"Get out of my house"

[E5RANGER375]

Blah blah blah. Like I said in a prior post... I'm at peace with my decision.

You must be the type that would arrest and see someone prosecuted for shooting an intruder in their home. It certainly looks to be the case, doesn't it?

yep. i would expect nothing less from him.

 

[IndySSD]

If I can up come with ONE scenario where it would be unreasonable to use deadly force then your argument that it is always reasonable (per the IC) to use deadly force falls apart. I have come up with several. I'm sure I or any others could up with many more & that just bolsters my argument even more.

There are a myriad of situations where the use of deadly force would be found unreasonable, therefore using deadly force in those scenarios would be outside the limits placed on you by the law, therefore ILLEGAL.



And I don't understand why you so blatantly IGNORE the rest of the IC that you partially paraphrase above.

Here let me post it AGAIN for you in case you missed it:



Look at the bolded part. That is the part you continuously ignore.



And I think you are getting hung up on the idea that you WANT it to read that it is always reasonable to use deadly force when from a simple fifth grade reading level it clearly doesn't.

Nowhere in any usage of grammar or logic does the word IF mean ALWAYS EQUAL TO.

Here let me try another way...





In regard to our point of contention



IOW, 'IF a reasonable person doesn't believe that DF is necessary then DF is not justified'.

Not that I hold out any hope that you will understand.



I agree the world is not always black & white. In fact MOST things aren't...but there are SOME things that are.

If it is your contention that EVERYTHING is open to interpretation then why don't you tell me how you interpret this:



Then explain to me how it is that those who would infringe that right could be wrong in their interpretation if all interpretations are equally valid.

SOMETIMES things really are as they are written.




Which is EXACTLY why the 'reasonable man' theory was adopted. That's why there are 12 other people instead of just one to decide, by concensus, if your actions were reasonable.



no.



It may be flawed (in you opinion) but it is the best system to judge others actions in a civilized society. There are A LOT of objectively unreasonable people in the world. If we as a society are ALWAYS forced to accept the perpetrators view of the "reasonableness" of their own actions we would quickly spiral into anarchy.




Because that is the price you pay when living in a lawful society. If you argue against using some semblence of reason you are arguing against the very fabric of that society.

Why did the Founders have an admonition against "cruel & unusual punishment"? Because SOMETIMES it is not reasonable to use extreme measures to prevent a minor transgression.

Before you try to accuse me of it, I'm not saying that someone entering your home is a minor transgression. It is serious. That's why the use of deadly force is specifically justified AS LONG AS IT'S USE IS FOUND REASONABLE under the rules of society.



You need to read my posts again. You are intentionally attributing to me an argument I have NEVER made.

I have never said that it is wholly unreasonable for you to be in fear of your families safety if someone breaks into your home.

I never said that the person has to be armed to be a threat.

I never said you had to be a mind reader.

I never said that you are required to show "detached reflection at the point of an upturned knife".

However IF you become aware of a change in the circumstances that would make a "reasonable person" believe that DF was no longer NECESSARY then you MUST NOT USE that DF on the other person.




Thanks for your concern, but I think I've got "reason" pretty well sorted out.



Nope. Shoot away.

If you are in the heat of the moment & have no other reason to believe that you are no longer in danger then DF is reasonable.

But what if...

You don't have your gun in easy reach & have to retrieve it from another location? (believe it or not, not everybody sleeps or showers with their gun on their side )?

When you get back the person is passed out or otherwise prone on your floor?

Do you think that DF is still justified?

Just because your p!$ that he came in doesn't mean you can shoot him.

All good thinking points. Perhaps worthy of some additional thought but for me, when push comes to shove, there's little time for extended thought processes, it all comes back to training.

I suggest everyone walk themselves through all the points here in this thread and make their own decisions because you and your loved ones, as well as potential loved ones of the perpetrator will have to live with the outcome of your personal/home defense situations.

I've made my decisions based on my experiences and how I weight personal and family safety in my life.

If I'm on my sofa and somebody breaks through the front door, the following actions would be taken.

1. I'd stand as quickly as possible and present my weapon immediately.
2. I'd order the intruder down as forcibly as I can muster.
3. Since my german shepherd dog would most likely be upset at the commotion, I doubt an accidental (drunk and lost for example) intruder would continue his intrusion.
4. If pressed further, I'll shoot.

Note: my front door is very close to the couch I'm thinking about. Time from initial breach of always locked front door to termination of intrusion would probably be only a few seconds. If I'm in bed or in my basement, the GSD will be on the main level and he will determine the proper course of action before I have an opportunity to provide an intruder direction out of the house.

