The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > Hogan's Alley > Tactics and Training

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old June 7, 2009, 12:42 PM   #101
OldMarksman
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 8, 2008
Posts: 1,950
Quote:
Make it three if Georgia is not among them
Georgia was indeed among them, "potentially"--the discussion was about the television. Georgia has some kind of provision about using deadly force to protect property in an instance involving a forcible felony. I do not know if it applies here and I wouldn't want to risk it.

Nor would I use deadly force to protect property simply because it might be legal in a couple of jurisdictions. Who knows, I might be unwittingly and unintentionally instrumental in getting the law repealed.

Quote:
Pay very close attention to Section 3 part B. I've read this about 20 times now and what I got from it was if someone unrelated to me forces their way into my house or if I stumble upon them in my house I can shoot them as I am "presumed to have held a reasonable fear of threat of imminent death or serious bodily injury" in such a situation.
Did you ever happen to notice the word "occupied" before "habitation" in Section 3 Part B?

Quote:
(b) A person is presumed to have held a reasonable fear of imminent threat of death or serious bodily injury to himself or herself or to another when using defensive force that is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm to another if the person against whom the defensive force was used was in the process of unlawfully and forcibly entering or had unlawfully and forcibly entered upon an occupied habitation and the person who uses defensive force knew or had reason to believe that an unlawful and forcible entry was occurring or had occurred."
http://www.legis.state.ga.us/legis/2...ext/hb1061.htm

However, that portion of the bill does not appear to have made it ultimately into the Georgia Code, in which it says

Quote:
... [a] person is justified in the use of force which is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm only if:

(1) The entry is made or attempted in a violent and tumultuous manner and he or she reasonably believes that the entry is attempted or made for the purpose of assaulting or offering personal violence to any person dwelling or being therein and that such force is necessary to prevent the assault or offer of personal violence;

(2) That force is used against another person who is not a member of the family or household and who unlawfully and forcibly enters or has unlawfully and forcibly entered the residence and the person using such force knew or had reason to believe that an unlawful and forcible entry occurred; or

(3) The person using such force reasonably believes that the entry is made or attempted for the purpose of committing a felony therein and that such force is necessary to prevent the commission of the felony.
(Georgia Code - Crimes and Offenses - Title 16, Section 16-3-23)

...nor does it seem to be very relevant.

http://law.onecle.com/georgia/16/16-3-23.html

That wording would appear to say that if one knew or had reason to believe that an unlawful and forcible entry had occurred, deadly force would be permissible. Would "stumbling upon" someone in your house give you sufficient knowledge or reason to believe that?

I haven't read it twenty times, but if there is one thing I learned in working directly for the General Counsel for a major business, and in working directly with the Law Department for more than two decades, it is to not try to interpret a law using lay dictionary definitions and without knowing how the courts have interpreted that lay in the context of the mosaic of the other laws including the state constitution.

And again---maybe you can shoot, but should you? I wouldn't, except to defend against death or serious injury.

By the way, I was told the other day that if I were to leave my doors open and go out of town for a week, my television would be among the things that remain!
OldMarksman is offline  
Old June 7, 2009, 12:59 PM   #102
MLeake
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 15, 2007
Location: Outside KC, MO
Posts: 10,128
Legal reform

Wouldn't it be nice if we could somehow pass an amendment requiring laws to be written in clear, plain language? (I almost wrote "English", but I'm not in the mood to start an English-only argument; my beef in this case is with "legalese")
MLeake is offline  
Old June 7, 2009, 04:48 PM   #103
David Armstrong
Junior member
 
Join Date: January 24, 2005
Location: SW Louisiana
Posts: 2,289
Quote:
I haven't read it twenty times, but if there is one thing I learned in working directly for the General Counsel for a major business, and in working directly with the Law Department for more than two decades, it is to not try to interpret a law using lay dictionary definitions and without knowing how the courts have interpreted that lay in the context of the mosaic of the other laws including the state constitution.
QFT! That is one of the big problems with folks trying to interpret the law, and one I've seen over and over. Just becaue the law says one thing that does no tmean that hting is what the law says. statutory definintions, otehr laws that modify, various court rulings, etc. can all impact the law and what it will mean in court.
David Armstrong is offline  
Old June 7, 2009, 06:07 PM   #104
guntotin_fool
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 18, 2004
Posts: 1,446
OK, I just spent a very nice weekend with a friend and his wife, she is a very active prosecuting atty for a fairly big city in Wisc. The state where self defense is not very well recognized.


MY question, have you ever charged or brought to trial a guy who was a homeowner, had a clean record, and was forced to shoot an intruder.


her answer: No, we don't do that.


