PDA

View Full Version : How wrong is this guy?


ZRX61
04-03-2009, 8:16 PM
could he be more wrong??

As CA law states you have to wait till the intruder shows intention to harm you or your family. In other words he has to have a knife gun ball bat etc..... and show he intends to harm you before lethal force can be justified.

dustoff31
04-03-2009, 8:22 PM
He may not be technically correct. But as a practical matter, it would be much easier on you if you can point to the gun, knife, bat, etc, in the dead bad guys hand when the cops show up.

fairfaxjim
04-03-2009, 8:29 PM
could he be more wrong??

His is wrong, but you do have to have a provable reasonable fear of death or harm.

Having said that, if someone has UNLAWFULLY & FORCIBLY entered your RESIDENCE and is not a resident there or a family member, and you know or have reason to belive that an unlawful forcible entry has occurred, you are afforded a "presumption" that such unlawfull forced entry represents a threat to life or of great bodily harm. In this case he does not even have to be armed. You still may be required to prove that the force you used was reasonable for the threat.

bornInSD
04-03-2009, 8:35 PM
His is wrong, but you do have to have a provable reasonable fear of death or harm.

Having said that, if someone has UNLAWFULLY & FORCIBLY entered your RESIDENCE and is not a resident there or a family member, and you know or have reason to belive that an unlawful forcible entry has occurred, you are afforded a "presumption" that such unlawfull forced entry represents a threat to life or of great bodily harm. In this case he does not even have to be armed. You still may be required to prove that the force you used was reasonable for the threat.

+1:thumbsup:

El Gato
04-03-2009, 8:37 PM
His is wrong, but you do have to have a provable reasonable fear of death or harm.

Having said that, if someone has UNLAWFULLY & FORCIBLY entered your RESIDENCE and is not a resident there or a family member, and you know or have reason to belive that an unlawful forcible entry has occurred, you are afforded a "presumption" that such unlawfull forced entry represents a threat to life or of great bodily harm. In this case he does not even have to be armed. You still may be required to prove that the force you used was reasonable for the threat.

That covers it brother... or the essentials anyway from PC 198.5... best to say you can't shoot someone just because they are in your home.. they need to be doing something that a reasonable person would construe as life threatening...

PC 197 is pretty clear...

197. Homicide is also justifiable when committed by any person in
any of the following cases:
1. When resisting any attempt to murder any person, or to commit a
felony, or to do some great bodily injury upon any person; or,

(Felony in this case is best described as a "violent" felony... attempting to commit an assault is NOT a violent felony)

ad6mj
04-03-2009, 8:41 PM
That covers it brother... or the essentials anyway from PC 198.5... best to say you can't shoot someone just because they are in your home.. they need to be doing something that a reasonable person would construe as life threatening...



Most reasonable persons consider a stranger forcibly breaking into their occupied home life threatening.

DDT
04-03-2009, 8:58 PM
(Felony in this case is best described as a "violent" felony... attempting to commit an assault is NOT a violent felony)

Can you clarify that please?

Knight
04-03-2009, 9:43 PM
Just thought I'd throw this out there: I was told in my CCW class that using lethal force to prevent someone from getting close enough to take your weapon away is justifiable.

M. Sage
04-04-2009, 7:05 AM
(Felony in this case is best described as a "violent" felony... attempting to commit an assault is NOT a violent felony)

What's attempted assault.

If someone swings at you and misses, that's an assault. If someone swings and connects, that's battery. Assault = attempted battery. How do you attempt an attempt?

gregorylucas
04-04-2009, 8:00 AM
"But officer he grabbed a knife I had laying on the table, look at it! It's in his/her's hands!":)

halifax
04-04-2009, 8:15 AM
I looked but I can't find it. About ten years ago, the SCOTUS said the intrepration of "reasonable" threat lies only with the person under said threat - not the DA, police or anyone else not there. Anyone else remember this decision?

B Strong
04-04-2009, 9:38 AM
I had an out-of-stater tell me that California law required an individual to exit their home and make "every effort" to retreat before they could use any level of force.

Misinformation seems to be universal.

sac550
04-04-2009, 10:08 AM
Read the homeowner bill of rights in the Penal Code. If someone breaks into your house it is "presumed" you are in fear of your life and your families life. You are justified without anything else to use deadly force. CA still has a few good laws on the books.

JDoe
04-04-2009, 10:17 AM
Just thought I'd throw this out there: I was told in my CCW class that using lethal force to prevent someone from getting close enough to take your weapon away is justifiable.

I agree with the above however in the absence of witnesses to corroborate your story how does the evidence look any different than an unprovoked shooting?

Haplo
04-04-2009, 10:52 AM
What's attempted assault.

If someone swings at you and misses, that's an assault. If someone swings and connects, that's battery. Assault = attempted battery. How do you attempt an attempt?

An attempted assault can happen in theory, but it wouldn't be provable unless you could reliably read the person's mind. It would be like walking up to a person with intent to hit them, but you back down. Once again, not a crime that could be proved in court, this is just in theory. Look at the substantial step test.

fairfaxjim
04-04-2009, 10:54 AM
I had an out-of-stater tell me that California law required an individual to exit their home and make "every effort" to retreat before they could use any level of force.

Misinformation seems to be universal.

I've had a lot of people tell me lots of things, and I didn't belive most of them, at least at face value.

I've said this MANY times before on here, and will reapeat it. You are talking about decisions that have the potential to SCREW you for the rest of your life. I recommend that everyone take a little bit of their posting time and read the CA PC that has to do with firearms and your rights when it comes to using force to defend yourself. You probably won't understand a lot of it the first time, but you will at least know where to find it later, and what questions to ask. You don't want to be testifying in court "I read on some internet gun board that it was okay to shoot him"

The amount of speculation and conjecture that gets passed on as facts is just amazing.

KylaGWolf
04-04-2009, 4:17 PM
As long as one has a "reasonable fear" they can act in self defense. Now this does not mean that they will not face charges if they do it just means that is what the law says has to be present. Now here is the rub what you or I may feel reasonable a LEO, DA or Judge may not.

hawk81
04-04-2009, 8:16 PM
You think I care about perjury after someone broke into my house and put my life in danger. I am not going to wait to see if someone has a weapon or not. And I am sure as hell not going to jail over some B.S California law.