I don't want to shoot anybody, but I will if pressed. The OP MAY have been OK after pulling the trigger in the described situation. In fact, I believe, so long as the room-mates didn't paint an improper picture for the police and/or prosecutor, he wouldn't have faced a trial. But he definitely would have had to deal with the emotional aftermath of killing somebody, and MAY have had legal problems.

Very good points that others may not have considered. One thing I would probably change is ordering them OUT instead of DOWN.. but that's just me.

How many here have actually been SHOT AT? I'm not talking about being shot at in a military or law enforcement context; I'm talking about being shot at by some scumbag.

Do you know how fast some scumbag can pull a gun and shoot you while you're trying to figure out whether deadly force is warranted?

I do. I've been shot at twice in my life.

I actually KNOW how fast this can happen.

Therefore, if you're in my house without my permission, I'm not going to sit around and try to figure out why you're there. I'm not going to give you time to make your intentions known, and prove to me that deadly force was warranted. I'm just going to shoot you. And whatever happens later, happens later. I'm at peace with that decision, in every way possible.

And please note... the terms "you" and "you're" above are intended in the general sense; they're not intended to point to any specific person.

Bolded two points that I should have made long ago. I've been attacked with a baseball bat before and it's amazing how fast people can move when highly motivated.

Never been shot at but if the guy had been using a knife instead of a bat, I'd be dead right now.

Also, put me in the "I don't mean specific people when I say YOU" I mean pretty much any/every one.

That's one of the reasons why I always call first, especially when stopping to visit for the first time. As far as the quoted question, ... yes, got some idea.
This point was driven home years ago during a defensive handgun course. Myself and about twenty or so students stood at about the 15 yard line. Two of the lead instructors - both former Marines (one an active SWAT cop) stood facing each other at about the 7. The SWAT member asked (paraphrased), "If someone broke into your house and you saw him right there, how many of you would try to talk to him, reason with him, or yell at him?" I was a little surprised and disappointed when over half the hands went up!
He then said, "Fine. I'll play the homeowner. My partner here will be the intruder." Both had .45s in OWB holsters and faced each other, hands at their sides, less than 10 ft. apart.
"Who ar?!" BLAM-BLAM The rest of his loud demand of who are you was drowned out by the sound of the pistol from the other instructor, who had drawn and fired two rounds into the chest area of a paper human silhouette @ 7 yds further at a right angle, without even looking at it.
They continued, with the instructor playing the BG reholstering each time.
"What're you d?!" BLAM-BLAM Same thing.
"Get outta" BLAM-BLAM Again.

Can't recreate it here. You really had to see it in real time.
They stopped and the first Marine asked again, "Now, how many of you are gonna try to talk to him?"
Even after that, there were still one or two hands that went up.

Yeah, unfortunately I've had similar experience, only not getting shot or stabbed but it was still enough to drive home the point!

Wow I sure hope some of the posters on this thread have a huge savings account for defense attorney fees. If not that public defender they are going to appoint you probably ain't gonna cut it.

And the prosecution would have a field day with all your INDGO thread posts. The average jury would eat that up.

Do what you gotta do I guess. You are the one that will have to deal with it.

Yeah, everyone is going to do whatever they want. One thing I'd like to mention though, while you allude to "dealing with it".... think about this... what do you have to live with if you hesitate and you or your wife/son/daughter/mother/father lose their lives because of it? How would your family fare without you around? What would happen to them after you've gone down, do you think the home invasion artist is just going to turn around and walk away from them?

You're right about people doing whatever they have got to do, I think you're wrong about you being the only person who has to deal with it.

 

[rjstew317]

i would have told him to lay flat on the ground and not move a g** damn inch towards me or i would blow off his f***ing head. and i would hold true to my statement. <<< and thats me being nice and letting him live because there are witnesses other than my family members. no witnesses and i would have killed him dead without a second thought

a law professor once told me that a dead man tells no tales, and if someone comes in your house, shoot him. if that man does not have a weapon, kindly lend him one.

 

[RichardR]

You really do have a reading comprehension issue, don't you.

It's not an issue of reading comprehension, it's an issue of how each of us defines "reasonable vs unreasonable", it's obvious that we are not going to agree but we can try to keep personal jibes at each other to a minimum (or do it through the forums PM feature) though please.

I said it wasn't ALWAYS reasonable, no matter what, in every situation, to use DF on someone in a home invasion scenario.