Do you know of any cases where a homeowner who had a clean record shot a burglar in the night and was brought to trial.

Her answer NO.




I hear lots of hearsay, I hear lots of "oh yeah, we know it has happened". I do not see cites and posts.



I say show me posts, cites, and news stories about a CLEAN homeowner who shoots and kills a burglar.


I am not talking about ex's ex who shows up drunk at the door, I am not talking about a drug deal gone bad, I am talking about mom and pop citizen who kill someone in their own home who had broken and entered or who had strong armed their way in. .

Post the links to the washington case, I don't believe it will pass muster. I have seen two cases one in MN, one in Florida, where people entered the front of the home while the homeowners were either in a detached garage and returned or on the deck and returned, where they felt their life was in danger and they shot and in once case killed the perp, and they walked clean and got an attaboy for doing it.


Maybe in california, NYS or NJ you might find some Ahole county atty who will charge you, but for the rest of us, its not going to happen.

If you feel you are being threatened with GBH, you have a RIGHT to defend yourself. Inside your home, you are already a reluctant participant, therefore the need to retreat is GONE. I have spent many hours with several MN criminal defense lawyers and LEO"S and NOT one has said I would be prosecuted for shooting an uninvited intruder in the house who I felt was a threat.

OK, I am 5'8 over 250 and fairly strong, a drunk granny who stumbled into the wrong house would not necessarily pose a threat, and if I popped her for being in the wrong house, I might get some bad results, but at 50 years old, if two teenage thugs with masks on their head break in, I am not concerned that I will be prosecuted if I remove their ability to threaten me.


All you have to be is a reluctant or forced participant to Reasonably be in fear of great bodily harm, and its ok to defend yourself.

That's it, DID You invite them in, If I know I locked the door and the front door is hanging off the hinges when I return, I am pretty sure they are not here selling Watkins door to door. If they have a weapon of any type visible, they are not here by accident from Jehovah's Witness's and are "just leaving a copy of the "Watchtower" on the divan" as a public service. We are not talking about the what if's and maybe's. IF you are in your HOME and somone kicks in the door, you have a reasonable belief that they are not there collecting for Goodwill, and that your use of force to stop the ongoing felony is legal.

PERIOD!

I am not a lawyer, but in my work, I spend a lot of time around them, and i talk to them. I manage apartments, we have pretty much an ongoing battle with bad section 8 renters and I am in court at least twice a month getting people evicted, securing their property as surety against debt, etc. When we spend four hours waiting for the judge, I am talking to my counsel, and others, and I am DAMN sure of what I am saying here.

When people make this up, it harms us all. For the other posters, how much time have you spend asking your Public Prosecutor what is the legal limit for self defense?

Edited to add, http://www.thefiringline.com/forums/...d.php?t=344971 woman walked in on an intruder, she attacks him with a baseball bat to point of scaring him off, she did not get charged for defending herself, despite walking in on the attacker. He returned with bad results.


BS said in an authoritative manner is still BS

Last edited by guntotin_fool; June 7, 2009 at 06:27 PM. Reason: typos
guntotin_fool is offline  
Old June 7, 2009, 07:25 PM   #105
Tucker 1371
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 29, 2008
Location: East TN
Posts: 2,001
Veering slightly off topic but...

Quote:
And again---maybe you can shoot, but should you? I wouldn't, except to defend against death or serious injury.
No probably not. Now that I think about it if I came home and someone was walking out with my TV I (assuming I had a gun on my person) would probably just hold the gun on him and tell him to set my TV down... and then of course we're back to the handcuffs debate... good grief.

Getting woken up in the middle of the night is a different story though. My plan in a nutshell is ID target and shoot immediately if need be, I don't want to wait to find out whether they're armed or not or what their intentions are, just whether they're someone I know or not.

A few years ago some people with (apparently) some very bad intentions cut my grandparent's phone lines and slashed all their tires and then tried to open the front door. However, my grandpaw met them at the front door as they were trying to kick it in (dunces hadn't realized it was an out-opening door) with a .44mag and they hightailed it outta there. I think you can understand where I'm coming from, right?
__________________
NCO of Marines, 3rd Award Expert Rifle, 236 KD Range
D Co, 4th CEB, Engineers UP!! OEF 21JUN-20SEP2011
REV. 19:11 And I saw heaven opened, and behold a white horse; and he that sat upon him was called Faithful and True, and in righteousness he doth judge and make war.
Tucker 1371 is offline  
Old June 7, 2009, 08:14 PM   #106
OldMarksman
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 8, 2008
Posts: 1,950
Quote:
I do not see cites and posts. I say show me posts, cites, and news stories about a CLEAN homeowner who shoots and kills a burglar.
Why is it that you think that how "clean" a homeowner might be will impinge on the situation? Do you somehow think that that factor will influence justifiability?