Look up the term "Subrogation of Perjury" before you post things like this.

rkt88edmo
04-04-2009, 10:31 PM
HAWK81 DO NOT PROMOTE ILLEGAL ACTIVITY

Quiet
04-05-2009, 2:58 AM
Read CA penal codes 197, 198 and 198.5


Penal Code 197
Homicide is also justifiable when committed by any person in any of the following cases:
1. When resisting any attempt to murder any person, or to commit a felony, or to do some great bodily injury upon any person; or,
2. When committed in defense of habitation, property, or person, against one who manifestly intends or endeavors, by violence or surprise, to commit a felony, or against one who manifestly intends and endeavors, in a violent, riotous or tumultuous manner, to enter the habitation of another for the purpose of offering violence to any person therein; or,
3. When committed in the lawful defense of such person, or of a wife or husband, parent, child, master, mistress, or servant of such person, when there is reasonable ground to apprehend a design to commit a felony or to do some great bodily injury, and imminent danger of such design being accomplished; but such person, or the person in whose behalf the defense was made, if he was the assailant or engaged in mutual combat, must really and in good faith have endeavored to decline any further struggle before the homicide was committed; or,
4. When necessarily committed in attempting, by lawful ways and means, to apprehend any person for any felony committed, or in lawfully suppressing any riot, or in lawfully keeping and preserving the peace.

Penal Code 198
A bare fear of the commission of any of the offenses mentioned in subdivisions 2 and 3 of Section 197, to prevent which homicide may be lawfully committed, is not sufficient to justify it. But the circumstances must be sufficient to excite the fears of a reasonable person, and the party killing must have acted under the influence of such fears alone.

Penal Code 198.5
Any person using force intended or likely to cause death or great bodily injury within his or her residence shall be presumed to have held a reasonable fear of imminent peril of death or great bodily injury to self, family, or a member of the household when that force is used against another person, not a member of the family or household, who unlawfully and forcibly enters or has unlawfully and forcibly entered the residence and the person using the force knew or had reason to believe that an unlawful and forcible entry occurred.

As used in this section, great bodily injury means a significant or substantial physical injury.

ontmark
04-05-2009, 9:51 AM
His is wrong, but you do have to have a provable reasonable fear of death or harm.

Having said that, if someone has UNLAWFULLY & FORCIBLY entered your RESIDENCE and is not a resident there or a family member, and you know or have reason to belive that an unlawful forcible entry has occurred, you are afforded a "presumption" that such unlawfull forced entry represents a threat to life or of great bodily harm. In this case he does not even have to be armed. You still may be required to prove that the force you used was reasonable for the threat.

+1000

U2BassAce
04-05-2009, 10:11 AM
I looked but I can't find it. About ten years ago, the SCOTUS said the intrepration of "reasonable" threat lies only with the person under said threat - not the DA, police or anyone else not there. Anyone else remember this decision?

I think "reasonable" goes back to the 12 people sitting in a jury box if it goes that far.

U2BassAce
04-05-2009, 10:14 AM
You think I care about perjury after someone broke into my house and put my life in danger. I am not going to wait to see if someone has a weapon or not. And I am sure as hell not going to jail over some B.S California law.

The real question to be asked is......WHY ARE YOU TALKING after the fact?

sac550
04-05-2009, 10:28 AM
You are all over thinking this. The Penal Code is clear. If someone unlawfully enters your house it is PRESUMED you are justifed in using deadly force. That is why the section is called the Homeowners Bill of Rights.

Penal Code 198.5
Any person using force intended or likely to cause death or great bodily injury within his or her residence shall be presumed to have held a reasonable fear of imminent peril of death or great bodily injury to self, family, or a member of the household when that force is used against another person, not a member of the family or household, who unlawfully and forcibly enters or has unlawfully and forcibly entered the residence and the person using the force knew or had reason to believe that an unlawful and forcible entry occurred.

BillCA
04-05-2009, 10:44 AM
(quoting someone else)As CA law states you have to wait till the intruder shows intention to harm you or your family. In other words he has to have a knife gun ball bat etc..... and show he intends to harm you before lethal force can be justified.

It used to be this way in California. The state's laws had a "duty to retreat" qualifier before using deadly force. Like many other states, it said if you could safely escape that you should do so.

IIRC the watershed events were the prosecution of several people in SoCal by anti-gun liberal prosecutors in the 70's. In at least two of the events a husband interposed himself between the threat and his children. The prosecutors argued that failure to withdraw from danger negated any self-defense claims because the men "put themselves in the line of danger".

It wasn't too much afterwards that the law was changed to remove the requirement to retreat.

Kid Stanislaus
04-05-2009, 9:50 PM
Having said that, if someone has UNLAWFULLY & FORCIBLY entered your RESIDENCE and is not a resident there or a family member, and you know or have reason to belive that an unlawful forcible entry has occurred, you are afforded a "presumption" that such unlawfull forced entry represents a threat to life or of great bodily harm. In this case he does not even have to be armed. You still may be required to prove that the force you used was reasonable for the threat.

If you are LEGALLY PRESUMED to be in fear of losing your life or suffering great bodily harm then that's the ball game right there, open fire. Yeah, the DA can prosecute you anyway, some of those a.h.s will, but any lawyer worthy of the name should be able to provide a good defense.

Vanguard
04-05-2009, 10:17 PM
I interpret the law to mean that you can shoot an intruder in your home if you feel they are a threat. Personally I believe that anyone who could be classified as an "intruder" in the first place is by default a "threat".

There are circumstances that might get you in trouble though. Shooting a guest in your home because you got into an argument with them would probably get you landed in jail unless there were witnesses who could confirm you felt a threat to your life. I think the circumstances dictate whether you're going to jail or not. I don't think there is a jury alive that would convict a guy for shooting someone that broke into their home at 3a.m.

BillCA
04-06-2009, 4:58 AM
Vanguard & Kid Stanislaus

The key elements here are

another person ... who unlawfully and forcibly enters or has unlawfully and forcibly entered the residence and the person using the force knew or had reason to believe that an unlawful and forcible entry occurred.

If you awoke to see a person standing in your home with no idea where the heck he came from, shooting him could be trouble. How? Did you know he had forcibly entered your home? What is the basis of your reason to believe that he broke in? Or was even there unlawfully? Could it have been possible your door was already opened by another and he was "good Sam" trying to determine if someone was in trouble?

Those are prosecutor arguments.

On the other hand, if you hear your door being forced open or someone coming through a window, you are on much more solid ground.

Unless there are witnesses present, if the intruder is DOA, there is probably nothing to support disputing your statements about what he said.

Note: In general, forcibly means overcoming a lock or barrier to enter the building. Opening an unlocked door is not considered "forcible" entry. Removing a screen and/or window is considered forcible entry.

Vanguard
04-06-2009, 9:40 AM
The notion that someone you don't know standing in your living room at 3am, who is not there to either rob you or do you harm, is almost ridiculous. I ALWAYS lock my door at night...without exception. On the off chance that I don't (it has never happened yet), it would be such a ridiculous coincidence that some "good sam" just happened to be walking by at 3am, saw my door sitting wide open, and decided to enter the house without saying anything? I don't think so, that person is going to be treated as an instruder because the 99.99999999% likelyhood is that he IS an intruder.

