Home defense

[centipede]

I've had enough of this inane chatter. Let's see what happens...

[the hare]

well as mentioned before, first of all the thief was known as a criminal. perhaps the two had a history, maybe he had warned before, maybe several times.....i personally don't like guns...i prefer a well trained German Shepherd!

[Dan De Soto]

FYI: Even if aquited the shooter can still be sued for wrongful death or injury by the spouse of the victim or the victim if alive. Homeowner's personal liability coverage does not provide any defense because of the intended injury exclusion:

http://www.irmi.com/expert/articles/2006/cooper01.aspx

[centipede]

What about a "Rightful Death"???

[kabloink]

I just have a hard time accepting this as someone was protecting his home. He shot a man on his property that was trying to steal illegal plants. So, to me it seems more like a criminal trying to protect their meth lab with deadly force than someone protecting their home and themselves from harm.

Seriously, if he was growing tomatoes in that greenhouse, would he had killed someone trying to steal one? I really doubt it.

[oink]

kabloink, you may well be correct in this instance. I'm trying to give benifit of doubt to the resident. On the other hand, a farmer will go out to check out unusual sounds at his tomatoe green house. If suspicious, he would be foolish to go unarmed. While inspecting his greenhouse he is confronted by the burglar. He is now placed into a situation that necessitates force. I have no sympathy for the burglar. On the other hand, if the resident had an illigal pot patch, you could make the case that the homicide was the direct result of his criminal enterprise, negating his self defence claim.

Pua`a
S. FL
Big Islander to be.

[ric]

Dan, I don't think anyone should be required to identify if they have an arsenal on their property or not. In fact, folks who don't own weapons are safer because of neighbors who do, since a stranger passing thru wouldn't know which house is armed or unarmed.

In a case like this, neighborhood like that, we can only use our own judgement, try to come up with some other scenario, has anyone offered any other reason this visitor would have been there? Why that house way up in HOVE when the intruder was from Milolii?

In the case of someone who has a record with so many violations, let's try to estimate just how much he has cost society in general, not to mention the direct victims of his crimes: devaluation of certain neighborhoods, increased family income spent on home security or firearms, lost productive time for innocent citizens in dealing with these losers, ... in the case of business's: loss of customers due to fear when such losers are hanging around, increased security, increase armor at your perimeters, perhaps having to close early each day for fear of one of these losers catching you there alone at night. . .

The fact that he shot in the back may be a little disturbing at first, but someone leaving can still pose a threat. Perhaps words were exchanged, the tresspasser knows who and where YOU and YOUR FAMILY are, and you don't know where they are or when they are coming back. The homeowner's guilt cannot be determined on that basis alone.

As long as this guy identified the tresspasser correctly, he did us all a favor. If he made a mistake and shot a decent citizen, a neighbor or passer-by looking for help, my analysis will be different.

[PaulW]

"but someone leaving can still pose a threat. Perhaps words were exchanged"

So now people should be killed for saying something?

Okay, the death penalty for burglary seems to have wide support. What else?
Firing squads for drug users? Lethal injections for pickpockets?

[Bullwinkle]

I think it was adrenalin and fear... these guys aren’t professional burglars or gun guys. I think the situation got away from them. Couple of amateurs high on adrenalin me thinks. All about a couple of hundred dollars of pot.
Shooting someone in the back - un pardonable – but usually an act of cowardice or fear - a warning shot in the air would have done the job.
The second round at the knees if he the intruder needed to be stopped
One thing that hasn’t been asked – How did the intruder know the plants were there? Had the shooter told him? Did they know each other? Let’s see how this plays out before forming opinions.

Aloha

[ric]

Paul, to answer your questions: "perhaps"

If someone comes to your property and threatens you, then leaves, he will sleep fine at night, and you may not. He knows where you are, you don't know when he is coming back. Only the owner can know if the guy has any business there. It seems you would prefer the shooter and his property should put up with any abuse at all, and you can come on here and defend the intruder. If you live in some fantasy land where you have never been threatened, or maybe you have nothing worth protecting, then you may not know what it's like.