And I agreed with you, even going as far as my saying that anyone could come up with dozen(s) of silly unreasonable scenarios in which DF would not be justified.

You haven't quite figured out that just because YOU say that I said something doesn't mean I actually did. Similarly, just because you illogically claim the law says something doesn't mean it actually does.

I am assuming that you meant what you said ... just like the statute in question means what it says.

You can "believe" whatever you want about me. I just don't want some other person to read your statement of your opinion as if it's fact (i.e. "It's ALWAYS reasonable to kill someone who broke into your house") & then act on that bad advice.

I highly doubt anything you or I say on the internet is going to change the way a homeowner reacts in a life or death situation.

However what you or I say could influence a potential member of a jury, who may potentially wrongly convicts a homeowner because the homeowner acted "unreasonably" in your opinion ie; did not hesitate long enough to do a thorough cavity search, background check & mental health evaluation on the intruder prior to squeezing the trigger on them.

Do what you want if it ever happens & hopefully it turns out OK for you.

Same for you man, just do me a favor & don't hesitate too long analyzing potential legal ramifications & stuff when fractions of a second matter.

 

[finity]

a law professor once told me that a dead man tells no tales, and if someone comes in your house, shoot him. if that man does not have a weapon, kindly lend him one.

I highly doubt anything you or I say on the internet is going to change the way a homeowner reacts in a life or death situation.

I think you may be surprised at what will influence some peoples actions. You haven't been around here long but after a while you will see enough "I thought that was legal because so & so said it was" to make you know that it happens. How many threads have there been where someone says "you can't carry in a bank" or "in a bar", etc because somebody told them it wasn't legal. The same happens the other way, too.

I hear tell that even college law professors tell people it's OK to do illegal stuff sometimes. (hmmm...now where have I seen that recently? hint:^^)

However what you or I say could influence a potential member of a jury, who may potentially wrongly convicts a homeowner because the homeowner acted "unreasonably" in your opinion ie; did not hesitate long enough to do a thorough cavity search, background check & mental health evaluation on the intruder prior to squeezing the trigger on them.

sigh...

 

[RichardR]

sigh...

Oh come on that was funny & you know it!

 

[SavageEagle]

Oh come on that was funny & you know it!

I got a chuckle out of it if it makes you feel better.

 

[j706]

Blah blah blah. Like I said in a prior post... I'm at peace with my decision.

You must be the type that would arrest and see someone prosecuted for shooting an intruder in their home. It certainly looks to be the case, doesn't it?

No probably not. However the decision of being a justified and reasonable shooting would more than likely be made long after the shooting happened. I am 100% in favor of a person being able to defend their home and family. I would do the same in a heartbeat. But before I would fire on a person inside my home I would be quite sure they in fact needed shot. I would not even consider shooting a person JUST for breaking in my home.

 

[j706]

a law professor once told me that a dead man tells no tales, and if someone comes in your house, shoot him. if that man does not have a weapon, kindly lend him one.

Do that I can just about guarantee you would be criminally charged. Do you not think an investigation would show what really happened? You bet it would. It is not TV. Very poor advice no matter who said it.

 

[rmabrey]

I dread the day someone actually post an account of having to defend themselves, I can see the arguments now.

"Shouldnt have shot him I dont care what the judges says"

"Should have used a RPG"

"You wouldn't have had to shoot him if you werent OC'ing"

Sigh..........We just cant have nice things

 

[IndyBeerman]

Some members on here debating the legal aspects, I have something to say....

My home is secure, there is no reason for anyone to be in here other than me and my wife. So anyone who is in my house unauthorized is immediately considered a threat.

I consider any threat in my house to be life threatening because they are not there to dance a waltz with me or my wife, they are there to steal, plunder or cause harm.

I plan on them leaving in a body bag, and after that I do not care what happens because myself and wife will still be alive.

I take this seriously, because in a blink of an eye or any hesitation can and will result in me or my wife being killed. I plan on being around a while longer, and will do what ever it takes to ensure that me and my wife live to our golden years.

So this can be debated till the cows come home and the milk is sour, each person to their own on how they react, I just hope and pray YOU make the right choice because I know what I'm going to do, and I hope that I don't have to attend the funeral of a beloved INGO member because some people want to think and debate on what is justifiable.

 

[Armed Eastsider]

To the OP: How do you know the intruder didnt have a gun? It was dark, you just woke up, there was confusion, he could of pulled that gun in an instant and this could of ended alot worse.