I take EVERY precaution to keep unwanted people out of my home. If they've made it past my precautions and are standing in my living room, that is enough for me to know they are intruders. At the point where I wake up and there is a stranger standing in my living room, I'm not going to take even a second to think about the legalities of the situation. In that second, I could be dead and if I die, it's safe to assume my family probably will too.

The only thing that might save an intruder at that point is if he happens to be standing in the light (slim chance at night) and I can plainly see he is not carrying a weapon and is far enough away that I can just get the drop on him with the 870 and call police. If I can't see his hands or suspect that he has a friend with him in another room or something, God help him.

Flopper
04-06-2009, 10:15 AM
i first learned about this amazingly logical part of the PC back in 1998 when i read "How to Own a Gun and Stay out of Jail."

i thought it was too good to be true, so i asked my neighbor, a superior court judge.

he said that it doesn't matter if the door or window is wide open. once they break the plane of the opening, they have illegally entered the home. you don't have to wait til a certain percentage of their body is inside.

i can't remember the legal reasoning, but he said the "forcibly" verbiage is a non-issue.

artherd
04-06-2009, 12:51 PM
An attempted assault can happen in theory, but it wouldn't be provable unless you could reliably read the person's mind. It would be like walking up to a person with intent to hit them, but you back down. Once again, not a crime that could be proved in court, this is just in theory. Look at the substantial step test.

What? Assault is: intentionally causing the reasonable apprehension of an immediate harmful or offensive contact.

How do you attempt to cause apprehension?

RandyD
04-06-2009, 9:36 PM
You can read, understand and follow all of the applicable statutes and case law, but that is not an absolute guarantee that you will not be prosecuted for using deadly force. Attorneys are rewarded for being creative in finding different applications of a statute or case law, and if a prosecutor decides that he is going to get creative and take a different approach to a situation that you deemed justified in using deadly force, you will find yourself being prosecuted. My suggestion is to only use deadly force when all other options are useless.

BillCA
04-07-2009, 8:22 AM
The notion that someone you don't know standing in your living room at 3am, who is not there to either rob you or do you harm, is almost ridiculous. I ALWAYS lock my door at night...without exception. On the off chance that I don't (it has never happened yet), it would be such a ridiculous coincidence that some "good sam" just happened to be walking by at 3am, saw my door sitting wide open, and decided to enter the house without saying anything? I don't think so, that person is going to be treated as an instruder because the 99.99999999% likelyhood is that he IS an intruder.
While I can agree with your basic argument that anyone entering your house at oh-dark-thirty is likely to be an immediate threat, there are those lawyers and prosecutors who will treat it otherwise.


I take EVERY precaution to keep unwanted people out of my home. If they've made it past my precautions and are standing in my living room, that is enough for me to know they are intruders. At the point where I wake up and there is a stranger standing in my living room, I'm not going to take even a second to think about the legalities of the situation. In that second, I could be dead and if I die, it's safe to assume my family probably will too.

You may want to modify that statement.
You'd certainly not want to wake up to some tumult like your door slamming open, step down the hall and blast the first person you see. Especially if that person is the cop who was chasing a felony suspect.

The argument that "I'm a light sleeper and will hear someone trying to..." doesn't work. A former roomie of mine was a "light sleeper" and moved because he claimed a neighbor coming home at 2am ruined his sleep. Yet, 8 months later, he was startled by TWO masked men in his bedroom at 4:15am. Fortunately, they were wearing SCBA and fire dept gear. But he'd slept through the arrival of two engine and two truck companies of equipment, plus pounding at his front door. Light sleeper, indeed!
The only thing that might save an intruder at that point is if he happens to be standing in the light (slim chance at night) and I can plainly see he is not carrying a weapon and is far enough away that I can just get the drop on him with the 870 and call police. If I can't see his hands or suspect that he has a friend with him in another room or something, God help him.
Unless you have children down the hall, your best bet is to hold up in your bedroom and guard the approach from the front of the house. In my place, I can guarantee at least 104 projectiles will fill the hallway in less than 30 seconds if needed. And in those narrow confines, not getting hit would be a miracle.

jamesob
04-07-2009, 8:27 AM
this is the key."i was in fear of mine and my families lives" thats it.

BillCA
04-07-2009, 8:28 AM
I can't remember the legal reasoning, but he said the "forcibly" verbiage is a non-issue.

I would never -repeat- never presume that language in a statute could be rendered irrelavant in a legal argument. There may be a reason why "forcible entry" is a non-issue in some cases, but I wouldn't want to stake my life on it.

And what works in criminal court may not work in Civil court. I'm pretty sure that if your door is open at night (i.e. for cooler air in the summer), the argument will be there is a duty on your part to not shoot if the person entered with no ill intent.

YoungGun2
04-07-2009, 8:39 AM
It goes like this, you come in with bag in hand you'll leave in one!

Vanguard
04-07-2009, 10:22 AM
Hey Billca, I'll take my freaking chances. I stand by everything I said. You keep coming up with these very unlikely scenarios but in reality, it is more likely that the person in your house at 3am is an intruder.

You don't know my situation, the layout of my home, how far my room is from the front door, how many people I have in the home, whether I have a dog or not, etc......I do know these things. I'm smart enough to take all of these things into consideration and make my own decisions for the protection of my family and myself. I'll take my chances when it comes to strangers in my home at 3am. The overwelming likelyhood is that they are there for no good. I'd rather be alive then dead, that's what it comes down to. You can preach all you want about the legality of it but that doesn't enter the equation when I'm protecting my family from a perceived threat.

AJAX22
04-07-2009, 10:28 AM
Dead men don't tell conflicting stories to law enforcement.

Repeat after me:

"I was fearful that my life was eminently in danger, I'm too shaken up to make a statement at this time, I would like to have my lawyer present."

DocSkinner
04-07-2009, 10:38 AM
While I can agre...

Unless you have children down the hall, your best bet is to hold up in your bedroom and guard the approach from the front of the house. In my place, I can guarantee at least 104 projectiles will fill the hallway in less than 30 seconds if needed. And in those narrow confines, not getting hit would be a miracle.

Don't you watch martial arts movies, or the Matrix? Happens all the time! ;-)

Got in a discussion once with a "martial arts expert" about his Samurai sword v my pistol, and how he guaranteed I would loose!

Kept going on that when he was in striking range, I couldn't pull trigger fast enough. HE couldn't get it through his head that someone coming at me with sword isn't getting that close (or be able to swing a sword (or a baseball bat those types" in a hallway, or most houses)- and he also argued that I would likely miss him 'cuz he could approach so quickly. But then he was a NYer and against anyone owning guns...

yellowfin
04-07-2009, 10:38 AM
What? Assault is: intentionally causing the reasonable apprehension of an immediate harmful or offensive contact.

