"Get out of my house"

[Keith_Indy]

i wasnt there so i hate to monday morning quarterback, but for the sake of discusion i will anyways.

the first thing that should have happened is for you to call 911. second, i wouldnt give anyone a gun that doesnt even know how to hold a knife. 3rd, if i knew everyone was accounted for i would have remained in my location and guarded the entrances and waited for the police.

Ditto on this...

The intruder wasn't a threat until you presented yourself to him. Your duty is to protect yourself and your friends.

Call 911, let the cops come and deal with it. Now, he starts coming upstairs, (or for me, towards our bedroom,) I'd take cover and done what you did.

As it is, someone is loose on the street, and knows you have a gun. They might come back for it.

Or...

The guy could have been at the wrong house. I'm assuming there are other college people living around you. Could have been a drunk wandering back to the wrong house. Could have been drunk/high friend of previous tenant.

I'd seriously look at your doors, and windows. Make sure you secure them when ever you are inside the home, not just at night. Make sure the locks have been changed since the former tenant left. Make sure valuables aren't left out where they are visible from outside.

 

[Keith_Indy]

THANK YOU!!!! I have said this before many times on here but theres still always cowboys that are untrained that wanna go do it anyways.

I like UMC_0311 am very well trained and experienced in CQB but I would still not do it in my own home unless i needed to grab a family member and ONLY clear as much as I had to, to reach them and get to our safe room. anything else is just pointless. thats what you have insurance for. Yes i do believe we should be able to shoot criminals who are just stealing, but we cant, so why try to stop them and risk getting killed even if theres a 1% chance? i like to save my luck for when I realy need it.

Totally agree.

How does a dog play into your plans now? If you, wife and child are in safe room, and the dog is attacking an intruder, what then?

I'm of the opinion that the dogs are family, and if someone is threatening them, they're threatening me.

 

[USMC_0311]

Totally agree.

How does a dog play into your plans now? If you, wife and child are in safe room, and the dog is attacking an intruder, what then?

I'm of the opinion that the dogs are family, and if someone is threatening them, they're threatening me.

The right dog makes this all a moot point.

 

[E5RANGER375]

The right dog makes this all a moot point.

i deffinatly have the right dog but i need her to grow up now

Keith, for me, thats why I will be training this GSD to listen and obey all of my commands. im sure it will take time, but a good GSD will even stop bitting an attacker on command and thats what I hope for one day. she/me starts her first class in 3 more weeks.

I truely hope that the dog barking by itself would keep any half way intelligent intruder out of my house. If they come in while im sleeping then im sure the dog is gonna get that ass. and that will give me the time to secure my human family and then call the dog. If the dog is getting attacked still at that point then yeah Im gonna go open a lead can of whoop ass on the guy.

 

[USMC_0311]

If the family is safe and dogs are with me we still wait on the police. No sense in sending them in and take a chance on them getting hurt either. If the dogs have them cornered or are themselves under duress I suppose I might go help. Again my primary goal is the safety of my family.

 

[finity]

this relates to my other thread.

if you can hold him at your house, by law how would this be different from a thief at a store you work at?

especially since there was no proof of the man in the OPs response proving he stole something, or did anything other than break in where as in my thread there was clear proof he stole something.

this is why i thought it may be reasonable to hold someone.

exactly why i posed the question in the other thread. it seems to me that these situations could be similar.
not trying to beat a dead horse or start anything, this is just another legitimate question pertaining to the law.

While I haven't read "the other thread" yet I will say:

1. If you catch a thief in your store I think you can detain them.

It is my understanding that you have two grounds in which to make the detention. The first is through the use of the citizens arrest law (IC 35-33-1-4). If someone commits a felony in your presence or you have probable cause to think that the person committed a felony then you can make a citizens arrest. IN law defines theft as a felony.

The second justification is given by “detention of shoplifters” (IC 35-33-6-2). That law states that if a store owner or agent has probable cause to think that someone is stealing they can detain them.

Note however that in both of the above you need PROBABLE CAUSE which has the same definition as it would be for a LEO. You have to have more than a suspicion that someone is stealing from your store. It has to be probable that they are.

If you saw them do it then that is pretty likely to be PC.

You CANNOT, however, use deadly force to perform the arrest unless they are a threat to you (IC 35-41-3-3) – as in an armed robbery situation.

2. As you can see from the above someone breaking into your house is committing a felony & you can then legally hold them for police.

i'll answer the best i can. keep in mind im no lawyer, thank goodness. but i did sleep with one a long time ago

the reason its different is that the guy is in your private dwelling and IS a threat to your life just by being there in my opinion. also dead men tell no tales. all you have to say is the guy threatened to kill you and then moved foreward. (actualy let your lawyer say that for you).

