# Homeowner charged with manslaughter for shooting at home invasion suspects



## BackyardCowboy (Aug 27, 2014)

Homeowner charged with manslaughter for shooting at home invasion suspects | Fox News


----------



## Cait43 (Apr 4, 2013)

Unfortunately, in most instances, one can not shoot at a bad guy(s) leaving the scene....

Time to plea bargain?


----------



## win231 (Aug 5, 2015)

I wish people who choose to have guns for self defense would learn when deadly force is permissible. I'm no genius or legal scholar but that's what I did 43 years ago when I bought my first gun. Shooting at a fleeing car, burglar, shoplifter, etc. encourages non-gun people to say, _"See? People who like guns just can't wait to shoot someone."_

I wouldn't be surprised if the homeowner is not only convicted of manslaughter but also is successfully sued by the guy who broke his ankle.


----------



## Craigh (Jul 29, 2016)

The guy was stupid. He was probably angry and afraid at the same time, then did something very stupid. He will probably plea and maybe get probation, but it will be a felony conviction and he will never own another firearm. Might be for the best.


----------



## paratrooper (Feb 1, 2012)

As we all know, it's an awesome responsibility to own / possess a firearm and use it for self-defense, among other things. 

Education and training are paramount. Those who receive neither, are set up to fail.


----------



## RK3369 (Aug 12, 2013)

It is interesting to see what is considered self defense and what is not. SC uses the Castle Doctrine in our law. It makes most issues related to defense of ones "Castle" legal under the law. 

I can remember at least two cases where perpetrators were shot by the homeowner while fleeing the scene of a property break in and there were no charges brought under the law. One even involved a perp that was trying to break in to a pickup sitting in an owners driveway. The owner came out of the house and shot at the car the perp was driving away from the scene. Perp was hit and ended up in the hospital which is where law enforcement caught up with him. No charges filed. Must have been a liberal DA who is going after this guy.


----------



## Craigh (Jul 29, 2016)

RK3369 said:


> Must have been a liberal DA who is going after this guy.


Maybe, but I'm not sure the Castle Doctrine would apply in this case. From what some said, the homeowner ran out into the street to empty his firearm at the fleeing automobile.

I think, though, if they pursue charges against the homeowner, they ought to also pursue 2nd Degree Murder charges against the accomplices, as they can when someone dies as the result of the commission of a felony. In fact, the idea they continued fleeing after knowing their pal needed medical attention, might be construed as premeditated which would be Murder One. This would be more in line with Justice, as I see it. Just my personal opinion. Obviously, we don't have nearly all the facts.


----------



## Blackhawkman (Apr 9, 2014)

You can only shoot when the invader is inside your home, NOT running away down the street! Jeesh what a DA! Also you can't shoot a perp for shooting your dog or stealing your truck! This doesn't seem right but it's the law. Dogs and trucks are property here in OH! fwiw


----------



## desertman (Aug 29, 2013)

About the only time you can use deadly physical force is if your own life or the life of another innocent person is in immediate danger. The laws do not view property crimes as those which are punishable by death.

Just recently here in Arizona a civilian came to the aid of an Arizona State Trooper who was getting his head bashed in after being shot by an illegal invader. The civilian shot the invader saving the Trooper's life. No charges were filed and the civilian was being hailed as a hero. Of which he was.

What this "homeowner" did was not only stupid, but reckless as he put the lives of anyone who may have been in the immediate vicinity in danger as well. Including those who may have been sitting in their homes if a stray bullet came crashing through their window. He should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.


----------



## Bisley (Aug 24, 2008)

Craigh said:


> Maybe, but I'm not sure the Castle Doctrine would apply in this case. From what some said, the homeowner ran out into the street to empty his firearm at the fleeing automobile.
> 
> I think, though, *if they pursue charges against the homeowner, they ought to also pursue 2nd Degree Murder charges against the accomplices*, as they can when someone dies as the result of the commission of a felony. *In fact, the idea they continued fleeing after knowing their pal needed medical attention, might be construed as premeditated which would be Murder One*. This would be more in line with Justice, as I see it. Just my personal opinion. Obviously, we don't have nearly all the facts.


I agree with this.

In my county, it is very doubtful that the homeowner would be charged, if his story checked out. Had he injured an innocent bystander, it would be a completely different story. Generally, shooting a known thief during his escape gets a pass. It all depends on the DA, I reckon.


----------



## pblanc (Mar 3, 2015)

Bisley said:


> I agree with this.
> 
> In my county, it is very doubtful that the homeowner would be charged, if his story checked out. Had he injured an innocent bystander, it would be a completely different story. Generally, shooting a known thief during his escape gets a pass. It all depends on the DA, I reckon.


It also very much depends on the State. Minnesota is not Texas.


----------



## paratrooper (Feb 1, 2012)

Maybe it's just me, but I don't think anyone should die for stealing a bicycle (example) from someone's yard.


----------



## pblanc (Mar 3, 2015)

Minnesota does not have a Castle Doctrine law. Supposedly, State statutes do not charge a homeowner with a duty to retreat before using deadly force to protect themselves or prevent a felony from taking place inside their residence, but there have been multiple incidents in which Minnesota homeowners protecting themselves were criminally charged for failing to retreat. In this case, it sounds as if the only crime committed was trespass, which is a misdemeanor offense in Minnesota.


