Legality of self defense in the home?

[malignity]

imported post

Taurus850CIA wrote:

A: Shoot to stop threat=(most likely) bad guy dead, good guy alive. Good guy goes on with no criminal charges filed.

B: Shoot to kill=(most likely) bad guy dead, good guy alive. Good guy said the wrong thing, could face jail or prison time.

Moral of the story, keep your mouth shut, except to your lawyer, even if you know beyond a shadow of a doubt that you were justified.

Words mean stuff.

At least SOMEONE understands. Thank you.


The CPL holder in Detroit that shot the intruder fleeing from his house about two weeks ago hung himself because of his words.

There were no witnesses; but he told the cops too much, and now he's facing murder.

 

[conservative85]

imported post

malignity wrote:

Taurus850CIA wrote:

A: Shoot to stop threat=(most likely) bad guy dead, good guy alive. Good guy goes on with no criminal charges filed.

B: Shoot to kill=(most likely) bad guy dead, good guy alive. Good guy said the wrong thing, could face jail or prison time.

Moral of the story, keep your mouth shut, except to your lawyer, even if you know beyond a shadow of a doubt that you were justified.

Words mean stuff.

At least SOMEONE understands. Thank you.


The CPL holder in Detroit that shot the intruder fleeing from his house about two weeks ago hung himself because of his words.

There were no witnesses; but he told the cops too much, and now he's facing murder.

Um he also shot a guy who was NOT in his house, hell the guy was NOT even in his yard.

 

[malignity]

imported post

conservative85 wrote:

Um he also shot a guy who was NOT in his house, hell the guy was NOT even in his yard.

Yes, I understand that..

However:

A: His house had been broken into 3(2?) times already that week.

B: There were no witnesses. Instead of telling the police EVERYTHING that happened (in which he hung himself) if he utilized his RIGHT to remain silent, there's a very good chance he'd be walking as a free man. I'm not condoning that what he did was right; but rather just using it as an example of how it could VASTLY work in your favor.

What happened and what my defense attorney says happened might be a tad bit different, get my meaning?

Like i said, I'm not condoning what the guy did; and the robber may have gotten what he deserved, but things would have probably gone much differently had he kept his mouth shut....

 

[BreakingTheMold]

imported post

"Better to look guilty at home, then innocent in jail"


That said, even if your house had been broken into repeatedly, chasing someone is dangerous business.

 

[Glock 19]

imported post

I 've been told if some one enters your home(have your cell in hand) dial 911 (starts recording when its picked up) yell as loud as you can " I HAVE A GUN YOU NEED TO LEAVE" repeat until that intruder leaves..if he leaves, threat is done don't follow...if he doesn't....well.. and hope to god he was armed, because if he wasn't, that would suck if you would have too shoot....

on a side note glad this topic came up i was going to post this topic..

"if you draw your weapon on a BG are you ready to use it, because i havebeen told,if you draw make sure you are going to use it"

Think long and hard on this one, its a decision that could change your life. right or wrong we all know how the courts operate..99% in favor of the BG that enters your home.

Not to be rude, please do not give "barney bad ass" reply's

 

[Haman J.T.]

imported post

Bikenut wrote:

office888 wrote:

EM87 wrote:

From everything I've read and/or heard on the subject, if someone forces their way into my home and I shoot them, I am not guilty of any crime because it was a self-defense shooting.

My question is, how is an in-home shoot a self defense shooting if this person has not made any threat to you? Say you find someone in your room stealing your things but they make no move towards you and they don't have a weapon that you can see. How is it legal for you to shoot them?

I just need to make sure I have all my bases covered in case someone ever breaks in.

Lethal force is only an option if your life, or the lives of others are being threatened.

You're more than welcome to wave a gun in their face all you want, but for your sake, never shoot an unarmed man.

-Richard-

Please reconsider your thoughts about an "unarmed man"... because there is really no such thing.

A person might not have any tool (including conventional weapons) in their hands but that does not mean they are "unarmed" since bare hands used to strangle... fists used to pummel....and feet used to kick... are all weapons when used to inflict great bodily harm or death.

I saw the FBIhomocide stats and I believe deaths by beatings were greater in number than shootings.

 

[conservative85]

imported post

malignity wrote:

conservative85 wrote:

Um he also shot a guy who was NOT in his house, hell the guy was NOT even in his yard.

Yes, I understand that..

However:

A: His house had been broken into 3(2?) times already that week.

B: There were no witnesses. Instead of telling the police EVERYTHING that happened (in which he hung himself) if he utilized his RIGHT to remain silent, there's a very good chance he'd be walking as a free man. I'm not condoning that what he did was right; but rather just using it as an example of how it could VASTLY work in your favor.

What happened and what my defense attorney says happened might be a tad bit different, get my meaning?

Like i said, I'm not condoning what the guy did; and the robber may have gotten what he deserved, but things would have probably gone much differently had he kept his mouth shut....

Right!

Shoot Shovel Shut up! :celebrate