Buying a foreclosed home may not be a bargain (scenario, really)

This is a discussion on Buying a foreclosed home may not be a bargain (scenario, really) within the Carry & Defensive Scenarios forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; Don't come into my home uninvited...don't do it!...

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 16 to 30 of 30

Thread: Buying a foreclosed home may not be a bargain (scenario, really)

  1. #16
    Moderator
    Array RETSUPT99's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Central Florida
    Posts
    44,551
    Don't come into my home uninvited...don't do it!
    The last Blood Moon Tetrad for this millennium starts in April 2014 and ends in September 2015...according to NASA.

    ***********************************
    Certified Glock Armorer
    NRA Life Member[/B]

  2. Remove Ads

  3. #17
    Member Array justjim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    65
    Quote Originally Posted by oakchas View Post
    JD, not gonna argue with you (much... I love to argue)... but as long as no "threat" is present... As long as he's just sittin' there watchin' the TOOB and eatin' some munchies... he is not a threat to your life or safety, you will not be "avoiding injury" by shooting him. Further, the alternative to using any reasonable force, including deadly force, would not entail a risk to your life or safety. You would not be required to abandon or retreat from your dwelling. All you have to do is call 911 from the house phone, or the cel phone on your person.

    JD, I'm not advocatng not doing something proactive... but, as a reasonable person, imagining myself in your shoes as the homeowner in a similar situation, according to the law, I would wonder why you didn't call 911.

    Now, in this scenario... previous owner is sitting on my couch eating bon bons and watching my tv... I walk in, tell him to get out of my house.. he laughs at me and says.. "My house, man... you get out..." and turns back to the tv... As long as he never gets up.. never walks towards me... the only "loss" you are preventing under the law is a few watts of power and a few bon bons... and in Iowa, as you know, you cannot protect property with force.

    Your only recourse is to call 911 and let the authorities handle it. I'm not saying you can't have a gun pointed at him the whole time... I'm not saying that if he moves towards you, you can't shoot him... I'm sayin...If he just sits there... all you can do is wait for the authorities...

    Now, assuming you were the lady in this case... and he's in your house standing up... you might have disparity of force and a reasonable person (what with all his past crazy hijinks) might easily see that you were in fear of your life..

    Otherwise.... let's say she shot him on the couch while he ate her chocolates.. then we might have a problem....

    But let's remember, he didn't use any force to get into your house, he called a locksmith, and the locksmith let him in... He didn't kick down your door... he didn't even act forcibly... Now, because the locksmith left the scene we have no witnesses to what actualy occured... Did Mr. looney threaten her... move towards her as she was calling 911?

    According to the news report, the 911 tape says she is saying "get off my porch..." and then 2 gunshots... was he leaving? Did she say it when he was gaining entry? Did she say it after he was in???

    Lot's of grey areas here for a shyster to work... I'm gonna try to keep an eye on it see where it goes...
    Sorry but I have to disagree with you. If I walk into MY house and find some scumbag stranger sitting in my living room eating my food, its straight to condition RED. I am going to draw down on this guy and he is going to the floor, any hesitation and he's dead. That being said and after reading the article, I would say that this particular scumbag was given more than enough chances to cease and desist. He kept pushing it and terrorizing this women, IMHO he got what he deserves. I were in the exact same situation knowing the story up to that point I probably would have shot the scumbag without the waring shot. I'll tell you that the locksmith was lucky he didn't get shot as well when he opened the door. Only one other thing to add, there are lots of deadly weapons in the normal house and if push comes to shove, placing a very large deadly looking knife in the purps dead hand, well you guess the rest.

  4. #18
    Senior Member Array JJVP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    501
    Quote Originally Posted by oakchas View Post
    Woman had a no contact injunction against previous owner...

    Previous owner calls locksmith, shows old I.D. proving "residence," gets in house, gets shot.

    Wild story.

    >>>Dallas news story<<<

    It's possible that the guy was unarmed... Don't know Texas law (Castle doctrine?) Is the possible disparity of force or the injunction enough to keep her out of jail?