 

[finity]

Some members on here debating the legal aspects, I have something to say....

My home is secure, there is no reason for anyone to be in here other than me and my wife. So anyone who is in my house unauthorized is immediately considered a threat.

Ok that sounds "reasonable"

I consider any threat in my house to be life threatening because they are not there to dance a waltz with me or my wife, they are there to steal, plunder or cause harm.

I'm still with you on that one.

I plan on them leaving in a body bag, and after that I do not care what happens because myself and wife will still be alive.

Here's where we MAY differ.

I DO care what happens after that because it is not in my idea of 'self-defense' to end up spending the rest of my life in prison because I refused to take into account the legal ramifications of my actions. I won't let any self-doubt cause me to hesitate to do what needs done BUT I'm not going to disengage my brain. These situations will be very dynamic & you will have to be able to think through the proper actions in order to come out on top. 99% of the time just shooting the guy will be completely justifiable. It's that 1% of the time that you have to think about.

It's the same argument used to say if you pull your gun you will ALWAYS shoot no matter what. That's not very smart either.

I take this seriously, because in a blink of an eye or any hesitation can and will result in me or my wife being killed. I plan on being around a while longer, and will do what ever it takes to ensure that me and my wife live to our golden years.

I think we all here pretty much take it seriously. For obvious reasons.

It won't do you much good to live out your golden years in a 6x8 room of concrete & steel. I don't think they allow conjugal visits do they?

I'm not saying you'll go to prison. I'm saying your increase your odds if you don't use your head instead of losing it.

 

[IndyBeerman]

Ok that sounds "reasonable"

Here's where we MAY differ.

I DO care what happens after that because it is not in my idea of 'self-defense' to end up spending the rest of my life in prison because I refused to take into account the legal ramifications of my actions. I won't let any self-doubt cause me to hesitate to do what needs done BUT I'm not going to disengage my brain. These situations will be very dynamic & you will have to be able to think through the proper actions in order to come out on top. 99% of the time just shooting the guy will be completely justifiable. It's that 1% of the time that you have to think about.

It's the same argument used to say if you pull your gun you will ALWAYS shoot no matter what. That's not very smart either.

I think we all here pretty much take it seriously. For obvious reasons.

It won't do you much good to live out your golden years in a 6x8 room of concrete & steel. I don't think they allow conjugal visits do they?

I'm not saying you'll go to prison. I'm saying your increase your odds if you don't use your head instead of losing it.

I want you to seriously stop for a second and think, because I have long and hard about this exact type of incident.

A person in my home that has gained access to the inside by means other than by my invitation is there for a reason, to steal, pillage and plunder.

If that person is willing to enter into a home that he/she knows has even the slightest possibility of being inhabited, I can guarantee you that there is a more than a likely chance that they intend to not be caught and are willing to do anything humanly possible to prevent that.

It won't be some 12 year old autistic kid, it won't be some lost little old lady either wanting help across the street.

They won't be playing a game and you can't yell timeout to rethink, all it takes is the time for them to move an arm 18 inches or less to raise a firearm.

I will not rethink, I will not hesitate, a person has entered into my house that was not invited by me and gained access illegally, and therefore I fear for myself and wife's life. It's that 1% that you say you have to "think" about that could get you and your family killed.

While I'm a man that likes 99-1 odds, I'm not playing with my or my wife's life to chance it, you can, but I won't.

 

[Armed Eastsider]

I want you to seriously stop for a second and think, because I have long and hard about this exact type of incident.

A person in my home that has gained access to the inside by means other than by my invitation is there for a reason, to steal, pillage and plunder.

If that person is willing to enter into a home that he/she knows has even the slightest possibility of being inhabited, I can guarantee you that there is a more than a likely chance that they intend to not be caught and are willing to do anything humanly possible to prevent that.

It won't be some 12 year old autistic kid, it won't be some lost little old lady either wanting help across the street.

They won't be playing a game and you can't yell timeout to rethink, all it takes is the time for them to move an arm 18 inches or less to raise a firearm.

I will not rethink, I will not hesitate, a person has entered into my house that was not invited by me and gained access illegally, and therefore I fear for myself and wife's life. It's that 1% that you say you have to "think" about that could get you and your family killed.

While I'm a man that likes 99-1 odds, I'm not playing with my or my wife's life to chance it, you can, but I won't.

Repped

 

[bigus_D]

I want you to seriously stop for a second and think, because I have long and hard about this exact type of incident.

A person in my home that has gained access to the inside by means other than by my invitation is there for a reason, to steal, pillage and plunder.

