Sunday afternoon, napping with your wife, your door gets kicked in. True story.

This is a discussion on Sunday afternoon, napping with your wife, your door gets kicked in. True story. within the Carry & Defensive Scenarios forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; THE ULTIMATE WEAPON IS THE BRAIN. I know under the OP circumstances, all the power I had 50 years ago, the training in the military, ...

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 57

Thread: Sunday afternoon, napping with your wife, your door gets kicked in. True story.

  1. #31
    jfl
    jfl is offline
    Distinguished Member Array jfl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Palm Beach County, FL
    Posts
    1,485
    THE ULTIMATE WEAPON IS THE BRAIN.

    I know under the OP circumstances, all the power I had 50 years ago, the training in the military, the martial arts, would be back for a few minutes. I'd probably be sore for a few weeks

    And if I lost - which I don't believe - I'd go down fighting.
    Death before dishonor.

    As some others said a gun would have been of no use in the OP situation; either you have the will to fight or you don't.

    In Jeff Cooper's book "Principles of Self-Defense" there is a good story about a guy in his boat waking up from a nap with an AK-47 pointed at his chest. Read it again.

    What ??? You don't have the book ??? I don't believe it !!!
    Seriously, get it, you wont regret it.
    The first rule of a gunfight: "Don't be there !"
    The second rule: "Bring enough gun"

    jfl
    (NRA Life Member/Instructor - GOA - IDPA - GSSF - ex-IHMSA)

  2. Remove Ads

  3. #32
    Distinguished Member Array kazzaerexys's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Maryland
    Posts
    1,838
    Grady, thank you very much for such a personal post.

    Quote Originally Posted by user View Post
    The rules change after dark, because you're entitled to a presumption that a burglar is willing to kill you.
    Any presumption you may have is written into the law. States that have a so-called castle doctrine give you the presumption of lethal threat the moment your house is broken into---in some states, even before that. In states that don't have an explicit castle doctrine, any violent breakin---shattered door as opposed to picked lock---sounds like a pretty articulable suspicion of lethal threat to me...

    In no state of which I am aware is there a dawn/dusk restriction on any legislated castle doctrine. The argument cited above is Talmudic law, not United States criminal or civil law.
    “What is a moderate interpretation of [the Constitution]? Halfway between what it says and [...] what you want it to say?” —Justice Antonin Scalia

    SIG: P220R SS Elite SAO, P220R SAO, P220R Carry, P226R Navy, P226, P239/.40S&W, P2022/.40S&W; GSR 5", P6.

  4. #33
    Distinguished Member Array Doc Holliday's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Georgia
    Posts
    1,675
    This is why I carry at home!
    Why Ike, whatever do you mean? Maybe poker's just not your game Ike. I know! Let's have a spelling contest!

  5. #34
    Member Array user's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Northern Piedmont of Va. & Middle of Nowhere, W.Va.
    Posts
    386
    I've read with some interest the opinions of many here who have clearly been practicing law a lot longer than I have. I'll stick to my original statements, though, with all respect to those with contrary views. I particularly enjoyed the idea that English common law and the Talmud are the same. Is this a "British Israelites" thing?

    I think, however, we may be losing sight of the basic element of the affirmative defense of "self defense": it always, always, always requires a reasonable belief based on objective facts that one is faced with a serious threat of bodily injury or death. Burglary is the breaking and entering of the dwelling house of another in the night-time with the intention to commit a felony. For the purposes of the jury instruction on self-defense, one is entitled to a presumption that one who reasonably appears to be a burglar is willing to kill, and thus shooting the presumed burglar will be excusable (not justifiable) homicide.

    Obviously, one who is not a burglar, i.e., a trespasser, who presents a real threat should be met with an appropriate level of force to eliminate the threat. But there's no presumption if the intruder is not a burglar. (Or a "robber" either, since "robbery" is the taking and carrying away of the personal property of another by threats, force, or intimidation; as distinguished from "stealing" or "theft".)