How do you attempt to cause apprehension?By doing a really poor job at it? The person may laugh instead of being frightened or offended.

grywlfbg
04-07-2009, 10:49 AM
Dead men don't tell conflicting stories to law enforcement.

Repeat after me:

"I was fearful that my life was eminently in danger, I'm too shaken up to make a statement at this time, I would like to have my lawyer present."

+1. Remember that the only "evidence" the prosecutor has will come from your statements and the responding officer's report. The prosecutor won't be at the scene.

I've taken shooting classes with cops before and all of them have told me the same thing: Shoot to kill and don't say anything beyond what AJAX22 said above. They've all told me that none of them will press you for a statement so just keep your mouth shut.

eighteenninetytwo
04-07-2009, 12:07 PM
+2. I also have a 12 gauge plastic flare gun which is loaded with a pepper sray shell. Our house has one point from which the entire upstairs can be defended easily against ten if needed. The pepper spray gets fired first, enabling wife to get to kids rooms and me to back up to this point and tell them that if they come further there's a gun waiting. Anyone coming any further gets shot. There is no room for bargaining when you have kids in their beds.

BillCA
04-08-2009, 6:17 PM
Hey Billca, I'll take my freaking chances. I stand by everything I said. You keep coming up with these very unlikely scenarios but in reality, it is more likely that the person in your house at 3am is an intruder.

You don't know my situation, the layout of my home, how far my room is from the front door, how many people I have in the home, whether I have a dog or not, etc......I do know these things. I'm smart enough to take all of these things into consideration and make my own decisions for the protection of my family and myself. I'll take my chances when it comes to strangers in my home at 3am. The overwelming likelyhood is that they are there for no good. I'd rather be alive then dead, that's what it comes down to. You can preach all you want about the legality of it but that doesn't enter the equation when I'm protecting my family from a perceived threat.

I'm only pointing out the opposing view that will be taken by lawyers who will look at what the law says versus what you reportedly did.

What is rule number four of gun safety?
Know your target

That means knowing what you are shooting at, including knowing if the target is a "hostile" or not. People frequently get intoxicated and force their way into the wrong house thinking their spouse locked them out. You run the risk of blasting someone only to find the coroner's verdict is that the deceased would barely be able to stand or walk. Now you have to articulate a reasonable defense against someone who was blind, staggering drunk.

M. Sage
04-08-2009, 6:22 PM
An attempted assault can happen in theory, but it wouldn't be provable unless you could reliably read the person's mind. It would be like walking up to a person with intent to hit them, but you back down. Once again, not a crime that could be proved in court, this is just in theory. Look at the substantial step test.

No, it would be walking up to someone with the intent to intend to hit them, then backing off.

Assault isn't actual physical contact. It's the point where the victim sees physical contact as imminent. Walking up to someone and cocking a fist back? Assault. Letting go and hitting them? Battery.

packnrat
04-08-2009, 6:23 PM
So if I kick in a door and make a mess in the kitchen making something to
eat, I can not be harmed???

Kid Stanislaus
04-08-2009, 6:45 PM
If you awoke to see a person standing in your home with no idea where the heck he came from, shooting him could be trouble. How? Did you know he had forcibly entered your home? What is the basis of your reason to believe that he broke in? Or was even there unlawfully?


If you lock your doors and windows before you go to bed and wake up at 3:00AM with somebody in your domicile, that person broke in pure and simple.

Kid Stanislaus
04-08-2009, 6:49 PM
i first learned about this amazingly logical part of the PC back in 1998 when i read "How to Own a Gun and Stay out of Jail." i thought it was too good to be true, so i asked my neighbor, a superior court judge. he said that it doesn't matter if the door or window is wide open. once they break the plane of the opening, they have illegally entered the home. you don't have to wait til a certain percentage of their body is inside. i can't remember the legal reasoning, but he said the "forcibly" verbiage is a non-issue.


HOT DAMN!! That's something I didn't know for sure!! Nothing but good news there!!:)

Kid Stanislaus
04-08-2009, 6:53 PM
You can read, understand and follow all of the applicable statutes and case law, but that is not an absolute guarantee that you will not be prosecuted for using deadly force. Attorneys are rewarded for being creative in finding different applications of a statute or case law, and if a prosecutor decides that he is going to get creative and take a different approach to a situation that you deemed justified in using deadly force, you will find yourself being prosecuted. My suggestion is to only use deadly force when all other options are useless.

I'm NOT going to spend my life running scared. If the a.h. is in my domicile at 3:00AM there's going to be gunfire and you can bet your backside I'll be doing my share of it! I really don't ever want to kill or seriously wound another human being but if he breaks into my house then he's "crossed the threshold", literaly and figuratively.

Kid Stanislaus
04-08-2009, 7:02 PM
+2. I also have a 12 gauge plastic flare gun which is loaded with a pepper sray shell.


I've got a Rem. 870 loaded with #1 shot. I'll go with the shot right off the bat.

Kid Stanislaus
04-08-2009, 7:06 PM
People frequently get intoxicated and force their way into the wrong house thinking their spouse locked them out. You run the risk of blasting someone only to find the coroner's verdict is that the deceased would barely be able to stand or walk. Now you have to articulate a reasonable defense against someone who was blind, staggering drunk.


"I was in fear of losing my life or suffering great bodily harm." I don't care if the guy was out of his head on #2 diesel fuel, he broke in and I was in fear of losing my life or suffering great bodily harm. Of course, I live in Stanislaus Co. and not Beserkeyl!

RandyD
04-08-2009, 11:27 PM
I'm NOT going to spend my life running scared. If the a.h. is in my domicile at 3:00AM there's going to be gunfire and you can bet your backside I'll be doing my share of it! I really don't ever want to kill or seriously wound another human being but if he breaks into my house then he's "crossed the threshold", literaly and figuratively.

I never said or suggested that you run scared. My point was to encourage people to use their ability to critically think of other alternatives before using deadly force, instead of training yourself to use deadly force in a habitual manner given only a few factors to consider. The most significant distinquishing characteristic between a liberal (those who want to take our firearms) and conservatives (those of us who want to keep our firearms) is that conservatives think and liberals feel. If you train yourself to use deadly force whenever you feel threatened, you may make a grave mistake that you will regret for the rest of your life.

To illustrate this point, I am a former police officer and while on duty I responded to a burglary call and encountered a suspect at 3:00 A.M. coming out of the building. I had my duty weapon trained on him, ordered him to stop and then asked him what he was doing. Instead of verbally answering me, he used his right hand to reach inside the left front area of his jacket and he began to pull his hand out of his jacket. His actions gave me justification to to use deadly force, but there were several factors that caused me to hesitate in using deadly force. I noted that he was dressed like homeless man and knew that they rarely possessed firearms. I also knew that I had my weapon pointed at his heart, and I was only a few feet away, and I could not miss, and with those advantages I decided to hesitate in the use of deadly force, and use it only if the threat increased. It turned out he was picking up cigarette butts to smoke later, he had placed them in his inside jacket pocket, and he was pulling them out in response to my question to show me what he collected.

