• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

homeowner shoots and kills intruder

Nah, you can pretty much just shoot him if he's in the house. Just don't shoot him in the back.
 
http://www.pe.com/localnews/inland/stories/PE_News_Local_D_webintruder.4a71a36.html

so pretty much all we have to do is plant a bottle of bleach on the intruder, splash some on our face afterwards, and voila...self defense.

joy

ya.. what a douche, killing a poor guy who broke into his home, he was probably harmless... he should have waited from him to attack him or his children 1st, see if the injuries were serious or life threatening and then closed his eyes, counted to 10, then if he still felt threatened, maybe he should have respectfully asked him to leave....
 
This is why guns should be illegal, if the homeowner didnt have a gun this man would not have lost his life.

Tragic.
 
Good for the homeowner. If someone breaks in to my house I'm shooting first and asking questions later.
 
so pretty much all we have to do is plant a bottle of bleach on the intruder, splash some on our face afterwards, and voila...self defense.

pffft, not even. All I need is to see an intruder in my house, shoot him, and claim I had a reasonable fear for my safety (which one always does with a break-in)....just as it should be.
 
pffft, not even. All I need is to see an intruder in my house, shoot him, and claim I had a reasonable fear for my safety (which one always does with a break-in)....just as it should be.

Wait what? claim you feared for your life? Move to a castle doctrine state. Intruder in house, shoot intruder. No explanation required AND civil immunity.
 
This is why guns should be illegal, if the homeowner didnt have a gun this man would not have lost his life.

Tragic.

:hmm: *taps sarcasm meter*

Sorry, but no. While burglary certainly doesn't deserve capital punishment via the court system, being shot dead is a risk a criminal takes when caught in the act. Too bad, so sad.
 
Last edited:
Wait what? claim you feared for your life? Move to a castle doctrine state. Intruder in house, shoot intruder. No explanation required AND civil immunity.

I'm in one. This was the language told me me by a cop, recently. I think he was trying to make the point that shooting a guy who is obviously fleeing, or hasn't crossed the "threshold" makes things complicated for the home owner.

edit:
from wiki:
Colorado "...any occupant of a dwelling is justified in using any degree of physical force, including deadly physical force, against another person when that other person has made an unlawful entry into the dwelling, and when the occupant has a reasonable belief that such other person has committed a crime in the dwelling in addition to the uninvited entry, or is committing or intends to commit a crime against a person or property in addition to the uninvited entry, and when the occupant reasonably believes that such other person might use any physical force, no matter how slight, against any occupant." 18-1-704.5 Use of deadly physical force against an intruder.

So yeah, not a problem. The cop was just stressing a particular portion of the law. And actually, now that I think about it, I think he was just relating it to hypotheticals about not shooting your drunk neighbor who happens to wander in to your house by accident...or something.
 
Last edited:
I, too, live in one of those castle states.

Someone breaks into your home, you can shoot them in the face in protection of your family, your property, or yourself.

Thank god for laws like this.
 
Back
Top