    Btw, the Castle Doctrine is a common law concept, too, and it applies to the Sovereign - it's basically the principle that's enshrined in the Fourth Amendment. I realize there are statutes in some states that have been labeled as having something to do with the Castle Doctrine, but the Castle Doctrine never gave anyone the right to shoot merely to protect property.

    Now, I depend for my livelihood on people not taking what I say seriously, and ignoring my advice. And I'll be more than happy to defend anyone charged with a crime because of their use of firearms, whatever their argument might be, and I'll make their cause known to the jury in the best way I can to protect their interests. But I suggest you check with a local attorney on the ideas and opinions expressed in this thread before the need arises. Check and see whether I'm right or not.
    Daniel L. Hawes - 540 347 2430 - HTTP://www.VirginiaLegalDefense.com

    Nothing I say as "user" should be taken as either advertising for attorney services or legal advice. Legal questions should be presented to a competent attorney licensed to practice in the relevant state.

  6. #35
    VIP Member
    Array 64zebra's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Panhandle of Texas
    Posts
    6,437
    Rugergirl OK start with eliminating that "bad part of town"
    Bad parts of any town is where you are when crime rears it's ugly head. That could be downtown or in your own home.
    Think for a minute about the slums, and compare them to the affluent side of town. If you were going to break into a home for say some drug money, where would you think you'd find it?
    Change the line of thinking of 'parts of town' to "your own personal safety", wherever you may be.

    I've been on the same calls in the "bad" parts of our town compared to the "good" parts of town, shots fired, home invasions, robberies, burglaries, assaults, drugs, you name it, it can happen anywhere/anytime

    Quote Originally Posted by user View Post
    In Virginia, and I suspect in most places, firing at a trespasser without having a factual reason to believe that you were facing an imminent threat of bodily injury is probably attempted murder. It is never dark in Virginia at 4 p.m., so that guy was not a "burglar", and you may not use deadly force merely to defend property rights.

    I'd have the gun out and be ready to shoot, of course, but no shooting until you've seen the guy and have a reason to believe he's dangerous to you or the wife.

    The rules change after dark, because you're entitled to a presumption that a burglar is willing to kill you.
    well, first of all....you are in VA, Grady is in MO, so I'm sure there are some differences there and between other states as well

    User
    Burglary is the breaking and entering of the dwelling house of another in the night-time with the intention to commit a felony.
    this I don't understand, please satisfy my curiosity.... in VA if someone breaks into a house in the daytime what is it called? in Texas its burglary no matter what time of day, and burglary in itself is justification for using deadly force. I'm really curious about the VA law.
    Prime example of everyone needing to know their state's laws

    Here deadly force is justified for anytime you reasonably believe deadly force is about to be used on you or a 3rd person, or if you are about to suffer serious bodily injury (or 3rd person), to protect the actor against the other's use or attempted use of unlawful deadly force.....anytime day or night; to prevent the other's imminent commission of aggravated kidnapping, murder, sexual assault, aggravated sexual assault, robbery, or aggravated robbery, kidnapping the actor from the actor's habitation, vehicle, or place of business or employment, 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, to prevent the other's imminent commission of arson, burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, theft during the nighttime, or criminal mischief during the nighttime, to prevent the other who is fleeing immediately after committing burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, or theft during the nighttime from escaping with the property

    This has all been in our penal code for years.....way before our so called castle doctrine law clarified a couple of things in the penal code.

    If I'm sitting in my recliner watchin TV, wife sittin in her recliner, son in bed....and someone opens my front door....they are uninvited since the only dwellers of my house are accounted for, and the new arrivals are not coming for tea, hence I would be completely justified in shooting. I won't wait to ID the person coming in my home and seeing if they have a gun pointing at me...at this point I'm behind the curve and the BG has the advantage. I don't have family here and all our friends know better than to come into our house uninvited.

