Bad Shoot - Man Faces Manslaughter Charges

[Skipper]

Sounds like he's a pretty good shot.

[nedro]

They admitted casing it for a future burglary.

[dwalker]

The possiblity of losing beauty sleep does not justify lethal force.

Yeah, it sure as hell does. If I am in reasonable fear for my well being, then that is justification for use of lethal force. I do not need to SEE a weapon, I do not need a verbal threat. Three punks climbing onto my deck in the middle of the night to me is a threat to my well being. Retreating to a vehicle is just as likely to mean they are retrieving weapons or intend to use the car as a weapon as it is to mean they are fleeing.

There is no mention of them being armed or them firing at him. From what we know there was NO threat.

The perpetrators do not need to have been armed. Why are you constructing an argument that has no merit. The ONLY argument in self-defense is if there was a reasonable fear for my safety or the safety of others. Three punks climbing up on my deck in the middle of the night is not OK. Its not like they just pulled in the wrong driveway and were backing out, they had actually trespassed with intent. Now sure they say now they only INTENDED to case the place for a later robbery, but

There is nothing reasonable about about this fear. It is bare fear and will get you locked up for murder.

FEAR is the only qualifier in the use of self defense. A reasonable fear is what is required, and it can be demonstrated in this case.


As far as what the HO said, well, I am sure his lawyer will present the case properly and point out that for all the HO knew those punks were getting gus and coming back to kill him, and he had a reasonable fear for the safety of himself and his family, and acted accordingly.

ETA: where I come from you do not come on a mans property, especially after dark, without minding your manners and making yourself known, because you very likely might get shot and killed. Been that way for generations, dont really see a reason to change much.

[rcslotcar]

Wow several Calguners would also go to jail.

[BuddyBoy]

The article stated that the homeowner told the dispatcher that the car was leaving:

"Pettersen told the dispatcher he fired his handgun at a gray car that was leaving his property after an attempted burglary."

I interpret that as the car was driving away. Hard for me to see how any of the required (by law) elements to justify lethal force were met.

Don't interpret the above as an opinion on whether or not the perp deserved to die. It was only a comment on the legality of the shooting.

[Scratch705]

dupe

https://calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=1298085

[ChuckDizzle]

Yeah, it sure as hell does. If I am in reasonable fear for my well being, then that is justification for use of lethal force. I do not need to SEE a weapon, I do not need a verbal threat. Three punks climbing onto my deck in the middle of the night to me is a threat to my well being. Retreating to a vehicle is just as likely to mean they are retrieving weapons or intend to use the car as a weapon as it is to mean they are fleeing.





The perpetrators do not need to have been armed. Why are you constructing an argument that has no merit. The ONLY argument in self-defense is if there was a reasonable fear for my safety or the safety of others. Three punks climbing up on my deck in the middle of the night is not OK. Its not like they just pulled in the wrong driveway and were backing out, they had actually trespassed with intent. Now sure they say now they only INTENDED to case the place for a later robbery, but






FEAR is the only qualifier in the use of self defense. A reasonable fear is what is required, and it can be demonstrated in this case.


As far as what the HO said, well, I am sure his lawyer will present the case properly and point out that for all the HO knew those punks were getting gus and coming back to kill him, and he had a reasonable fear for the safety of himself and his family, and acted accordingly.

ETA: where I come from you do not come on a mans property, especially after dark, without minding your manners and making yourself known, because you very likely might get shot and killed. Been that way for generations, dont really see a reason to change much.

Stop. You clearly don't understand the law.

[Subotai]

Bad shoot. Guy should have known better.

[Calguns77]

Stop. You clearly don't understand the law.

Pretty much.

Yeah, it sure as hell does. If I am in reasonable fear for my well being, then that is justification for use of lethal force. I do not need to SEE a weapon, I do not need a verbal threat. Three punks climbing onto my deck in the middle of the night to me is a threat to my well being. Retreating to a vehicle is just as likely to mean they are retrieving weapons or intend to use the car as a weapon as it is to mean they are fleeing.