Quote:
Post the links to the washington case, I don't believe it will pass muster.
No, I won't take the time, and frankly, I do not care what you believe. I have told you all that I know: a man came home to find a man in his house, shot him, and was charged with murder.

If a citizen employs deadly force within his dwelling, domicile, etc. and is justified under the law, one would hope that he will not be charged; in castle law states he stands a good chance; if he shoots someone under questionable circumstances and there is unfavorable evidence, he may well be charged, and he probably deserves it.

How "clean" he is is completely irrelevant.

Read this for a better understanding. I't too long to paste, but you will learn that seedy characters may be sucessfully defended in court:

http://www.nacdl.org/public.nsf/01c1...ocument&Click=

Last edited by OldMarksman; June 7, 2009 at 08:44 PM. Reason: Spelling; addition in red
OldMarksman is offline  
Old June 7, 2009, 08:48 PM   #107
OldMarksman
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 8, 2008
Posts: 1,950
Quote:
I think you can understand where I'm coming from, right?
Yes indeed.
OldMarksman is offline  
Old June 7, 2009, 09:54 PM   #108
pax
Staff
 
Join Date: May 16, 2000
Location: Washington state
Posts: 6,933
OM ~

Good link.

Everyone ~

It looks as if tempers are getting a little frayed. Please, before you post: think twice, post once.

pax
__________________
Kathy Jackson
My personal website: Cornered Cat
pax is offline  
Old June 8, 2009, 12:33 AM   #109
FNtastic!
Member
 
Join Date: September 5, 2007
Location: Perth, Western Australia
Posts: 37
Hmmmn, strong in this one, rhetoric is ... mmmnnn

Please, no one is trying to force you to use their way of thinking when it comes to your paticular home invasion ethos. If someone like Skydiver or GSUeagle1089 wants to shoot someone in his home for whatever reason, that is his choice and he is welcome to it. It will be up to him alone to face the concequences of his actions should the matter proceed to trial. To say however, that rational minded people who would rather not excecute or attempt to slap restraints upon an intruder the first instance they come into view are the cause of the downfall of your countrys social values is absurd.

http://www.news.com.au/perthnow/stor...9-2761,00.html

A story from the area, yes it is not the United States, but it is still relevant and interesting. It also affirms most of what the sensible posters on this thread are saying, in my opinion, this man did the right thing.
__________________
God bless America... but thank Christ for Australia
FNtastic! is offline  
Old June 8, 2009, 12:44 AM   #110
Tucker 1371
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 29, 2008
Location: East TN
Posts: 2,001
Quote:
If someone like Skydiver or GSUeagle1089 wants to shoot someone in his home for whatever reason
This sounds like a very anti-gun, rhetoric-injected statement to me. I never said I wanted to shoot anyone and I am fully aware of what my state's laws say is legal in a home invasion. Your laws down under may suck, mine here don't. Don't make me out to be a bloodthirsty vigilante because you got the short end of the stick. I personally think there are too many risks involved in 1) waiting to see what an intruder's intentions are 2) trying to restrain an intruder unassisted. If you think you can then go for it Hulk, I'm 5'7 and 140lbs, I may bench 200 and know a little hand to hand stuff but so do a lot of people and I'd rather not take mine or my family's lives into my bare hands if I can help it.

If a guy has forced his was into my house but I catch him in a position of weakness (i.e. hands full of TV or already in the air, back turned) of course I will not shoot him. But if he's free handed (or armed) and moving he's a threat and it's going to be a bad night for him.
__________________
NCO of Marines, 3rd Award Expert Rifle, 236 KD Range
D Co, 4th CEB, Engineers UP!! OEF 21JUN-20SEP2011
REV. 19:11 And I saw heaven opened, and behold a white horse; and he that sat upon him was called Faithful and True, and in righteousness he doth judge and make war.

Last edited by Tucker 1371; June 8, 2009 at 12:52 AM.
Tucker 1371 is offline  
Old June 8, 2009, 12:56 AM   #111
pax
Staff
 
Join Date: May 16, 2000
Location: Washington state
Posts: 6,933
Hmm. Should have trusted my instincts earlier, I see.

Closed.

pax
__________________
Kathy Jackson
My personal website: Cornered Cat
pax is offline  
Closed Thread

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:45 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2014 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.10241 seconds with 9 queries