----------



## hillman (Jul 27, 2014)

I figure there are quite a few gun owners out there who are a few bricks short. One time I looked in a mirror and saw myself holding a handgun. Said to myself "Damn, guy, be careful with that thing".


----------



## Blackhawkman (Apr 9, 2014)

paratrooper said:


> Maybe it's just me, but I don't think anyone should die for stealing a bicycle (example) from someone's yard.


I agree..but there should be a "Warning Shot" option.


----------



## Bisley (Aug 24, 2008)

paratrooper said:


> Maybe it's just me, but I don't think anyone should die for stealing a bicycle (example) from someone's yard.


I agree, but if I were empaneled on the grand jury that decided whether such a case would be prosecuted, I would be reluctant to put a person on trial for manslaughter, who simply made a mistake in the heat of the moment about when he was allowed to shoot a thief. It would be a tough decision for me, and all of the mitigating factors would be considered.


----------



## paratrooper (Feb 1, 2012)

Blackhawkman said:


> I agree..but there should be a "Warning Shot" option.


Would you agree to be 100% responsible for where that warning shot ended up? A warning shot could end up most anywhere.


----------



## desertman (Aug 29, 2013)

paratrooper said:


> Would you agree to be 100% responsible for where that warning shot ended up? A warning shot could end up most anywhere.


I was going to say the same thing, you beat me to it!

Although I don't think they were serious, at least I hope not for the sake of their neighbors.


----------



## paratrooper (Feb 1, 2012)

Bisley said:


> I agree, but if I were empaneled on the grand jury that decided whether such a case would be prosecuted, I would be reluctant to put a person on trial for manslaughter, who simply made a mistake in the heat of the moment about when he was allowed to shoot a thief. It would be a tough decision for me, and all of the mitigating factors would be considered.


If one is serious enough to not only possess a firearm, but serious enough to take that said firearm and point it at another, he or she better not fall prey to a "heat of the moment" decision.

_Heat of the moment_ or not, it's not a legit / valid excuse for deciding to shoot someone when they shouldn't have in the first place.


----------



## smokestack (Feb 2, 2017)

If a person breaks in your house, in CT, the state wants you to retreat to the last room in the house. If and when he or she gets in the room, with a weapon, can you use deadly force.Unless you had away to get out of the house.


----------



## Bisley (Aug 24, 2008)

paratrooper said:


> If one is serious enough to not only possess a firearm, but serious enough to take that said firearm and point it at another, he or she better not fall prey to a "heat of the moment" decision.
> 
> _Heat of the moment_ or not, it's not a legit / valid excuse for deciding to shoot someone when they shouldn't have in the first place.


Again, I agree in principle, but the evidence and the consequences of my decision could sway me, either way. A thief needs to understand that he is gambling with his life whenever he steals, just as an armed citizen is gambling with his freedom whenever he pulls the trigger.


----------



## paratrooper (Feb 1, 2012)

smokestack said:


> If a person breaks in your house, in CT, the state wants you to retreat to the last room in the house. If and when he or she gets in the room, with a weapon, can you use deadly force.Unless you had away to get out of the house.


I'm not sure if you are directing this question at me or not.

First of all, I'd never live in CT. For just the reason you explained. Second, if I retreat to the last room in my house, and the intruder follows me into that room, you can bet the farm, there's going to be gun fire.

If someone broke into my house, there's no way in Hell that I'd go to the trouble to retreat to the last room, or heaven forbid, leave my home.

I'm a warrior, and I wlll be until my dying breath. That's the whole premise that this great nation of ours was founded upon.


----------



## stokes (Jan 17, 2017)

Warning shots.My,times have changed.When I was a kid,around 1965,my best friends dad was a NYC cop.I remember having a party at his house cause his dad was awarded "cop of the month" for firing a "warning shot" to stop a perp.......the shot went in one side of his face and out the other.


----------



## paratrooper (Feb 1, 2012)

stokes said:


> Warning shots.My,times have changed.When I was a kid,around 1965,my best friends dad was a NYC cop.I remember having a party at his house cause his dad was awarded "cop of the month" for firing a "warning shot" to stop a perp.......the shot went in one side of his face and out the other.


Yup.....warning shots and on-the-spot street justice are pretty much a thing of the past. :draw:


----------



## Tangof (Jan 26, 2014)

Every self-defense shooting is different; all are judgement calls. Shooting at fleeing thieves? I would say no way. Going out the door with your flat screen? Let 'em go. Finding them in your living room confronting you, well, aim for center mass. If they were stealing my Dog, I'd probably end up in trouble.


----------



## Philco (Apr 17, 2012)

smokestack said:


> If a person breaks in your house, in CT, the state wants you to retreat to the last room in the house. If and when he or she gets in the room, with a weapon, can you use deadly force.Unless you had away to get out of the house.


That's pure B S. If someone breaks into my home, he's bought and paid for. I don't have any desire to kill anyone and hope and pray I never have to, but I won't retreat or flee from my home. it's my safe haven and anyone who breaks into my home has already threatened me to the point I will utilize self defense. Any law to the contrary flies in the face of common sense.


----------



## Cait43 (Apr 4, 2013)

Wisconsin law allows one to shoot an intruder that enters thier home, not property........


----------

