being part of the home.

And again, let's try to remember that it sounds like the homeowner actually did yell at the intruder and brandish his gun before firing. If that's the case, it obviously didn't deter the kid. It doesn't seem like this was a case of the homeowner shooting at the first shadow he saw.

No argument that the homeowner in this case was in the right. In fact, I think there is about a 0% chance of him being prosecuted... and the only reason the news people even bring it up is because they know it will help them with ratings.