Front page LA Times

[greasemonkey]

I believe there is a bill up for debate in SF that would prohibit use of a weapon in self defense. That seems lunatic.

This will not 'pass the mustard', as it were

[scarville]

Correct me if I am wrong but, AFAIK.

1. The California "castle doctrine" laws date back to the 19th Century and have been interpreted to apply only inside your residence.
2. California law does not presume an illegal intruder into the "castle" is there with the intent to commit an unlawful act involving force or violence.

[Quiet]

Correct me if I am wrong but, AFAIK.

1. The California "castle doctrine" laws date back to the 19th Century and have been interpreted to apply only inside your residence.
2. California law does not presume an illegal intruder into the "castle" is there with the intent to commit an unlawful act involving force or violence.

CA's "castle doctrine" also know as the Home Protection Bill of Rights [PC 198.5], which was added to the CA Penal Code in 1994.

Under the law, a person using deadly force on an (non-family member) intruder that unlawfully and forcibly enters the residence is presumed to have reasonable fear of death/great bodily injury to self/family/others in the residence.

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.

[rodeoflyer]

Damn, shot over the shoulder. If you watched last week's Fringe, 3 minutes of total deafness after a gun fires next to your ear.

I'm calling bull****.

I was in Wyoming with my father hunting antelope, and we were both prone behind a blind - shoulder to shoulder. I completely forgot to cover my ears as he lit his .270 off next to me. Hurt like a @#$%, but I was not deaf for 3minutes.

Regarding the OP, the first person is a great self defense story. The second one is the type of asshat that gets more gun laws passed. Enjoy life with Bubba dumbass....

[ankyle62]

They ran and as they drove away, Dydouangphan fired again, killing Stanley Wallace,

Both events are tragic. However, it appears that a very strong message is that, in this state, you never resort to lethal force in defense of property. And that you or your neighbor better be under indisputable and imminent threat of life and limb before you use lethal force in self-defense.

Or to not shoot at a threat that is fleeing from you and no longer a threat.

[dreslinger]

It is sad that someone had to lose their life over something so trivial as a pot plant. Liberals would argue that a human life is not worth worldly possessions and how could you put a price on it. I would tend to agree and ask why the person put their life at risk to commit a crime? I guess that is a possible consequence of his action and he should have thought about it before he acted. Too bad the others got away. They should be tried for his death since he died in the comission of a crime and they were involved too.

[socal2310]

I'm calling bull****.

I was in Wyoming with my father hunting antelope, and we were both prone behind a blind - shoulder to shoulder. I completely forgot to cover my ears as he lit his .270 off next to me. Hurt like a @#$%, but I was not deaf for 3minutes.

Assuming your father was using a bolt action, the bullet was fired within a sealed breech and almost all of the noise came from the muzzle which was a good 20" away and pointing about 120 degrees away from you. The muzzle of a handgun fired over your shoulder would be much closer to your ear and at a more acute angle. In addition, both revolvers and semi autos allow gases to escape from the cylinder and ejection port respectively. I don't know if it would be enough to cause deafness, but it would be at least nominally louder I would think, even with the reduced noise from the smaller powder charge.

Ryan

[POLICESTATE]

Would like to see California exploring the idea of using deadly force in the defense of property. I could see such a thing helping cut a lot of property crimes.