I am not saying don't use deadly force on someone who broke into your home at 3:00 A.M. In such a moment, you will experience a flood of information and you can process and analyze that information if you have the desire.

Vanguard
04-08-2009, 11:27 PM
I'm only pointing out the opposing view that will be taken by lawyers who will look at what the law says versus what you reportedly did.

What is rule number four of gun safety?
Know your target

That means knowing what you are shooting at, including knowing if the target is a "hostile" or not. People frequently get intoxicated and force their way into the wrong house thinking their spouse locked them out. You run the risk of blasting someone only to find the coroner's verdict is that the deceased would barely be able to stand or walk. Now you have to articulate a reasonable defense against someone who was blind, staggering drunk.

You gotta be kidding me, man. Ok, I'll bite. Here's an equally silly scenario for you...What if the guy is just acting drunk and the second you let down your guard, he shoots you in the face with the handgun he had concealed, then he rapes and murders your entire family. That is just as likely as your fairy tale "drunk" guy that just had the wrong house and got past my two locked doors but "was barely able to stand or walk".

Like I said twice already...it is more likely that someone is in your house at 3am to do you harm than it is that he's there by mistake. So, taking all of that into consideration, I'm 95% likely to shoot that person versus taking the chance of my family getting murdered. You can go ahead and take the time to consider all the possibilities of the situation, maybe have a chat with the guy and find out why he's there, maybe offer him a drink, whatever. Good luck with that....tell me how it turns out for you. :confused:

AndrewMendez
04-08-2009, 11:33 PM
His is wrong, but you do have to have a provable reasonable fear of death or harm.

Having said that, if someone has UNLAWFULLY & FORCIBLY entered your RESIDENCE and is not a resident there or a family member, and you know or have reason to belive that an unlawful forcible entry has occurred, you are afforded a "presumption" that such unlawfull forced entry represents a threat to life or of great bodily harm. In this case he does not even have to be armed. You still may be required to prove that the force you used was reasonable for the threat.
In my house without my permission... Your getting shot....Survivors.... Will be shot again! I am not going to wait to see if he has a bigger gun than me!

Vanguard
04-08-2009, 11:42 PM
....If you train yourself to use deadly force whenever you feel threatened, you may make a grave mistake that you will regret for the rest of your life.

And sometimes, if you pause to think too long, you won't regret for the rest of your life because you'll be dead as fried chicken.

A cop showing up at a call at 3am and getting the drop on some guy is much diffrent from waking up at 3am with a stranger in your living room. The cop has the obligation to find out what is going on and has limited information about the situation.

I, as the home owner, already have all the information I need. I know that the guy standing in my living room isn't supposed to be there. I know that he came through either 2 doors and 3 locks or a screen, window and 2 locks. I know I have a family to protect within the walls of that home. I know there are crazy, violent people in this world who, given the chance, would do harm to that family. I know that if he has a gun himself, I could be dead before I think about anything else. I know that if I'm dead, my family is alone with that person. That's all I need to know.

RandyD
04-09-2009, 12:17 AM
When someone expresses an intent to use deadly force in a certain scenario, another person can create a hypothetical "what if" scenario to show the flawed logic of that scenario. This is a game can go back and forth and it has no end. So, I won't challenge any of you with a hypothetical "what if" scenario.

What concerns me is that some people appear to have the desire to use deadly force and, they are hoping and waiting for that chance. In my opinion, if you have predetermined that you will absolutely use use deadly force in a given situation you are setting yourself up for a fall.

Vanguard
04-09-2009, 1:28 AM
When someone expresses an intent to use deadly force in a certain scenario, another person can create a hypothetical "what if" scenario to show the flawed logic of that scenario. This is a game can go back and forth and it has no end. So, I won't challenge any of you with a hypothetical "what if" scenario.

What concerns me is that some people appear to have the desire to use deadly force and, they are hoping and waiting for that chance. In my opinion, if you have predetermined that you will absolutely use use deadly force in a given situation you are setting yourself up for a fall.


And it seems to me that some people are naive about intruders in their house at 3am. In all likelyhood, they're not there to tell you left your porch light on. Saying I won't hesitate to defend my family is not the same as saying I "have the desire to use deadly force" or am "hoping and waiting for the chance". I'm simply saying I will not hesitate to keep my family safe in a situation that is, in nearly 100% of cases, hazardous to them. The law doesn't mean jack to me when it comes down to my family living or dying. I'm sure you think you'd have the time to talk it over with the guy in the next room but what if you're wrong?

If I'm wrong and the guy happens to be the 1% guy that just broke into the wrong house because he thought it was his, I MIGHT go to jail. If you're wrong and the guy is the 99% guy who is there to rob you or worse, you and your family might be dead before you have time to ask him why he's there.

If he's in my house, he had to break in to get there. If he broke in to get there, I'm not going to take chances with my family's lives.

It's really easy to not get shot....don't break into people's houses at 3am. :rolleyes:

jlh95811
04-09-2009, 1:47 AM
Penal Code 198.5
Any person using force intended or likely to cause death or great bodily injury within his or her residence shall be presumed To me this simply means that proof would need to be established to prosecute that one did not have said fear. to have held a reasonable fear of imminent peril of death or great bodily injury to self, family, or a member of the household when that force is used against another person, not a member of the family or household, who unlawfully and forcibly enters or has unlawfully and forcibly entered the residence and the person using the force knew or had reason to believe that an unlawful and forcible entry occurred. This to me means that if you believe you locked all doors and windows and someone appears in your home; you have reason to belive that they must have forced or broken their way in.

I always lock my doors and windows before bed time. If someone appears in my home after the fact I KNOW, but let's say for the purpose of this argument that I BELIEVE, that this person forced entry.

Them being in my home is reason enough for me to believe that they intend to harm me or my loved ones. I doubt they broke in cause they smelled my leftover chili on the stove. :)

If I was of clear mind at the time of contact with the person, ie not totally dazed, I would yell for them to stop. If they run away cool. If they move toward me I assume they are trying to hurt or kill me. The fact that I will more than likely have a gun in my hands makes it that much more dangerous for me should they reach me. At that point I shoot them to save my own life and/or those of my family.

Seems pretty clear to me.

Break in my house and you got three choices. Run, Freeze, or get filled full of .452 diameter holes.

BillCA
04-09-2009, 4:55 AM
If you lock your doors and windows before you go to bed and wake up at 3:00AM with somebody in your domicile, that person broke in pure and simple.

Are you sure? There is no other possible explanation?
Think about that before you reply and tell me that you're still right.