    I've read with some interest the opinions of many here who have clearly been practicing law a lot longer than I have. I'll stick to my original statements, though, with all respect to those with contrary views. I particularly enjoyed the idea that English common law and the Talmud are the same. Is this a "British Israelites" thing?
    maybe its people knowing their individual state's laws
    LEO/CHL
    Certified Glock Armorer

    "I got a touch of hangover bureaucrat, don't push me"
    --G.W. McClintock

    Independence is declared; it must be maintained. Sam Houston-3/2/1836
    If loose gun laws are good for criminals why do criminals support gun control?

  7. #36
    VIP Member Array LongRider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    2,618
    Grady, I can feel the frustration in your writing. I know that book struck a cord way to close to home.
    We both know that the prof will ALWAYS see a punk in the mirror for the rest of his life because he is too much a of a coward to man up and take responsibility for his family. I have no compassion or pity for volunteer victims that would sacrifice his family to his cowardice. I do pity his family and hope his wife leaves him for a real man.
    Thankfully your family is far safer because you are not that guy. You are a man who is doing what you need to do to protect your family. Even though it is not appreciated even disparaged, you are doing the right thing for those you love and who depend on you. Hopefully your daughter will come to realize that the reason she has had a safe secure life is because dad was looking out for her long enough for her to grow up.

    Quote Originally Posted by grady View Post
    [*]They burned sage--a Native American custom--in the 4 corners of the house to ward off evil spirits.
    This about made me snap. These hippie new age racist noble savage bastardizations of Native Traditions disgust me. Sick spineless fake fraud part time broad weak punk. How about the Native Tradition of growing a pair? Standing up for your family? For showing his wife some respect and defending her dignity and honor. Instead of allowing her to be paraded around butt naked like a whore by some street thug. Really armed has nothing to do with it armed or not the punk should be beaten to death before he would allow that to happen to his wife. Comments like this make me want to introduce him to another Native American Tradition, called a blanket party.

    Quote Originally Posted by user View Post
    In Virginia, and I suspect in most places, firing at a trespasser without having a factual reason to believe that you were facing an imminent threat of bodily injury is probably attempted murder..
    If that is right Virginia laws SUCK. Virginians really need to get off of their touchy freely criminal coddling kick. Any idiot should be able to figure out that any sociopath breaking into your home does not mean you well. In Washington lethal force is lawful to stop a felony. I can think of four cases that thieving low life scum got dirt naps for bringing their stink hole where it did not belong. My favorite was a teenage cretin who was pooping his brains out before he made it halfway through the window. Not even in liberal Seattle was there a single objection or complaint
    Abort the Obamanation not the Constitution

    Those who would, deny, require permit, license, certification, or authorization for me to bear arms are as vile, dangerous & evil as those who would molest, abuse, assault, rape or murder my family

  8. #37
    Member Array user's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Northern Piedmont of Va. & Middle of Nowhere, W.Va.
    Posts
    386

    64Zebra's Right: Get Local Legal Advice

    Quote Originally Posted by 64zebra View Post
    :...well, first of all....you are in VA, Grady is in MO, so I'm sure there are some differences there and between other states as well ...
    ...
    Absolutely right, and I generally advise people to ask a lawyer where they live. However someone earlier identified a common law principle I'd cited as "talmudic", which I thought was pretty much off the wall.

    Quote Originally Posted by 64zebra View Post
    :...
    ... in VA if someone breaks into a house in the daytime what is it called? ...
    ...
    As a civil matter, it's trespassing; in criminal law, it's breaking and entering (which, unless the intruder is armed at the time of the invasion, is not a "serious felony" the prevention of which would justify the use of deadly force).

    Quote Originally Posted by 64zebra View Post
    :...
    Here deadly force is justified ... to prevent the other who is fleeing immediately after committing burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, or theft during the nighttime from escaping with the property

    This has all been in our penal code for years.....way before our so called castle doctrine law clarified a couple of things in the penal code.
    ...
    It's no longer OK to shoot a fleeing felon unless he represents an imminent threat of serious bodily injury to others. And if you're a cop, and state law allows or requires it, you can rely on a public welfare rule such that it is not necessary to show that the fleeing felon was a threat to any particular person, but a threat to people generally. That's a matter of federal constitutional law, not state law.

