Can You Kill Him?

[lawrra]

The sad puppy provides instantaneous forgiveness.

 

[SMiller]

For all I know he is heading for cover to return fire. Drop him where he stands! It might be your family's life or someone else life you save!

 

[aikidoka]

Do you have any legal problems?

Off the top of my head I would say yes. I know we don't have a duty to retreat on our property but he is running away and unarmed.

I'll now read the rest of the thread and see if I'm way wrong on this.

 

[GuyRelford]

Wow. You guys are GOOD!! It is so cool to see how responsible gun owners can analyze a situation and come to the "right" decision - although as I said earlier, this was not an easy question and exactly how Indiana law applies to these facts would unquestionably be up to a prosecutor (in deciding whether to charge you in the first place) and possibly a jury (in deciding whether you actually violated the law). I'll post my answer in the morning. In the mean time, I'd love to see more of your analyses, because you're very good at it.

INGO rocks!

 

[Bigum1969]

Wow. You guys are GOOD!! It is so cool to see how responsible gun owners can analyze a situation and come to the "right" decision - although as I said earlier, this was not an easy question and exactly how Indiana law applies to these facts would unquestionably be up to a prosecutor (in deciding whether to charge you in the first place) and possibly a jury (in deciding whether you actually violated the law). I'll post my answer in the morning. In the mean time, I'd love to see more of your analyses, because you're very good at it.

INGO rocks!

Oh come on buddy!!!!

I've been lingering for hours to see the correct answer...

All right, I can wait a little longer.

 

[Slab]

I'll post my answer in the morning.

i knew i should have gone to bed earlier.......

 

[ATM]

I've been lingering for hours to see the correct answer...

All right, I can wait a little longer.

You are banned for lingering this long and then giving up so easily!




oops... wrong thread.

 

[Bigum1969]

 

[Chefcook]

OK -1 GunLawyer I have changed my answer twice after reading the law and been sitting here waiting for you to post an answer GRRRRR lol... May as well recap my original thought. At first read It seems no you cant shoot the second guy. The way section C reads it says you can protect your property also, and that led me to think that legally you could shoot him. But just cause you can doesn't necessarily mean you should. So I will just say this. I would not shoot the second guy. But that was not the question. The scenario states you have already shot him. I think you might have a problem with BG #2 but a problem a really good lawyer could get you threw...

 

[SC_Shooter]

I'm in the camp of BG#1 is a no-brainer. Clear and active threat = good shoot. BG#2, however is murky at best in my book. I doubt the law is crystal clear one way or the other, but suspect that you MIGHT be ok with the shoot. That said, I would not take it. Whether I could or could not take the shot legally, I wouldn't because the reason for shooting BG#1 in the first place was to neutralize the threat...not punish him for breaking in. If BG#2 is running out the door screaming like Andy Gibb, there is no longer an active threat.

The bottom line for me is the law's position on BG#2 is a moot point, as I would not take that shot. There is a big difference between what you CAN do and what you SHOULD do IMHO.

Of course, I'd still like to know both the legal answer and logic behind it.

 

[Cygnus]

Wait a dang minute here!!!!!!!


OK GunLawyer, I'm glad you have not posted the answer yet.....
I may or may not need to change my answer....

There are 2 questions here!!!

My first answer a few pages back says NO based upon the the thread title "Can You Kill Him?" (Referring to BG #2 running for the door BG#1 you are fine as obvious Self-Defense /threat)

My answer to the question at the end of your first post "Do You Have Legal Issues?"
Is an abosulte YES! (If you shoot BG#2)

Anyone else catch this??????
Or am I overthinking this ??

 

[Roadie]

I gotta go with Joe on this one. Chasing the BG is a BAD idea unless you have loved ones in the part of the house they are fleeing towards.

If your family is behind you, and safe, stand your ground while yelling at a family member to call 911.

However, since this is not the scenario, as provided, I would say that yes, you are in hot water legally because the shot placement on BG2 would suggest he was fleeing, even if not on tape. With the tape, you would have to be VERY lucky and get a conservative jury, or you would be serving time .

 

[Wabatuckian]

How Well Do You Know Indiana Gun Law?

Here's the scenario: You're at home with your wife and children. It's 2:00 am. Two masked, armed intruders break into your home. One has a loaded AK, the other a loaded sawed-off 12 ga. shotgun.

After a few seconds, your trusty labrador hears them in the home, and alerts you with aggressive barking, just as the pair of thugs enters your master bedroom.

You pull your handgun of choice from your nightstand and deliver two perfect center-of-mass shots to the first intruder as he appoaches the bed, and you retire him from the fight immediately.

Upon seeing his partner crumple, the other bad guy throws down his shotgun and runs for the front door, which is still open. You clear the corner of the room in time to see him in the foyer still 3 feet from the front door, with your grandmother's silver collection under his arm, screaming like a baby and running like hell for the door. You drop him with another perfectly-placed shot to the back of the head.