    How would you have handled this one? In Iowa, as long as he's not armed, it would be really hard to justify a shooting even if he's sitting on my couch watching TV and eating my foodstuffs, as long as he's not armed..
    In Texas it doesn't matter if he is armed or not, if he breaks into the house. Now at the end of the updated story it says:

    "The female came out of the house, cursing," Dallas police Senior Cpl. Janice Crowther said. "She fired three shots."

    If she shot him outside the house, that could give her some trouble. However, due to the previous history, complaints to the police and police inaction, I doubt she will be indicted. Maybe in some other state like Kalifornia or NY, but not in Texas.

  5. #19
    Senior Member Array CCWFlaRuger's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Florida's NatureCoast
    Posts
    708
    In Florida, home invaders are considered armed and a threat (Love the Castle Docterine). The only stipulation is that you may not shoot a fleeing intruder/threat. Sitting on the couch is not fleeing.
    "You will not rise to the occasion and you will not default to your level of training. You WILL ONLY default to the level of training you have mastered."
    -Ruger P345; LCP
    -Mossberg 590A1; Model 42
    -Phoenix Arms Raven

  6. #20
    Member Array StcLurker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    St. Cloud, MN
    Posts
    137
    I can't help but wonder if the locksmith has any liability here. I'm not saying that its his fault the lady started shooting, but had he not let the prior owner in, this may not have happened in the first place.
    Quando Omni Flunkus Moratati

  7. #21
    VIP Member Array ctsketch's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Connecticut
    Posts
    2,319
    not the locksmith's fault... the guy had a legal document with the address listed as his... if you are locked out of your home how else do locksmith's verify if you have a right to be there? (I have never used one)
    Glock 19
    Kahr PM9
    LMT-M4
    Mossberg 590
    Shodan, Jujutsu

  8. #22
    VIP Member Array paaiyan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Oklahoma
    Posts
    2,071
    A. The Legislature hereby recognizes that the citizens of the State of Oklahoma have a right to expect absolute safety within their own homes.
    B. A person is presumed to have held a reasonable fear of imminent peril of death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another when using defensive force that is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm to another if:
    1. The person against whom the defensive force was used was in the process of unlawfully and forcefully entering, or had unlawfully and forcibly entered, a dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle, or if that person had removed or was attempting to remove another against the will of that person from the dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle; and
    2. The person who uses defensive force knew or had reason to believe that an unlawful and forcible entry or unlawful and forcible act was occurring or had occurred.
    C. The presumption set forth in subsection B of this section does not apply if:
    32
    1. The person against whom the defensive force is used has the right to be in or is a lawful resident of the dwelling, residence, or vehicle, such as an owner, lessee, or titleholder, and there is not a protective order from domestic violence in effect or a written pretrial supervision order of no contact against that person;
    2. The person or persons sought to be removed are children or grandchildren, or are otherwise in the lawful custody or under the lawful guardianship of, the person against whom the defensive force is used; or
    3. The person who uses defensive force is engaged in an unlawful activity or is using the dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle to further an unlawful activity.
    The first time I caught him in my house when I got home he'd have a gun pointed at him and the police would be called. If it ever happened again he would once again have a gun pointed at him, but this time the police would be called after I put holes in him where holes don't belong.
    My blog

    WARNING: This post may contain material offensive to those who lack wit, humor, common sense and/or supporting factual or anecdotal evidence. All statements and assertions contained herein may be subject to literary devices not limited to: irony, metaphor, allusion and dripping sarcasm.

  9. #23
    VIP Member Array oakchas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Iowa
    Posts
    7,219
    paaiyan,

    The law is soooo tricky...

    "1. The person against whom the defensive force was used was in the process of unlawfully and forcefully entering, or had unlawfully and forcibly entered, a dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle, or if that person had removed or was attempting to remove another against the will of that person from the dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle; and
    2. The person who uses defensive force knew or had reason to believe that an unlawful and forcible entry or unlawful and forcible act was occurring or had occurred."

    its those little ands that might get you in this case... He didn't forcibly enter, he had a locksmith... of course that depeds on the da or the grand jury in this case... I hope it's a no bill... but we'll see.
    Rats!
    It could be worse!
    I suppose

  10. #24
    VIP Member Array paaiyan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Oklahoma
    Posts
    2,071
    Well in my opinion forcefully would mean making a conscious effort to defeat any device meant to prevent them from entering. Hiring a locksmith to open the door is a forceful entry as far as I'm concerned. Besides, if I get home and he's there, I'm not going to make an attempt to find out how they got in there. I'm going to reasonably assume they broke in and take care of things. Check the second bullet there about "reason to believe." I think that'd cover it.