    And, btw, the last important case relating to the Castle Doctrine was decided in England in 1605. It's not a new idea.

    Quote Originally Posted by LongRider View Post
    ... Any idiot should be able to figure out that any sociopath breaking into your home does not mean you well. In Washington lethal force is lawful to stop a felony. ...
    The person coming into your house in the daytime may be a trespasser; or he may be coming in because you left your door open with only a screen door closed (or the door unlocked) and thus there's an implied license you gave anyone who wants to come in. That's why the cops can just waltze in anytime if the door's unlocked. It's not necessarily a felony, even if the person means you no good. He may just be trying to steal the TV. And you may not stop him with deadly force unless he resists with deadly force.

    He may simply be a confused person with Alzheimer's disease who thought your house was that of his grand-daughter. If you blow him away absent a threat of bodily harm, you're probably going to lose that house to pay for the damages in the wrongful death suit. As to which the issue of whether you could be charged with a crime, and whether you've got a good defense to such a charge, will be totally irrelevant.
    Daniel L. Hawes - 540 347 2430 - HTTP://www.VirginiaLegalDefense.com

    Nothing I say as "user" should be taken as either advertising for attorney services or legal advice. Legal questions should be presented to a competent attorney licensed to practice in the relevant state.

  9. #38
    Senior Member Array JohnKelly's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    554
    Grady, thanks for posting that. I can relate to your frustration, my wife has gone to bed with the front door unlocked and I've chewed her out over it (she works 3rd shift and sleeps days, the kids leave it unlocked whe going to school sometimes). Our security system consists of two dogs, who I know would bark so it is in effect always "on".

    I can forgive a person for being an unprepared victim - once. Although since the invader was unarmed I'm not sure I could even begin to understand whay the author didn't fight back.

    But some of the "solutions" he employed afterwards are ridiculous:

    * They leave the lights on in certain rooms at night.
    OK, gives the house a "lived in look" but may provide advantage to invader at night.

    * He changed locks on the house doors.
    Great idea.

    * Replaced the shattered door with one reinforced on the bottom half only--they still like the light coming through the upper half. Note: after the breakin, they discovered the shattered door was an interior door installed on the outside of the house. Probably wouldn't have mattered, but it may indicate a previous lack of attention to security issues.
    Better, but total reinforcement is best. I can understand not wanting to feel like you live in a prison, though, with steel instead of windows.

    * He daydreams of having a gun on the day of the invasion. No mention of buying one.
    Walter Mitty meets the cowardly lion. The one tool that would have likely solved the situation he refuses to purchase.

    * His wife stays with family or friends when he travels out of town.
    Afraid of being in her own home! Why stay not stay with friends all the time, it seems to make no difference whether her husband is home or not.

    * His wife dislikes 4 p.m.
    Understandable... maybe a little PTSD going on.

    * They burned sage--a Native American custom--in the 4 corners of the house to ward off evil spirits.
    Oh for pete's sake. The only smoke that should have been in their house that day was gunsmoke wafting from the barrel of their gun.

    * He reinforced the planks in the backyard fence, although no mention is made of the intruder damaging the fence to gain entry.
    Reinforced planks? Sounds like he is rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic, but okay.

    * He did say he was "remaking his place" and "disinviting the predator", apparently making some outside changes to encourage a predeator to keep on looking for a softer target.
    Okay, finally we have a solution! A predator needs to understand that they are "disinvited" and must vacate the premises. Failure to complete this important step only invites trouble! Seriously, adding lights and removing bushes that hide windows is a good idea.

    * Entered therapy.
    Understandable, maybe. Should coincide with firearms and defense training.

    * Night terrors.
    Definately understandable.

    * Expectations of suddenness, and lack of calmness.
    Sounds like PTSD also.