BillCA
04-09-2009, 4:56 AM
I'm NOT going to spend my life running scared. If the a.h. is in my domicile at 3:00AM there's going to be gunfire and you can bet your backside I'll be doing my share of it! I really don't ever want to kill or seriously wound another human being but if he breaks into my house then he's "crossed the threshold", literaly and figuratively.

Does this mean you won't consider other options?

What will you do if he's heading for the door at a slow walk?

BillCA
04-09-2009, 4:59 AM
In my house without my permission... Your getting shot....Survivors.... Will be shot again! I am not going to wait to see if he has a bigger gun than me!

With that statement in a public forum, I sure hope you never end up shooting someone inside your home. Not unless it's reallllly obvious that he was trying to kill you or a family member.

BillCA
04-09-2009, 5:00 AM
When someone expresses an intent to use deadly force in a certain scenario, another person can create a hypothetical "what if" scenario to show the flawed logic of that scenario. This is a game can go back and forth and it has no end. So, I won't challenge any of you with a hypothetical "what if" scenario.

What concerns me is that some people appear to have the desire to use deadly force and, they are hoping and waiting for that chance. In my opinion, if you have predetermined that you will absolutely use use deadly force in a given situation you are setting yourself up for a fall.
+1 :thumbsup:

luchador768
04-09-2009, 5:34 AM
+2. I also have a 12 gauge plastic flare gun which is loaded with a pepper sray shell. Our house has one point from which the entire upstairs can be defended easily against ten if needed. The pepper spray gets fired first, enabling wife to get to kids rooms and me to back up to this point and tell them that if they come further there's a gun waiting. Anyone coming any further gets shot. There is no room for bargaining when you have kids in their beds.


I don't understand the logic of the pepper spray flare gun... Why on earth would you waste your time with such a thing? Have you ever fired this INDOORS before? More than likely you will "pepper" yourself and family.

Mayhem
04-09-2009, 5:38 AM
could he be more wrong??

As CA law states you have to wait till the intruder shows intention to harm you or your family. In other words he has to have a knife gun ball bat etc..... and show he intends to harm you before lethal force can be justified.

Nope he's not wrong but he missed something. Breaking in such as smashing your window or kicking in your door alone can be perceived as intent to harm or commit a heinous felony. Not a problem if you lock your doors screens and windows.

If you lived in a house all your life it may not seem likely some one may mistakenly walk into your home even drunk. However in an apartment complex it is a very common mistake. I myself have done exactly that while stone cold sober a time or two when I was in my 20's and I lived in an apartment complex. This is why the law is the way it is .... to keep people from blasting people for accidently walking into the wrong place at the wrong time.

While I disagree with it, unfortunately theres been one to many idiots that have fired first and asked questions later that screwed the rest of us. Remember the japanese student that got bad directions to a party and walked into the wrong house and got shot and killed?

While the home owner broke no law (in his state at the time), the parents and the Japanese government blasted the U.S. for Lax gun control and our gun culture .

BillCA
04-09-2009, 6:22 AM
I, as the home owner, already have all the information I need. I know that the guy standing in my living room isn't supposed to be there. I know that he came through either 2 doors and 3 locks or a screen, window and 2 locks. I know I have a family to protect within the walls of that home. I know there are crazy, violent people in this world who, given the chance, would do harm to that family. I know that if he has a gun himself, I could be dead before I think about anything else. I know that if I'm dead, my family is alone with that person. That's all I need to know.
Arguing for the prosecutor's case...

You know that an unknown person is in your house the first time you see or hear them. Period.

You do not know if that person defeated the locks on your doors and windows - unless you heard them enter. You also don't know their intent until you put eyes on them and/or decide by their behavior.

You may decide they form a potential threat to you or your family, but pulling the trigger has to be based on credible evidence. Bare fear of what an intruder might do is not excuseable nor justification. Nor will it be protected by 198.1 PC.


You gotta be kidding me, man. Ok, I'll bite. Here's an equally silly scenario for you...What if the guy is just acting drunk and the second you let down your guard, he shoots you in the face with the handgun he had concealed ... Like I said twice already...it is more likely that someone is in your house at 3am to do you harm than it is that he's there by mistake. So, taking all of that into consideration, I'm 95% likely to shoot that person versus taking the chance of my family getting murdered.

I guess we're making progress. There's now a 5% chance of survival. Compared to you're earlier statement of ... If I can't see his hands or suspect that he has a friend with him in another room or something, God help him.

"I was in fear of losing my life or suffering great bodily harm." I don't care if the guy was out of his head on #2 diesel fuel, he broke in and I was in fear of losing my life or suffering great bodily harm. Of course, I live in Stanislaus Co. and not Beserkeyl!

Here's my problem with "blanket" statements, such as "If I see a guy in my house at 3am I'm gonna turn him into dogfood..." These situations are not always cut and dried.

Imagine for a moment the front door opens/closes and when you peek into the livingroom, Mr. Intruder has dossed down on your sofa to sleep? Will you still perforate him?[1]

Will you be just as quick on the trigger if the person in the living room is a 60-something woman? How are you going to claim you were "in fear for your life" if your intruder is an unarmed skinny 13 y/o youth or an elderly woman?

As to the drunk mistaking your place for his...
In the last 48 hours, I've listened to SJPD dispatch over 10 calls where someone was pounding or kicking at a door and the caller had no idea who the person was. In every case, the subject was charged with, among other things, being drunk in public. Two were claiming their (ex-)girlfriends lived there. That's 5 per day and I'm not listening for the entire evening either.

Unlikely intruders?
Twice, since a "retirement" home opened a few miles away we've had incidents where an elderly person has wandered in to our townhome complex and tried opening doors. One poor old gent found an unlocked door and surprised a 17 y/o girl who called 911. He'd had a stroke sometime earlier and was mostly deaf and could not speak. He was very lost and just looking for help. The old woman was onery, pounding on the door because she insisted that it was her house. That was across the street. It took a lot to calm her down.


Fatal Error:
I tried to look it up but can't find it. The homeowner's first name, IIRC, was Hamilton, living near Sacramento in 1990 (this was just after the 'quake up here). He tried to claim "feared for his life" when he shot a 68 year old man - about 6'1", 165# - standing just inside his livingroom from the entrance hallway with a shotgun. Prosecutors overcame the 198.1 presumption by showing the intruder was unarmed, elderly, white haired and (seriously damning) shot from the 8 o'clock position. There were no signs of damage to the doors or windows either. A father of three ended up going to jail for 12 years.



[1] Actual call I handled where a woman awoke at 4am to find a stranger in her apartment, sleeping on her couch. Turned out that he had a key and let himself in to what he thought was his sister's apartment, though she'd moved out 3 months prior. He'd driven straight through from Albuquerque NM - about 19 hours - and arrived after midnight. He was quite embarrassed and apologetic. He was cited for trespass and released to his sister.