If you need to lie about the reason that you shot somebody chances are you didn’t have a legal reason to do it. You are then a criminal. Just like the guy that broke into your house. If you really were in reasonable fear for your life then just tell the truth (through your lawyer, of course).

Advocating people lie & make up stories about why they killed someone is, IMO, irresponsible.

if the guy that robs your store has a weapon then you CAN hold him at gun point,

True.

but i'd rather shoot him and not take the chance of dying at his hand.

Unless of course he has already given up. If he has he is no longer a threat & shooting him could then make you guilty of murder. If he hasn’t or won’t give up then blast away. By this I’m not saying you have to give any warning. If he is pointing a gun at you, you are in clear & imminent danger. Just shoot to stop the threat.

merchandise and personal property being stolen does not itself give you a right to shoot in indiana. but the being in fear of your life part does.

all you have to do is be in fear of your life and as long as its not a far stretch (like you shot the guy in the back) then you will walk.

Or if they catch in your recommended act of lying you could have a WAY MORE difficult time getting a jury to buy your story.

i see stories on here and in the news all the time where people are too merciful when they could have legaly killed a person. im not all about killing someone if they dont deserve it, but a person who is threatening my life (knife, gun, bat, etc) is gonna get shot before they kill me or even have the chance. theres no time for repentance when i bring the gun out. thats the time to make their peace with a higher power if they believe in one, and it better be in less tha 2 seconds.

Strange, that doesn’t jibe with your previous post in this thread about the subject:

no witnesses and i would have killed him dead without a second thought.

Several things wrong here. In Indiana an intruder does NOT have to armed as part of the equation of "justifying" lethal force.

Also, in Indiana "disparity of force" is not needed to 'justify' lethal force inside a persons property. It could have been the entire Colts offensive line vs this guy. Wouldn't matter.

True…to an extent.

There is no requirement to prove that you were in fear of your life or SBI BUT the use of deadly force must be considered to be REASONABLE.

It would be unreasonable for the homeowner to kill an intruder who was unarmed with the entire Colts offensive line there to subdue the invader.

If it’s just you & your wife then it may be reasonable to use deadly force. At least that is the presumption. They are PRESUMED to be a threat if they are entering an occupied dwelling.

BUT even then you STILL don’t have carte blanche justification to kill someone. It STILL has to be reasonable. If an unarmed 10 YO kid broke in then it would probably be seen as unreasonable to use deadly force on them.

Furthermore, deadly force can be used to stop the invasion itself or theft of property inside the dwelling. It is NOT predicated upon 'self defense'.

I think you are mistaken. If it is just the possible theft of property & not a self-defense concern as you say then why is the Castle Doctrine ONLY aimed at a persons home (presumably occupied or your wouldn’t be there to defend it), curtilage or occupied vehicle & not for any property stolen from outbuildings, unoccupied cars, or any other property?

The CD presumes that a person who is bold enough to break into your occupied home or vehicle will have no problem harming you so the requirements to justify the use of DF are relaxed accordingly. But EVEN then there is still that pesky requirement that the use of DF be REASONABLE.

If the person stops the attack on your dwelling (for whatever reason) then it is no longer reasonable to use DF to stop the attack because the attack has already stopped. Do you know of any court cases in which they defined the moment of “stopping the attack” as anything other than when the attacker surrenders? If not I don’t think I’d bet my future on any other assumption.

everything else made sense but i thought there were laws pertaining to protection of property??? maybe thats just what i want to hear but i dont know

There are. You can’t use deadly force to protect your property in IN.

Here is the law:

IC 35-41-3-2

You can only use deadly force if you’re in imminent threat of death or serious injury. Otherwise you can only use “reasonable force”. IN law makes a definite distinction between that and “deadly force”.

 

[roscott]

Good points from many, yet some of you are coming from a different perspective than I.

You are middle aged men with wives, kids, family, job, insurance. I'm a poor college student, and if someone breaks into my house, I don't have insurance to pay for my stuff. If he runs off with my laptop while I'm on the phone with the cops, I'm just s*** out of luck.

Besides, it's not in my nature to hide upstairs while someone breaks into my house and steals my stuff. He's robbing me, and I won't stand for it.

But I certainly would not look down at anyone if they simply stayed put with their family.

 

[Demo]

Good points from many, yet some of you are coming from a different perspective than I.