    * A false perception of reality shattered (my words, not his).
    Everyone should (and has right to) feel safe in their own home. I feel safe because I have locked doors, two dogs and a Glock 19 on my hip.


    I've seen this before, even with my own family (dad and brother). Security system in place, better locks, sometimes a dog or two. But often the security system is disarmed, the door is left unlocked and the dogs are out in the backyard. An absolute refusal to accept that when perimeter defenses fail, the tool of last resort must be available and EMPLOYED.

    The author of the book needs to grow a pair. His own wife is afraid of being in their home at times. Preparation/training removes a lot of fear. But you have to be willing to do it.

  10. #39
    Ex Member Array PNUT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    TN
    Posts
    913
    I think, however, we may be losing sight of the basic element of the affirmative defense of "self defense": it always, always, always requires a reasonable belief based on objective facts that one is faced with a serious threat of bodily injury or death.

    It's reasonable to assume that someone breaking into your house at ANY time is ready, able, and willing to do you harm. It's unreasonable to think otherwise.

  11. #40
    VIP Member Array rottkeeper's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Upstate New York
    Posts
    3,194
    You nailed it Grady and again thats why I like to read your posts. For some it is hard wired into their brains that nothing bad can happen to them, not in their neighborhood.
    He failed to provide safety for himself but more importantly his wife, for that he will only find peace in death.
    For as the lightning comes from the east and flashes to the west, so also will the coming of the son of man be. Mathew 24:27

    NRA Member

  12. #41
    Distinguished Member Array kazzaerexys's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Maryland
    Posts
    1,838
    Quote Originally Posted by user View Post
    I particularly enjoyed the idea that English common law and the Talmud are the same. Is this a "British Israelites" thing?
    Feel free to look at the opinion of others more learned in the Torah than I (American Jewish Committee):
    The Torah makes a clear distinction between a nighttime and daytime robbery. As the text states,

    [If] the thief is seized while tunneling, and he is beaten to death, there is no bloodguilt [for the homeowner]. If the sun has risen on him [and he is beaten to death], there is bloodguilt [for the homeowner].

    "Tunneling" is understood by most scholars to imply an event that occurred at night, under the cover of darkness, in contrast to one that occurred during daylight hours, described by the phrase, "If the sun has risen on him."

    I think, however, we may be losing sight of the basic element of the affirmative defense of "self defense": it always, always, always requires a reasonable belief based on objective facts that one is faced with a serious threat of bodily injury or death.
    That turns out not to be the case. The castle doctrine, where it exists as an explicitly written law, provides a rebuttable legal presumption that anybody breaking into a dwelling is there to do lethal harm to the inhabitants; it specifically does not require the inhabitant to wait to be convinced of this. It is a rebuttable presumption because the DA can attempt to prove that the homeowner ought to have known that there was no lethal threat and should not have used lethal force, but because of the castle doctrine the burden of proof is on the prosecutor, not the defendant.

    Burglary is the breaking and entering of the dwelling house of another in the night-time with the intention to commit a felony.
    That was the understood definition according to English common law, yes. And yet, according to the Maryland state code, burglary has no time constraint. In fact, burglary in the fourth degree is defined solely as breaking and entering. Add the intention to commit any crime, felony or otherwise, and it becomes third degree. Add the intent to commit theft or violence (and there are misdemeanor levels of both) and you get yourself first degree---even during the daytime and with no intent to commit a felony.

    For the purposes of the jury instruction on self-defense, one is entitled to a presumption that one who reasonably appears to be a burglar is willing to kill, and thus shooting the presumed burglar will be excusable (not justifiable) homicide.
    Just curious, how many self-defense shootings have you seen charged as excusable homicide, rather than murder or manslaughter?

    As for jury instructions, again, in a state with an explicit castle doctrine, I would have my lawyer begin the appeals process if the jury is not instructed that the burden is on the prosecution to prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the burglar was not there to commit violence against my person.

