Home Invasion Turns Deadly Right Down The Road

[TailGator]

a book I have by Michael Martin on Concealed Carry it quotes the Tempe Study, regarding an attacker being shot in the back and says that 2/10s of a second the BG could complete that movement of turning and the defender might require 5/10 of a second to stop shooting.

Yes, thanks - that is the kind of thing I was remembering. I didn't read that book or the Tempe Study, but it sounds like it parallels the material I read. I have been swamped and haven't had a chance to find a link. These kind of findings, along with the scenario of a fleeing person taking pot shots over their shoulder, make it plain that is an oversimplification to think that you can't shoot someone in the back in self defense.

[matthew261]

Sounds like a justified shooting to me. Stand your ground laws and castle laws were implemented for just such scenarios.

As for around the house carry, I always have at least my NA Arms .22 magnum in my pocket and many times a .357 magnum J-frame. Waking hours home invasions are on the rise around here.

[Onward Allusion]

Hiker 1
Ah, but if the kid was carrying - it may have only taken a single shot or no shots at all.

Not really relevant as very few, if any, 15 year olds are going to be carrying at home.

Missed the big smiley, eh?

[armoredman]

Mr Brown will be turning up very shortly on national television in front of a Congressional committee asking that he be provided a bullet resistant vest so as to level the playing field in his particular line of endeavor.
Good shooting, young man, I hope he works through any trauma quickly.

[Double Naught Spy]

Got it, Mello2u. The article represents a low standard of journalism because it doesn't answer all the questions you have.

It is interesting to look over various historic events, criminal reports, etc. and come up with questions not addressed they way we would have liked, or in the reporter's/officer's presentation of information to answer certain questions, we are spurred to consider additional questions which are not answered. That is a kind of nature of the beast. Only you can come up with answers to all of your questions and regardless of how thorough somebody else reports information, there are always going to be questions.

Did you notice from the article that there is still an open investigation? The lack of information you want isn't necessarily the fault of journalists either. Law enforcement has a long history of only repleasing limited information and sometimes repleasing incorrect information. This is especially true of open cases.

The article did answer who, when and where; but in my opinion failed to answer what and why.
What was the weapon used to defend the home?
Why did the sheriff's department decide this was a justified shooting?

Once again, the weapon used was a .22 rifle. The the information isn't sufficient to support your assault weapon agenda probably isn't a concern of the police, reporter, or others.

As for why the sheriff's department considered the shooting justified, I don't understand what it is that you are clear on in this matter? You have a forced entry home invasion by multiple people and the renter's son shoots and kills one of the invaders and you don't know what it is justified?

Of course you could have looked at the article and noted that it was days old when posted here. You could have simple pulled out some of the key words such as the names mentioned in the article and Googled them or searched the same newspaper to see if there was new information. You might have been surprised by some of it. For example...
http://newstimes.augusta.com/latest-...tinez-burglary

[Stevie-Ray]

The article did answer who, when and where; but in my opinion failed to answer what and why.
What was the weapon used to defend the home?
Why did the sheriff's department decide this was a justified shooting?

I am not passing judgment on the actions of the people involved in the shooting. I really want to know those facts about this incident.

I don't. I don't much care as long as LE decided justification. It's clear there were uninvited strangers with ill-intent in the home. I see a happy ending here, as long as the kid is OK with it. I won't get into how much happier it could have been.