Your security system has captured every bit of the event on video.

Do you have any legal problems?

Number one: OK here. I do not see any problems with shooting to stop an armed assailant in my home.

Number two: I would not take the shot. I would retreat, grab a better weapon than a mere pistol, and wait for the police.

Hopefully my Labrador is unhurt as the other zombie is still armed.

If I hear gunshots, I will fire to stop those gunshots, if a target is in view.

Josh <><

 

[Wabatuckian]

Gunlawyer was on as recently as two hours ago - 1am.

Josh <><

 

[femurphy77]

All of this scenario is occuring at 2 a.m., your dog just awoke you from a deep sleep, you drop the bad guy who definitely had a gun, turn the corner see the other bad guy with something in his hand. It's dark, your adrenalin meter is pegged, there is a bad guy bleeding on your floor, you're concerned for your family, second bad guy is dead! You show remorse over taking a life, don't freak because it was only silverware in his hand. I don't honestly believe there is going to be a LOT of trouble on this one but then maybe you get a DA that believes the English way is the best way!!

 

[Bill of Rights]

Maybe the second BG is screaming like a baby now, but what about later, when he decides that you "disrespected" him (not to mention killed his buddy) and comes back to rape and kill your family while you are at work?

As far as I'm concerned, the second BG deserves to get shot, but I would probably abstain from shooting merely out of fear of our tainted legal system.

While I agree with you regarding ending the possible future threat, the law does not. They must be an immediate, credible threat (AOJ). While he's screaming like a baby (and probably needs his pants changed, too. ), he's still in your house and about to be on your "curtilage" (yard) with property he's stolen (in the act of committing a forcible felony) He is unlikely to stop at the property line and drop the silver, so the only reasonable way to stop him at that distance is with deadly force.
Again, I likely would not shoot at that point but my reasoning has little to do with the courts. If, God forbid, I ever do have to shoot a person, it will likely be because I still considered him/her a threat to me or to my family.

Blessings,
Bill

 

[Bill of Rights]

GunLawyer, if when you post the answer, you would touch on the point about "no legal jeopardy of any kind whatsoever" in the statute as well, I would appreciate it. There has been some discussion back and forth as to whether or not this line could be used to throw out a civil case brought by either a criminal who lived or by the family of one who did not.

IC 35-41-3-2
Use of force to protect person or property
Sec. 2. (a) A person is justified in using reasonable force against another person to protect the person or a third person from what the person reasonably believes to be the imminent use of unlawful force. However, a person:
(1) is justified in using deadly force; and
(2) does not have a duty to retreat;
if the person reasonably believes that that force is necessary to prevent serious bodily injury to the person or a third person or the commission of a forcible felony. No person in this state shall be placed in legal jeopardy of any kind whatsoever for protecting the person or a third person by reasonable means necessary.

Thanks very much, in advance. I look forward to future scenarios. The fewer questions we have, the more likely we'll make the right decision if we ever have to do so.

Blessings,
Bill

 

[Jay]

You can really, really WANT to kill #2, but as I said earlier...... bullet holes in the back are tough to equate with self defense.

Lots of folks will "clear their house"..."slice the pie", or whatever...... but me?..... I've had all the war I want. My bedroom is accessable only one way. I can totally control access to it. I will deny access to my bedroom with deadly force. If an intruder gets out, the cops get paid to deal with him. I"m not going to jail for a few minutes of "boy, I sure showed him".

Everyone has to do what they feel they have to do, and I'm certainly NOT judging anyone else's actions, or plan/s to act. It's your call....and mine...individually. Hopefully, none of us will have to make that particular decision.

As are all of us, I'm really interested in hearing the legal solution.

 

[Paco Bedejo]

Upon seeing his partner crumple, the other bad guy throws down his shotgun and runs for the front door, which is still open. You clear the corner of the room in time to see him in the foyer still 3 feet from the front door, with your grandmother's silver collection under his arm, screaming like a baby and running like hell for the door. You drop him with another perfectly-placed shot to the back of the head.

Justified to shoot because:

• I just woke up with an adrenaline dump. Queue medical testimony.
• I didn't know if he was running for the door, running to get buddies in another room near the front door, running to get buddies outside, or retreating to a stronger position where they've placed other weapons. Until I see him fleeing across the yard, he has shown himself to be a danger to myself & my family by entering my bedroom armed.
• I didn't see him drop the shotgun.
• He had something under his arm which was wood & metal. In the dark, it looked like a firearm.

While justified, you're still gonna get raped through the "justice" system & if he has any living relatives who liked him, you're going to be sued for wrongful death. Which is a crock of crap.

Now, if he drops the firearm & yells "don't shoot" while getting down on his knees with both hands splayed & obviously empty, then he gets to live.

 

[Robert Richardson]

He is still in my house= target!!