    I realize there are statutes in some states that have been labeled as having something to do with the Castle Doctrine, but the Castle Doctrine never gave anyone the right to shoot merely to protect property.
    ‘Never’ is such a strong word. I imagine you would not have to go too far back in English history to find property owners legally and justifiably killing poachers on their land, because life and livelihood are very inter-related concepts. It is quite clear that use-of-force laws in some states---see Texas---most certainly allow for deadly force in the protection of property.
    “What is a moderate interpretation of [the Constitution]? Halfway between what it says and [...] what you want it to say?” —Justice Antonin Scalia

    SIG: P220R SS Elite SAO, P220R SAO, P220R Carry, P226R Navy, P226, P239/.40S&W, P2022/.40S&W; GSR 5", P6.

  13. #42
    Member Array ckgdrums's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Wichita, KS
    Posts
    63
    Quote Originally Posted by kazzaerexys View Post
    ‘Never’ is such a strong word. I imagine you would not have to go too far back in English history to find property owners legally and justifiably killing poachers on their land, because life and livelihood are very inter-related concepts. It is quite clear that use-of-force laws in some states---see Texas---most certainly allow for deadly force in the protection of property.
    Good call, Kazz.

    I have read this entire thread and some VERY good points have been made. It seems that the victim in Grady's original post could have done something....anything, to defend himself and his wife.
    I remember the Carr brothers home invasion here in Wichita a few years back. 5 people dead...executed, but only after being made to perform sexual acts on one another. Very nice neighborhood. Criminals knocked and the door was opened. The rest is history. The only survivor, a woman who was shot in the head, but her hair clip deflected the bullet, ran almost a mile, nude through the snow to a farmhouse for help.
    All but for 1 gun in the house, those people would be alive today....or at least they could have gone down fighting.

    Very sad.
    Be Safe,
    Chuck

  14. #43
    VIP Member
    Array 64zebra's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Panhandle of Texas
    Posts
    6,437
    Quote Originally Posted by user View Post
    As a civil matter, it's trespassing; in criminal law, it's breaking and entering (which, unless the intruder is armed at the time of the invasion, is not a "serious felony" the prevention of which would justify the use of deadly force).
    CIVIL? is trespassing a civil offense in VA? Its criminal everywhere else I know of.

    Quote Originally Posted by user View Post
    It's no longer OK to shoot a fleeing felon unless he represents an imminent threat of serious bodily injury to others. And if you're a cop, and state law allows or requires it, you can rely on a public welfare rule such that it is not necessary to show that the fleeing felon was a threat to any particular person, but a threat to people generally. That's a matter of federal constitutional law, not state law.
    Yes I'm well aware of this, based on Tennessee vs Garner. Learned all about it. This is applicable to LEO and a fleeing suspect based on using deadly force against them is a seizure based on the 4th amendment. This was not the case prescribed above. The situation above (and my statement of Texas state law) was concerning a citizen. The Holding in the case of Tenn. vs Garner was applied to LEO. To my knowledge there hasn't been another case brought forward concerning a citizen in a similar situation, and there have been a bunch of SD/protection of property shootings in Texas since this case.

    Quote Originally Posted by user View Post
    And, btw, the last important case relating to the Castle Doctrine was decided in England in 1605. It's not a new idea.
    we all know where the term castle doctrine came from, I never said it was a new idea, I was merely pointing out that the "castle doctrine" law passed in 2007 by the Texas Legislature only modified the language in a couple of small places of the penal code. The language of this new law in Texas was already in place in other areas of the penal code (ex: referencing duty to retreat-if you were threatened with deadly force/serious bod. injury there was no duty to retreat already but a couple of places in the penal code contradicted each other and this new legislation corrected these errors. The media did a great job boosting this all over the news that everyone would be shooting and asking questions later, even though there really wasn't much changed in law)