    I don't mean to make it sound like I'd want to shoot anyone here, but if they broke into my house and I knew they had a violent background like she knew....
    My blog

    WARNING: This post may contain material offensive to those who lack wit, humor, common sense and/or supporting factual or anecdotal evidence. All statements and assertions contained herein may be subject to literary devices not limited to: irony, metaphor, allusion and dripping sarcasm.

  11. #25
    Member Array msb45's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    PA
    Posts
    187
    This is why you should never dodge jury duty. IF this person was charged and I was on the jury I'd hold on to a not guilty vote. Remember jury nullification. The locksmith was a victim. The scum was the criminal.

  12. #26
    VIP Member Array farronwolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    4,768
    I believe this falls under the catagory as justified according to Texas Penal Code.

    It appears the guy was lucky for several years that the previous homeowners didn't shoot him. What a nut job.

    The home owner was apparently in fear for her life.

    "She was terrified of him," said McDonald, who also noted that Kelly was aware of Pennington's arrest in the April stabbing incident and she believed he had a "propensity" for violence. "She said that he started approaching her and started coming towards her and at that point, she was in fear for her life."
    PC 9.31. SELF-DEFENSE. (a) Except as provided in Subsection
    (b), a person is justified in using force against another when and to the
    degree the actor reasonably believes the force is immediately necessary
    to protect the actor against the other's use or attempted use of
    unlawful force. The actor's belief that the force was immediately
    necessary as described by this subsection is presumed to be reasonable
    if the actor:
    (1) knew or had reason to believe that the person against whom
    the force was used:
    (A) unlawfully and with force entered, or was attempting to
    enter unlawfully and with force, the actor's occupied habitation, vehicle,
    or place of business or employment;
    (B) unlawfully and with force removed, or was attempting to
    remove unlawfully and with force, the actor from the actor's habitation,
    vehicle, or place of business or employment; or
    (C) was committing or attempting to commit aggravated kidnapping,
    murder, sexual assault, aggravated sexual assault, robbery,
    or aggravated robbery;
    (2) did not provoke the person against whom the force was used;
    and
    (3) was not otherwise engaged in criminal activity, other than a
    Class C misdemeanor that is a violation of a law or ordinance regulating
    traffic at the time the force was used.
    (b) The use of force against another is not justified:
    (1) in response to verbal provocation alone;
    (2) to resist an arrest or search that the actor knows is being
    made by a peace officer, or by a person acting in a peace officer's
    presence and at his direction, even though the arrest or search is
    unlawful, unless the resistance is justified under Subsection (c);
    (3) if the actor consented to the exact force used or attempted by
    the other;
    (4) if the actor provoked the other's use or attempted use of
    unlawful force, unless:
    (A) the actor abandons the encounter, or clearly communicates
    to the other his intent to do so reasonably believing he cannot safely abandon the encounter; and
    (B) the other nevertheless continues or attempts to use
    unlawful force against the actor; or
    (5) if the actor sought an explanation from or discussion with the
    other person concerning the actor's differences with the other person
    while the actor was:
    (A) carrying a weapon in violation of Section 46.02; or
    (B) possessing or transporting a weapon in violation of Section
    46.05.
    (c) The use of force to resist an arrest or search is justified:
    (1) if, before the actor offers any resistance, the peace officer (or
    person acting at his direction) uses or attempts to use greater force
    than necessary to make the arrest or search; and
    (2) when and to the degree the actor reasonably believes the
    force is immediately necessary to protect himself against the peace officer's
    (or other person's) use or attempted use of greater force than
    necessary.
    (d) The use of deadly force is not justified under this subchapter
    except as provided in Sections 9.32, 9.33, and 9.34.
    (e) A person who has a right to be present at the location where the
    force is used, who has not provoked the person against whom the
    force is used, and who is not engaged in criminal activity at the time
    the force is used is not required to retreat before using force as
    described by this section.
    (f) For purposes of Subsection (a), in determining whether an actor
    described by Subsection (e) reasonably believed that the use of force
    was necessary, a finder of fact may not consider whether the actor
    failed to retreat.
    Just remember that shot placement is much more important with what you carry than how big a bang you get with each trigger pull.
    www.ddchl.com
    Texas CHL Instructor
    Texas Hunter Education Instructor
    NRA Instructor