Mayhem
04-09-2009, 6:59 AM
Unknown person in your home.

1) Shed light on the subject ... Turn on a light or use your flashlight to illuminate the subject if you don't already have enough light.

2 ) Evaluate the subject the situation and threat. Is he an elderly old man with a confused look on his face and your door is open or some punk kid with droopy drawers a beenie cap cocky expression on his face and your window is open. This is going to determine your defensive stance. are you a) going to keep your firearm at your side in the ready and politely ask the subject to leave b) point your gun at the subject and tell him to get the frack out of your house c) lock the door and tell the subject he has a pretty mouth. ALWAYS TELL AN INTRUDER TO KEEP HIS HANDS WHERE YOU CAN SEE THEM.

3) call 911 tell them you have or had an intruder in your house. If the intruder fails to leave for whatever reason (drunk, stupid, up to no good) Tell the dispatcher and inform them you are armed (So PD doesn't shoot you when they show up). Do not hang up with the dispatcher as long as the intruder is present and DO NOT TAKE YOUR EYES OFF OF THE INTRUDER.

4) If the intruder takes a hostile action take the appropriate reaction.

RandyD
04-09-2009, 7:20 AM
As a former police officer, the training that I received conditioned us to first attempt to take a suspect into custody. If you have the desire, you can take an armed suspect into custody, I know this because, I have done it and know a lot of men who have done it many times. In our training, there were very few scenarios where our only option was to use deadly force, and in working the streets, I can attest that those situations are extremely rare.

I believe the current attitude towards firearms in this country is about to change for the worst. You should ask yourself what would improve the gunowners' image in the eyes of the media and nongunowners; killing a suspect under questionable but legal circumstances or taking an intruder of your home into custody and holding him for the police?

RandyD
04-09-2009, 7:43 AM
[1] Actual call I handled where a woman awoke at 4am to find a stranger in her apartment, sleeping on her couch. Turned out that he had a key and let himself in to what he thought was his sister's apartment, though she'd moved out 3 months prior. He'd driven straight through from Albuquerque NM - about 19 hours - and arrived after midnight. He was quite embarrassed and apologetic. He was cited for trespass and released to his sister.
[/QUOTE]

When I read the quote that is above, it reminded me of a situation when I was in the Marine Corps. One of my men went home on leave and used his key to enter his parents' home late at night. After he got inside he went to the fridge, opened a beer, sat on the couch and turned on the TV. Unknown to him, his parents had sold the house, moved away and did not tell him. The people who owned the house were extremely scared and called the police who sorted the whole thing out. This Marine was one of the most popular guys in our company, and the situation gave us a funny story that is still told today when some of us get together. I am thankful that this Marine's parents did not sell their house to a few of the posters on this thread.

Vanguard
04-09-2009, 9:09 AM
RandyD and BillCA

You guys are both insane if you think I'm going to put my family in danger so you can feel good about yourselves. Batsh*t insane.

Bill, you keep siting instances where old people walked into the wrong house, or someone had a key, or some drunk was beating on a door and yelling. We aren't talking about situations like that here....where are you getting this stuff? First, I LOCK MY DOORS....old or confused people can't just walk into my place. Besides, my place doesn't look like any of the places around it and it's not an apartment or row house. Second, no one else has a key for my place but me so that's strike two for you. Third, someone beating on your door at 3am is very different from someone IN your house at 3am. No one is talking about shooting someone through the front door for God's sake. You are grasping at straws to make your illogical argument seem more plausible. None of those situations apply to me. I know what situations apply to me and I'm prepared to make the decisions I have to make at the time. I take precautions to help me make those decision. I always lock my doors (There are two doors to come through in both the front and back), and I have motion lights outside.

For every silly situation that you dream up or hear about some poor guy just ending up in the wrong house, I'm sure there are 10 where it was an intruder there with bad intent. The law of average is on my side....that's logic....that's fact. You guys are trying to make it sound like innocent people are just walking into other people's houses all the time at 3am. You guys are dealing in the rare and hypothetical. I hope an armed intruder never breaks into either of your homes because you're giving that guy a chance equal to yours of surviving. I don't like those odds.

DocSkinner
04-09-2009, 10:44 AM
Hey Billca, I'll take my freaking chances. I stand by everything I said. You keep coming up with these very unlikely scenarios but in reality, it is more likely that the person in your house at 3am is an intruder.

You don't know my situation, the layout of my home, how far my room is from the front door, how many people I have in the home, whether I have a dog or not, etc......I do know these things. I'm smart enough to take all of these things into consideration and make my own decisions for the protection of my family and myself. I'll take my chances when it comes to strangers in my home at 3am. The overwelming likelyhood is that they are there for no good. I'd rather be alive then dead, that's what it comes down to. You can preach all you want about the legality of it but that doesn't enter the equation when I'm protecting my family from a perceived threat.



Except it violates one of the basic rules of safe gun ownership - always identify your target. which I believe is what others are trying to point out. simply shooting at a vaguely human shaped thing you see before you process what/who it is could be disastrous.

DocSkinner
04-09-2009, 10:57 AM
RandyD and BillCA

You guys are both insane if you think I'm going to put my family in danger so you can feel good about yourselves. Batsh*t insane.

Bill, you keep siting instances where old people walked into the wrong house, or someone had a key, or some drunk was beating on a door and yelling. We aren't talking about situations like that here....where are you getting this stuff? First, I LOCK MY DOORS....old or confused people can't just walk into my place. Besides, my place doesn't look like any of the places around it and it's not an apartment or row house. Second, no one else has a key for my place but me so that's strike two for you. Third, someone beating on your door at 3am is very different from someone IN your house at 3am. No one is talking about shooting someone through the front door for God's sake. You are grasping at straws to make your illogical argument seem more plausible. None of those situations apply to me. I know what situations apply to me and I'm prepared to make the decisions I have to make at the time. I take precautions to help me make those decision. I always lock my doors (There are two doors to come through in both the front and back), and I have motion lights outside.

For every silly situation that you dream up or hear about some poor guy just ending up in the wrong house, I'm sure there are 10 where it was an intruder there with bad intent. The law of average is on my side....that's logic....that's fact. You guys are trying to make it sound like innocent people are just walking into other people's houses all the time at 3am. You guys are dealing in the rare and hypothetical. I hope an armed intruder never breaks into either of your homes because you're giving that guy a chance equal to yours of surviving. I don't like those odds.


and unless you have some electronic system to monitor that you have locked your doors every night, I guarantee that you at some point in time have or will miss one. Its called being human.