    Quote Originally Posted by user View Post
    The person coming into your house in the daytime may be a trespasser; or he may be coming in because you left your door open with only a screen door closed (or the door unlocked) and thus there's an implied license you gave anyone who wants to come in. That's why the cops can just waltze in anytime if the door's unlocked. It's not necessarily a felony, even if the person means you no good. He may just be trying to steal the TV. And you may not stop him with deadly force unless he resists with deadly force.
    ???? may be a trespasser? coming onto my property without permission, or coming INTO my house uninvited MAY be a trespasser? I have to ask..... is this VA law? if so thats really messed up
    and "implied license" that anyone can come in.......never heard of that either, open window, door, screen, etc does NOT mean anyone can come in, where did you learn that from?
    and no, absolutely no....we LEOs CANNOT just waltz in anytime a door is unlocked, if you're a lawyer you should really know this. We can't enter a house without proper warrant unless there are exigent circumstances. Just because a door is unlocked doesn't mean we can just enter. Maybe you mistakenly typed that or something.
    Not necessarily a felony......again, as soon as they enter my habitation uninvited it is a felony here anyway, maybe not in VA (and if not I pity the citizens of VA)

    Quote Originally Posted by user View Post
    He may simply be a confused person with Alzheimer's disease who thought your house was that of his grand-daughter. If you blow him away absent a threat of bodily harm, you're probably going to lose that house to pay for the damages in the wrongful death suit. As to which the issue of whether you could be charged with a crime, and whether you've got a good defense to such a charge, will be totally irrelevant.
    again, depends on state law, maybe its that way in VA but in most places I'm sure, anyone breaking into your house justifies deadly force. Sure it would not be a good thing to shoot someone mistakenly entering the wrong house, but it wouldn't be a good thing for me to sit and wait for someone to come in and explain themselves as to why they are coming into my home.
    LEO/CHL
    Certified Glock Armorer

    "I got a touch of hangover bureaucrat, don't push me"
    --G.W. McClintock

    Independence is declared; it must be maintained. Sam Houston-3/2/1836
    If loose gun laws are good for criminals why do criminals support gun control?

  15. #44
    Member Array user's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Northern Piedmont of Va. & Middle of Nowhere, W.Va.
    Posts
    386
    Quote Originally Posted by kazzaerexys View Post
    Feel free to look at the opinion of others more learned in the Torah than I (American Jewish Committee):
    [INDENT][I]The Torah makes a clear distinction between a nighttime and daytime robbery. As the text states,
    ...
    Just curious, how many self-defense shootings have you seen charged as excusable homicide, rather than murder or manslaughter?

    As for jury instructions, again, in a state with an explicit castle doctrine, I would have my lawyer begin the appeals process if the jury is not instructed that the burden is on the prosecution to prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the burglar was not there to commit violence against my person.
    ...
    Interesting first point - not being Jewish, myself, and residing in a common law state, my background is the history of Virginia law (including whatever the law of England was in 1607).

    I was a bit confused by the second point at first, until I realized that I hadn't made it clear that I was citing a standard defense instruction. Both sides are entitled to offer jury instructions. But you're right, the charge would probably be second degree murder. As to which all the state would have to prove is the intentional homicide. It would then be up to the defense to demonstrate that there was a good reason for it, and to offer the court appropriate jury instructions consistent with the evidence.

    I keep forgetting too, that I apparently have to constantly remind everyone that I am only an attorney in Virginia, and as such I have no idea what state law is in effect elsewhere. To be really clear, each person should check with an attorney where he lives. For that matter, since I am not advising clients here, but giving personal opinions, one should check with a Virginia lawyer about any questions he may have about Virginia law - don't blithely assume that something I've said here applies to the facts of any particular case.
    Daniel L. Hawes - 540 347 2430 - HTTP://www.VirginiaLegalDefense.com

    Nothing I say as "user" should be taken as either advertising for attorney services or legal advice. Legal questions should be presented to a competent attorney licensed to practice in the relevant state.

