• 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.

Thief calls 911, afraid homeowner may have a gun

N

Narmer

Diamond Member
This presents a question. Since the intruder was still in the man's home, could the homeowner raid the bathroom and legally kill the thief as he was talking to 911?

http://www.cnn.com/2011/CRIME/03/08/oregon.intruder.911/index.html?iref=obnetwork

Intruder calls 911, afraid homeowner may have gun

(CNN) -- This time it was the intruder who called 911.
A man who broke into a house in Portland, Oregon, called police -- afraid the homeowner may have a gun.
The suspect, Timothy James Chapek, was in the bathroom taking a shower when the homeowner returned to the house Monday night, Portland police said in a statement.
Accompanied by two German shepherds, the homeowner asked Chapek what he was doing in the house.
Chapek locked himself in the bathroom and made an emergency call, police said. He said he had broken into the house, the owner had come home, and that he was concerned the owner might have a gun.
The homeowner also called the police to report that he had found a man in the house.
Police with dogs took Chapek, 24, into custody "without incident," they said. He was booked for criminal trespass.
They did not say if the homeowner did in fact have a gun.
Click to expand...
 
Narmer said:
This presents a question. Since the intruder was still in the man's home, could the homeowner raid the bathroom and legally kill the thief as he was talking to 911?
Click to expand...

As long as there is no perceived threat, I don't think the use of lethal force is justified.
 
In any state with castle doctrine he could have shot him even if the police were on their way. In those wussy states without it, he would have had to offer the criminal a drink and some food, rub his feet and then leave his home while the criminal robbed him.
 
KB said:
In any state with castle doctrine he could have shot him even if the police were on their way. In those wussy states without it, he would have had to offer the criminal a drink and some food, rub his feet and then leave his home while the criminal robbed him.
Click to expand...
Don't think so if they guy is not a threat. But there are LOTS of bathroom items that could be used as a weapon.

"Officer, he threatened me with a maxi pad. Oh, noes!"
 
I wouldn't shoot someone for taking a shower in my house though I would have them charged. I assume the guy had a cell phone to call the police from the bathroom so he can't be that poor. Must have some issue that he likes to take baths after breaking in.
 
Texashiker said:
As long as there is no perceived threat, I don't think the use of lethal force is justified.
Click to expand...

if someone i don't know is in my house without my authority, i would feel threatened. especially when he barricaded himself in a room. he might be psyching himself up to come out guns blazing.
 
Even though legally in my state I could shoot him. If I knew he was on the phone with 911 and is not posing a threat I still could face legal action (the whole "reasonable force" part of the law).

However morally it would be wrong to shoot someone who is willingly submitting and is no threat while police are on their way.

So I could shoot him, would probably get away with it, but wouldn't because it violates my ethics.

Now if I had not know he was on the phone with police, he would be dead. Being a unknown threat invading my home, I don't have time to find out what you are up to. I'm going to shoot you and figure out what you are up to later.
 
The home owner was clearly a bleeding heart liberal.

Had it been me, I would have shot him in the legs and arms with magnum slugs. Then, slowly tortured him while recording said torture. Then, send the video to his family. Then, record his family watching the video. Then, show the video of his family's reaction, to the thief.

THEN, I would have burned my house down with the thief in it.

My GOD, this country is full of wimps....
 
Macamus Prime said:
The home owner was clearly a bleeding heart liberal.

Had it been me, I would have shot him in the legs and arms with magnum slugs. Then, slowly tortured him while recording said torture. Then, send the video to his family. Then, record his family watching the video. Then, show the video of his family's reaction, to the thief.

THEN, I would have burned my house down with the thief in it.

My GOD, this country is full of wimps....
Click to expand...

207_not_sure_if_serious.jpg
 
sourceninja said:
Even though legally in my state I could shoot him. If I knew he was on the phone with 911 and is not posing a threat I still could face legal action (the whole "reasonable force" part of the law).

However morally it would be wrong to shoot someone who is willingly submitting and is no threat while police are on their way.

So I could shoot him, would probably get away with it, but wouldn't because it violates my ethics.

Now if I had not know he was on the phone with police, he would be dead. Being a unknown threat invading my home, I don't have time to find out what you are up to. I'm going to shoot you and figure out what you are up to later.
Click to expand...

+1

Yet another instance of a gun (or just the fear of one by a criminal) stops a crime.
 
There is NO state in the USA - not even Texas - where shooting a guy locked in your bathroom who is on the phone with the police is going to be protected by a castle doctrine type law.

I invite the armchair lawyers here who think it's legal to justify it by citation to their state's laws on the subject.
 
Narmer said:
This presents a question. Since the intruder was still in the man's home, could the homeowner raid the bathroom and legally kill the thief as he was talking to 911?
Click to expand...


Really only if you could justify that they were posing a threat to you. Which, considering they are in your house isn't necessarily hard to do. However since the thief also called 911, it probably wouldn't have gone over so well. I'm not entirely clear but I also do not believe it legal to hold them (gunpoint, knife, whatever) until the cops get there as it would technically be a form of kidnapping/hostage. So, I guess if you really want to get them then shoot them in the leg before they can walk out.
 
Jeeebus said:
There is NO state in the USA - not even Texas - where shooting a guy locked in your bathroom who is on the phone with the police is going to be protected by a castle doctrine type law.

I invite the armchair lawyers here who think it's legal to justify it by citation to their state's laws on the subject.
Click to expand...
Post #10 and #13 are proof he's a threat to me and mine.😀
 
Demo24 said:
Really only if you could justify that they were posing a threat to you. Which, considering they are in your house isn't necessarily hard to do. However since the thief also called 911, it probably wouldn't have gone over so well. I'm not entirely clear but I also do not believe it legal to hold them (gunpoint, knife, whatever) until the cops get there as it would technically be a form of kidnapping/hostage. So, I guess if you really want to get them then shoot them in the leg before they can walk out.
Click to expand...

It would not be kidnapping, but Citizen's Arrest.
 
Narmer said:
Why are you happy? The thief gets to live another day. He'll do it again. A pound of C4 up his rectum would've been reason to celebrate. In the backyard, of course.
Click to expand...

Dude you are embarrassing. Yes he broke into the house. Clearly he is low level common thief. He doesn't deserve death, you moron.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top