The perpetrators do not need to have been armed. Why are you constructing an argument that has no merit. The ONLY argument in self-defense is if there was a reasonable fear for my safety or the safety of others. Three punks climbing up on my deck in the middle of the night is not OK. Its not like they just pulled in the wrong driveway and were backing out, they had actually trespassed with intent. Now sure they say now they only INTENDED to case the place for a later robbery, but

FEAR is the only qualifier in the use of self defense. A reasonable fear is what is required, and it can be demonstrated in this case.

As far as what the HO said, well, I am sure his lawyer will present the case properly and point out that for all the HO knew those punks were getting gus and coming back to kill him, and he had a reasonable fear for the safety of himself and his family, and acted accordingly.

ETA: where I come from you do not come on a mans property, especially after dark, without minding your manners and making yourself known, because you very likely might get shot and killed. Been that way for generations, dont really see a reason to change much.

I recommend anyone in this thread who thinks what is posted here sounds reasonable to pick up the books Deadly Force, and In the Gravest Extreme by Massad Ayoob.

[hermosabeach]

Joe Biden said to fire a shotgun off of the upstairs balcony....

[MontClaire]

Its a good shoot in my book. One of the burglars name was cornelius? Tells me all I need to know. They were not at his house to sell boyscout cookies. They admitted what they were there for. The DA is a POS and I hope he gets what karma has in store for him.

[PaIadin]

Pretty much.



I recommend anyone in this thread who thinks what is posted here sounds reasonable to pick up the books Deadly Force, and In the Gravest Extreme by Massad Ayoob.

Its not reasonable. But I do not care. I may even fly out to this guys trial and pass out information on jury nullification in hopes of poisoning the jury pool. These theives are a few degress from being slave master's. Hyperbole?

What do you call a person that robs you of the of the mean of exchange traded for your life? They are in fact making you work so the expression of your sweat and tears becomes therees.

This man could have curb stomped the theives on video and I would vote not guilty.

[Sapperforward]

The article stated that the homeowner told the dispatcher that the car was leaving:

"Pettersen told the dispatcher he fired his handgun at a gray car that was leaving his property after an attempted burglary."

I interpret that as the car was driving away. Hard for me to see how any of the required (by law) elements to justify lethal force were met.

Don't interpret the above as an opinion on whether or not the perp deserved to die. It was only a comment on the legality of the shooting.

I've seen cops shoot at criminals as they drove away, always claiming a threat to their lives. Kinda feels the same to me here even though it isn't the same.

Sent from my secret bunker using Tapatalk

[calif 15-22]

He got at least one but should have taken out all of them.

Any snowflakes here need not respond. Just go to your safe place and cry for the criminals.

That's Mr. Snowflake thank you very much!

While we may ALL agree these 18yr old burglars deserve to be caught, tried, convicted, and jailed, for their "attempted break-in" I think we diverge on they should all be killed. If that makes me a "Snowflake" then so be it.

The immediate treat was over. Could they come back? Of course they could, but the question one must asked is "would they come back". If they did come back that is another interaction that would have to be addressed.

You guys do what you want. Run down the street firing at a fleeing car have at it. But it's not going to end well for you. Once tried and convicted (yes you will b econvicted) you will go to jail and lose your gun rights. But hey it's a free country go for it.

Me I would have dialed 911 after the threat was over.

And for all those who have posted here "I would have eliminated the threat" God help you when you actually have this happen and the Police take your computer and find out "you advocated this on a gun forum". I'm sure that will only help your case.

Gotta go now as the Bay Area Chapter of Snowflakes is having a meeting!

[skosh69]

Again, the story should have been I chased the theives to the car. While attempting to get a description, I saw a glint of light that looked like a gun. I was in fear of my life and used the necessary force to stop a threat.
.

This ^^^^^