  16. #45
    VIP Member Array LongRider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    2,618
    Quote Originally Posted by user View Post
    The person coming into your house in the daytime may be a trespasser; or he may be coming in because you left your door open with only a screen door closed (or the door unlocked) and thus there's an implied license you gave anyone who wants to come in. That's why the cops can just waltze in anytime if the door's unlocked. It's not necessarily a felony, even if the person means you no good. He may just be trying to steal the TV. And you may not stop him with deadly force unless he resists with deadly force.

    He may simply be a confused person with Alzheimer's disease who thought your house was that of his grand-daughter. If you blow him away absent a threat of bodily harm, you're probably going to lose that house to pay for the damages in the wrongful death suit. As to which the issue of whether you could be charged with a crime, and whether you've got a good defense to such a charge, will be totally irrelevant.
    If you are going to comment on others situations. You may want to be familiar with their situation and the laws of their state. They laws of your state and your understanding of them may not be irrelevant in their state.

    In Washington in addition to self defense and the defense of others. Washington state law provides for the use of lethal force to stop a felony and to stop a fleeing felon the shooter believes may be a danger to others. Clearly anyone who would threatens me or mine with violence is a threat to others. At no time have I or anyone advocated shooting anyone without identifying the target. Obviously no one is shooting a lost two year old or other non threat. Than again lost two year olds or other non threats will not be in my home uninvited

    My property is two miles up a dirt road surrounded by State land it clearly posted around the perimeter. It is a good 150 to 200 yards up the driveway from the dirt road to the house.

    Anyone who is on my property uninvited gets drawn on. Four sets of people have been drawn on in the past ten years. One was bitten badly. Twice the police were called by the trespassers. Each time the PD was irritated at the trespassers for wasting their time. Each time I opted not to press charges. The police explained to the trespassers that there are 922,561 acres or 1442 square miles of wilderness not counting, state land forestry lands and other undeveloped lands clear to the ocean surrounding our land it is easy for folks to get lost forever around here. That they are very lucky I am polite and law abiding many are not.

    Anyone inside my house uninvited gets shot period. If they have mental problems that makes understanding the obvious, they will have been cured by the time they arrive at the morgue. I can and will clearly articulate through my lawyer that anyone in my home out here in the sticks day or night uninvited put me in fear of my life and for the well being of my family.

    Not even Perry Mason will not be able to convince any jury around here that some one came two miles up a dirt road past the posted permitter, past the security cameras past the flock of attack turkeys past 3 125 pound guard dogs through the enclosed porch and into my house with a weapon in their hand. Did so by accident without ill intent .

    Washington state by law pays for the defense of anyone who is charged and proves self defense. My lawyers has been on retainer for near 25 years and a personal friend. He has successfully defended more capitol cases than any other lawyer in the NW including Mo and Utah. Who has proven it is reasonable for a violent felon fresh out of prison to bludgeon a mayor to death. I am sure that he will have any case of legitimate self defense I find myself in dismissed.
    Abort the Obamanation not the Constitution

    Those who would, deny, require permit, license, certification, or authorization for me to bear arms are as vile, dangerous & evil as those who would molest, abuse, assault, rape or murder my family

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

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. A Minneapolis police SWAT team kicked in the wrong door....
    By DIXIETWISTER in forum In the News: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: May 9th, 2010, 10:15 AM
  2. Middle of night - door is kicked in - do you shoot?
    By Chevy-SS in forum Carry & Defensive Scenarios
    Replies: 190
    Last Post: December 3rd, 2008, 12:07 AM
  3. A fine Sunday afternoon
    By mzmtg in forum Defensive Carry & Tactical Training
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: January 11th, 2006, 01:42 AM
  4. True Story
    By QKShooter in forum Off Topic & Humor Discussion
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: February 15th, 2005, 01:20 PM

Search tags for this page

florida castle doctrine picked lock

,

is it true you can beat your wife on sunday after noon in south carolina

,

reluctant wife gives intruder sex

,

sunday afternoon naps story

,

sunday afternoon satisfaction with spouse

,

your door will be kicked at 2 am remington

Click on a term to search for related topics.