You are middle aged men with wives, kids, family, job, insurance. I'm a poor college student, and if someone breaks into my house, I don't have insurance to pay for my stuff. If he runs off with my laptop while I'm on the phone with the cops, I'm just s*** out of luck.

Besides, it's not in my nature to hide upstairs while someone breaks into my house and steals my stuff. He's robbing me, and I won't stand for it.

But I certainly would not look down at anyone if they simply stayed put with their family.

Look into renters insurance. It's cheap and will cover quite a bit.

You did great IMO.

 

[E5RANGER375]

If you need to lie about the reason that you shot somebody chances are you didn’t have a legal reason to do it. You are then a criminal. Just like the guy that broke into your house. If you really were in reasonable fear for your life then just tell the truth (through your lawyer, of course).

Advocating people lie & make up stories about why they killed someone is, IMO, irresponsible.



Unless of course he has already given up. If he has he is no longer a threat & shooting him could then make you guilty of murder. If he hasn’t or won’t give up then blast away. By this I’m not saying you have to give any warning. If he is pointing a gun at you, you are in clear & imminent danger. Just shoot to stop the threat.



Or if they catch in your recommended act of lying you could have a WAY MORE difficult time getting a jury to buy your story.



Strange, that doesn’t jibe with your previous post in this thread about the subject:

I dont have to lie at all. If a person is in my house un-invited then Im in fear of my families life.

I wont talk to the police so how would I get caught in anything? especialy since they cant disprove that I was in fear of my life. And yes it does jive with my previous post, because if your in my house you are a deadly threat to us, i dont care if your a drunk who made a mistake or not. an innocent person in my mind would be a baby that can do me no harm. anyone else is fair game in my dwelling.

 

[down3green]

Ditto on this...

The intruder wasn't a threat until you presented yourself to him.

How in the world could you reach THIS conclusion??!!

 

[finity]

I dont have to lie at all. If a person is in my house un-invited then Im in fear of my families life.

Well I guess you need to take care as to how you word things then because:

also dead men tell no tales.

and

all you have to say is...

implies to most people some intended dishonesty.

I wont talk to the police so how would I get caught in anything? especialy since they cant disprove that I was in fear of my life. And yes it does jive with my previous post, because if your in my house you are a deadly threat to us, i dont care if your a drunk who made a mistake or not. an innocent person in my mind would be a baby that can do me no harm. anyone else is fair game in my dwelling.

I think you may be surprised at what the police can "find out". A lot of people are. You also seem to be completely forgetting that whole "reasonable" requirement. It's not always reasonable to kill someone in your house just because you want it to be.

Am I saying you'll be sent to prison? Nope, not at all. If the shoot was legitimate then you should have no reason to gin up the facts or "put something in their hand" (I'm not saying you said that. Someone did recently & I don't remember who it was.). Then you'd be OK.

If not & it's found out (& it usually tends to come out somehow) then your gone & rightly so. You would be a criminal just as much as the guy who broke in...at least until the law changes. I really can't see that happening though.

You know if you really are in fear of harm then go for it. Shoot them to the ground (by that I mean shoot to stop the threat). If you don't know if they are a threat or not then assume that they are & take appropriate action. I wouldn't take the chance with my family or myself either. However, If they are clearly leaving or otherwise not a threat then you can't kill them. That's just the way it is & the way it should be IMO.

 

[88GT]

Not to rain on your parade, but are you competent enough to prone someone then handcuff them all while holding you forearm on them with out the person seeing a opportunity to disarm you?

Pshaw. Nothing to it. Night stick to the intruder's head and my buddy's knees in his kidneys and it's lights out, or pretty close to it. While he's out cold, he gets the silver jewelry. At least that's how I've seen them do it on Cops.

I was @ my old girlfriends place on IU's campus, when we heard someone come inside the apartment. I realized he was drunk, and entered the wrong unit. I yelled for him to hit the road, and that was that. Sounds like you handled the situation admirably.

And what if he didn't comply?

Do you remember this woman and her drunk intruder?
YouTube - Woman calls 911 and ends up shooting intruder

Now imagine you make discover after he's already in the house. My point is that his status is dependent on his actions, not his sobriety level.

 

[Keith_Indy]

The intruder wasn't a threat until you presented yourself to him.

How in the world could you reach THIS conclusion??!!

How could you reasonably reach the conclusion that your life is in jeopardy?

The only way he's a credible threat is if he is within viewable striking distance with whatever weapon he might have.

If things had gone differently for the OP, and he shot the intruder.

Scenario 1: My roommate told me there was a guy downstairs. I went down with my handgun to confront him. I told him to leave, he lunged towards me, and I shot him.