  13. #27
    VIP Member Array Eagleks's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Kansas
    Posts
    7,653
    Walk into an occupied home, and with the past issues, I can't see how they would ever rule it was not justified.
    I don't make jokes. I just watch the government and report the facts. --- Will Rogers ---
    Chief Justice John Roberts : "I don't see how you can read Heller and not take away from it the notion that the Second Amendment...was extremely important to the framers in their view of what liberty meant."

  14. #28
    VIP Member Array 9MMare's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Outside Seattle, WA
    Posts
    3,309
    Wow, I dont think I have the words to describe how awful this would have been for this woman. Didnt this guy also shoot her rottie?

    In this situation, would OC spray have been better? IMO it would have escalated his rage (later) but been a decent defense if needed at that moment. But later, who knows what he would have done in retaliation?

    The legal system severely let this woman down. The man was clearly crazy. His break-ins and trespassing should have been seen/counted as cumulative and progressively dangerous, leading to the court's ability to put him in jail for a long time. But I dont believe current laws work that way. If they did, alot more stalkers would be off the streets.

    After such a period of harrassment and mental anguish, I would hope that any grand jury would see that she had good reason to be in fear of her life and was justified in shooting him. I think she was.
    Fortune favors the bold.

    Freedom doesn't mean safe, it means free.

    The thing about "defense" is that it has practically nothing to do with guns. (As passed on by CCW9MM)

  15. #29
    VIP Member Array ctsketch's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Connecticut
    Posts
    2,319
    Quote Originally Posted by paaiyan View Post
    Well in my opinion forcefully would mean making a conscious effort to defeat any device meant to prevent them from entering. Hiring a locksmith to open the door is a forceful entry as far as I'm concerned. Besides, if I get home and he's there, I'm not going to make an attempt to find out how they got in there. I'm going to reasonably assume they broke in and take care of things. Check the second bullet there about "reason to believe." I think that'd cover it.

    I don't mean to make it sound like I'd want to shoot anyone here, but if they broke into my house and I knew they had a violent background like she knew....
    Exactly, if you come through a locked door uninvited i'd say that forcing entry.
    Glock 19
    Kahr PM9
    LMT-M4
    Mossberg 590
    Shodan, Jujutsu

  16. #30
    VIP Member Array mcp1810's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    4,949
    "It appears that she was trying to protect herself," he said. "If the evidence didn't support her story, we would have arrested her."
    I imagine the grand jury will need about five minutes to clear her.

    Foreclosures do have their risks. In many states, realtors have to disclose known defects in a house they are selling except foreclosures! My house was a foreclosure. Fortunately I didn't have dead fish in the walls or concrete in the plumbing. I have had no contact from the previous owner. I did however get visits from repo men looking for the previous owner's Mercedes and four Deputy Sheriffs looking for him.
    Infowars- Proving David Hannum right on a daily basis

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Similar Threads

  1. Home Invasion scenario
    By Pete14 in forum Carry & Defensive Scenarios
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: February 28th, 2010, 10:00 PM
  2. Home buying advice..Newer vs old
    By GoGators10 in forum Off Topic & Humor Discussion
    Replies: 35
    Last Post: May 21st, 2009, 07:00 PM
  3. Home Invasion Scenario
    By ErikGr7 in forum Carry & Defensive Scenarios
    Replies: 24
    Last Post: December 30th, 2008, 07:53 PM
  4. Buying a second G26 from home
    By rwmorrisonjr in forum General Firearm Discussion
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: April 14th, 2006, 06:42 AM
  5. Scenario: You come home...
    By rfurtkamp in forum Carry & Defensive Scenarios
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: February 9th, 2005, 09:23 AM

Search tags for this page

are there threats in buying a forclosure home

,

sanctity being invaded

Click on a term to search for related topics.