And I certainly hope these "impossible/implausible" situations (that even though they are implausible and impossible happen regularly) never do happen to you - Not sure you would fare well in prison, and I would hope having just killed an innocent and accidental trespasser would bother your conscious. But, maybe you are the sociopath type that it wouldn't bother at all. Or with the black and white reasoning you keep using, you would just justify and rationalize it to yourself and not care that you killed an innocent, while you sat in jail serving your turn. Much like how most criminals aren't really guilty - OTHER people forced them to act teh way they did. I have always hoped most gun owners were more intelligent and rational than that.

Vanguard
04-09-2009, 11:45 AM
I'm not talking about shooting at a vaguely human blob or shadow, I'm talking about shooting at an intruder. If it is an intruder, it has been identified as such, otherwise I wouldn't be able to call it an intruder. You're bending the conversation to fit your argument.

You guys with this attitude that you know better than I when I should defend myself and my family are a joke. Seriously, do you guys work for the current government? I'm an adult and know damn well good enough when I need to pull the trigger and when I shouldn't. I don't need to justify it to a bunch of internet lawyers and holier than thou types. The chance that I would be wrong and end up in jail are lower than the chance that you would be wrong and end up dead.

Your catorgorizing me and demonizing me as a "sociopath" and comparing my mindset to that of a criminal for saying I would defend myself shows just how ignorant and naive you are.

ohsmily
04-09-2009, 11:53 AM
Bill, don't bother with these guys. They are freaking yahoos with a shoot first and always mentality. I hope they never have to use deadly force in their home or any other place because it is highly likely they are going to have some major legal troubles when they most likely could have avoided it. I am betting that the people you are getting a great amount of resistance from have NEVER taken a CCW course.

The whole point you are trying to make that some of these slower people don't get is that you need to THINK and assess the situation and not be an automatic trigger puller just because someone is in your home. WHile it may be very likely that you will make a quick assessment and decide to use lethal force if you perceive that someone broke into your home, you must make that determination both legally and morally (IMO). These guys saying "if he is in my house, he is dead, PERIOD" are pretty scary, ignorant, and dangerous.

Vanguard
04-09-2009, 12:04 PM
ohsmily,

Yeah, we just want to blast everything we see. We're nuts, man! I'd use nukes on an intruder if I had them!

Give it rest already. I'm sorry but you'll never get me to say that you know better than ME when I should use deadly force, in MY home, to protect MY family.

This is an ego thing for you guys.

ohsmily
04-09-2009, 2:00 PM
ohsmily,

Yeah, we just want to blast everything we see. We're nuts, man! I'd use nukes on an intruder if I had them!

Give it rest already. I'm sorry but you'll never get me to say that you know better than ME when I should use deadly force, in MY home, to protect MY family.

This is an ego thing for you guys.

Shoot 'em dead tiger.

Mayhem
04-09-2009, 3:13 PM
Bill

Interesting coincidence, Ceres PD had a report the other day that a drunk guy wrecked his car in a hit and run walked into some ladies back yard and in threw her unlocked back door and passed out on her couch. she reported it to PD who arrested the guy for DUI, hit and run, public drunkenness , and trespassing.

ohsmily
04-09-2009, 3:44 PM
Bill

Interesting coincidence, Ceres PD had a report the other day that a drunk guy wrecked his car in a hit and run walked into some ladies back yard and in threw her unlocked back door and passed out on her couch. she reported it to PD who arrested the guy for DUI, hit and run, public drunkenness , and trespassing.

Well, he would be pushing daisies had he walked into Vanguard's house because these kinds of situations NEVER occur in his world and this admittedly drunk moron meant to harm Vanguard and his family and he deserved to die.[/sarcastic run-on sentence]

Vanguard
04-09-2009, 4:03 PM
Well, he would be pushing daisies had he walked into Vanguard's house because these kinds of situations NEVER occur in his world and this admittedly drunk moron meant to harm Vanguard and his family and he deserved to die.[/sarcastic run-on sentence]

He wouldn't have been in my house. I don't leave my back door unlocked. Ever. It's part of my normal routine to lock my doors so I won't have to make the mistake of shooting someone in my house by at 3am who just happened to be drunk and wander in...which must happen all the damn time in your neighborhood, right?

You're ignorant, sweetheart.

ohsmily
04-09-2009, 4:16 PM
He wouldn't have been in my house. I don't leave my back door unlocked. Ever. It's part of my normal routine to lock my doors so I won't have to make the mistake of shooting someone in my house by at 3am who just happened to be drunk and wander in...which must happen all the damn time in your neighborhood, right?

Yeah, and you are infallible and never make mistakes just like the scenario described by the other poster is far fetched (according to you)

Shoot 'em dead tiger. Pile 'em high. You can retain me to defend you when you are arrested if you are in the greater Sacramento area.

sweetheart.

Oooh, I see you have taken quite a shine to me....I am flattered but I am married. Sorry to disappoint you.

Vanguard
04-09-2009, 4:38 PM
Yeah, and you are infallible and never make mistakes just like the scenario described by the other poster is far fetched (according to you)

Shoot 'em dead tiger. Pile 'em high. You can retain me to defend you when you are arrested if you are in the greater Sacramento area.


Oooh, I see you have taken quite a shine to me....I am flattered but I am married. Sorry to disappoint you.

I haven't NOT locked my door yet. When and if that ever happens, it would be an amazing coincidence that some innocent guy would pick that night to come stumbling into my home at 3am. Nice try. I guess you know what I would do better than I do, huh? That's why I called you ignorant....you are. You don't know me or the precautions I take.

At this point in the conversation, you're just being an antagonistic *** because I wouldn't entertain your internet lawyer ego and tell you that you're right and that you know what's better for me than I do.

Get over yourself...the world won't end because you're not able to convince someone to do things your way.

ohsmily
04-09-2009, 7:01 PM
I haven't NOT locked my door yet. When and if that ever happens, it would be an amazing coincidence that some innocent guy would pick that night to come stumbling into my home at 3am Yeah, it would be. A sad night for you and him too.. Nice try. I guess you know what I would do better than I do, huh? That's why I called you ignorant....you are. You don't know me or the precautions I take.

At this point in the conversation, you're just being an antagonistic *** because I wouldn't entertain your internet lawyer ego and tell you that you're right and that you know what's better for me than I do.

Get over yourself...the world won't end because you're not able to convince someone to do things your way.

In response to your rant, I will post what I did earlier in the thread. I am not trying to convince you of anything. In fact, I counseled someone else in the thread not to try to convince you.

Bill, don't bother with these guys. They are freaking yahoos with a shoot first and always mentality. I hope they never have to use deadly force in their home or any other place because it is highly likely they are going to have some major legal troubles when they most likely could have avoided it. I am betting that the people you are getting a great amount of resistance from have NEVER taken a CCW course.

BTW, it might be a good idea to take one.

M. Sage
04-09-2009, 7:26 PM
Geez. Get a room.