Scenario 2: My roommate told me there was a guy downstairs. We called 911. We were all in 1 bedroom, we heard the guy coming up the stairs. I yelled that I had a gun, and to leave the home. He kept coming. He came through into our bedroom. I shot him. (All of that is, of course, recorded on the 911 call.)

Which scenario is going to be the lest trouble with the police?

 

[Keith_Indy]

Good points from many, yet some of you are coming from a different perspective than I.

You are middle aged men with wives, kids, family, job, insurance. I'm a poor college student, and if someone breaks into my house, I don't have insurance to pay for my stuff. If he runs off with my laptop while I'm on the phone with the cops, I'm just s*** out of luck.

Besides, it's not in my nature to hide upstairs while someone breaks into my house and steals my stuff. He's robbing me, and I won't stand for it.

But I certainly would not look down at anyone if they simply stayed put with their family.

Ditto on looking into renters insurance. Split between everyone in the house, it shouldn't be more then the cost of a box of ammo for you.

It's also less then the cost of a defense attorney should you shoot someone, and there's the lest thing hinky with the incident (which will likely get you arrested.)

 

[SSGSAD]

Renters Ins., is about $20.00 a month...

 

[drgnrobo]

Handled that situation well brother ,there is so much adrenaline pumping in that scenario that most would have shot first & asked questions later.Although I probably would have had 911 called & at least got the poor sod off the street,he could have been leaving in a body bag for not responding to your demands to leave the house.Bottomline is that everyone is alright & you learned from the experience

 

[USMC_0311]

Good points from many, yet some of you are coming from a different perspective than I.

You are middle aged men with wives, kids, family, job, insurance. I'm a poor college student, and if someone breaks into my house, I don't have insurance to pay for my stuff. If he runs off with my laptop while I'm on the phone with the cops, I'm just s*** out of luck.

Besides, it's not in my nature to hide upstairs while someone breaks into my house and steals my stuff. He's robbing me, and I won't stand for it.

But I certainly would not look down at anyone if they simply stayed put with their family.

Even if your perspective is different your actions should be the same. Marital status or insurance has nothing to do with it. Your actions should favor life first possessions next. Some of us have been in the very same scenario. It’s not in my nature to hide either but it is my nature to live. Unless you have trained fire teams with flash bangs leave the room clearing to the cops. You should have called the cops anyway and if everyone was accounted for and upstairs you should stayed until the cops came all the while on the phone with 911. For a poor college student you should appreciate the cheap life lesson you just got.

If still you insist on clearing a house you need to put back some tuition money and get some training. There are so many unknowns, unpredictable’s, in QCB a bold headed ego will just get you or someone you care for killed.

Glad to know you won’t look down on me for simply staying with my family.

 

[Keith_Indy]

Oh BTW, if I haven't said it, any incident that ends with no one being injured or killed is a good outcome. So in that respect, the OP did fine.

I for one, would rather not have to shoot anyone. That's why the line has to be etched in your brain when you would use lethal force. If my family, friends, or myself are threatened, I'm going to use whatever force is necessary to deal with that threat.

Since I'd rather not shoot anyone, I'm going to do my best to avoid putting myself in a situation where that could be needed. That means, if the family is safe with me, I'm not going to seek out an intruder. If the family isn't with me, then I'm going to cautiously get to them.

 

[indyjoe]

A good discussion here. I'm late to the thread, being away from the computer yesterday.

I didn't see anything in the OP's post about letting the BG know that he was armed. With a light in your face, you cannot see anything. Letting him know you are armed is the quickest way to get him out of the house.

I agree with all that mentioned staying upstairs. I would have called 911. Announced down that:

1 - You are Armed.
2 - You are on the phone with the police.
3 - That any attempt to come up the stairs will be fatal.

The only reason to give up a good defensive choke point is to retrieve/defend someone.

That being said, in all of the three encounters that I have had to use my pistol in defense, I found issues with my actions. Yet, I got out of it and didn't have to shoot anyone. I call that a win. Doing this is the right thing. Discussing actions and making changes for the better.

 

[hi-pointfan1]

Its easy for every one to say, "I would have shot him dead, blah blah blah" but when placed in the actual situation, in my opinion, taking someones life and the consequences associated with it become very Real. Unless your a cold blooded killer with no regard for human life, shooting and possibly killing another human being would go completly against your nature, even in a situation such as this. Id like to thank the person who shared this story because it gives level-headed, law abiding citizens who own firearms, like most if not all of the people on here, a chance to relate to a real life scenario to learn from your experience, and adjust our actions properly should something like this ever take place. Good job, thanks again.