If that person is willing to enter into a home that he/she knows has even the slightest possibility of being inhabited, I can guarantee you that there is a more than a likely chance that they intend to not be caught and are willing to do anything humanly possible to prevent that.

It won't be some 12 year old autistic kid, it won't be some lost little old lady either wanting help across the street.

They won't be playing a game and you can't yell timeout to rethink, all it takes is the time for them to move an arm 18 inches or less to raise a firearm.

I will not rethink, I will not hesitate, a person has entered into my house that was not invited by me and gained access illegally, and therefore I fear for myself and wife's life. It's that 1% that you say you have to "think" about that could get you and your family killed.

While I'm a man that likes 99-1 odds, I'm not playing with my or my wife's life to chance it, you can, but I won't.

I assume you feel comfortable saying the bolded part because you live in an issolated and huge parcel of land with a moat filled with allegators and draggons and a draw bridge and a manned gate. Maybe it is just because you never leave your windows open and always have the doors locked, even when coming and going while working in the yard or whatever.

Sure, it is more likely that an univited "guest" is going to be a bad guy, but those other situations DO happen all the time. I'd bet the ratio of mal-intentioned intrudors to 'accidental' intrudors is way lower than 99 to 1 (as described above)... even with your moat and draw bridge.

 

[IndySSD]

Sure, it is more likely that an univited "guest" is going to be a bad guy, but those other situations DO happen all the time. I'd bet the ratio of mal-intentioned intrudors to 'accidental' intrudors is way lower than 99 to 1 (as described above)... even with your moat and draw bridge.

I don't know where you live that people just randomly walk into eachothers homes but in the city and suburbs you think that there are less than 99 home invasions for every accidental entry?

LMAO.... that's the most naive thing I've heard in a while. Maybe it's because I live in Marion county but we have hundreds of home invasions every month.

I have a family member who is LEO here in Indiana and I can't even begin to tell you how many times he's been called to apartments and houses where people have been robbed or have been the victims of attempted/successful rapes and abductions. There has however only been about one or two times in the last 12 years or so that I know of where there was a funny "this drunk guy walked/kicked his way into a house and just fell asleep" story whereas there have been lots and lots of "Man, I arrested these two *******s that broke into this apartment, one of them was still hiding in a closet after we had the place cleared by the dogs!!".


Bigus, I hope your life continues along the path of the criminally unremarkable. Unfortunately not all of us are so lucky.

I personally have entirely too much first hand experience with bad **** happening to look at things the way you do.

 

[bigus_D]

Bigus, I hope your life continues along the path of the criminally unremarkable. Unfortunately not all of us are so lucky.

I have first hand experience with real life criminal activity. Maybe thats why I don't live in Marion county anymore. Have you ever had a gun to your head? Do you really know how quickly these things can develope? Honestly, I don't care. I'm just letting you know I'm not as naive as you may think.

NOTE: The accidentals don't make the news. See, not everything that happens in the world can be found on that picture box in your living room. So, just because all you hear about are the criminal tresspass situations, that doesn't mean that's all that is happening out there.

 

[SemperFiUSMC]

OK, I'll give my post-game review.

I would not have called 911 initially. Last thing you need is that the one time LE is 10 seconds from your door they enter and you shoot them / they shoot you. Also, the guy could have a police scanner for intel. You call 911, he bolts. Wait to call 911 to tell them about the dead bad guy or the bad guy that just got away. No need for armed confrontation with another invading force.

He was probably playing you, acting incapacitated. If he directly and deliberately worked his way toward the door in a stuper, he was definately playing you.

If you weren't prepared to shoot him the second you identified he shouldn't be there you shouldn't have confronted him. Taking a defensive position would have been a wiser choice.

DON'T EVER GIVE ANYONE A GUN THAT DOESN'T KNOW HOW TO USE IT. This is the only thing you described that I would remotely call poor judgment.

Remember the golden rule. You are no obligation to turn a gunfight into a fair fight, especially in your own home.

You did what you did. All the good guys lived. If you're happy with the outcome no one can second guess you. I'd say it goes to prove my point that most will chose not to drop the hammer on a bad guy when given the opportunity. That's not a bad thing, and it's not a slam. It's reality.

We've already had the would-you-shoot-a-bad-guy thread for the month, so I won't go in to what I would have done, other than to say it's not what you did.

Final analysis. Not that you need my approval, but you did good.

Recommendation: If you didn't pull the trigger this time you probably won't next time. Get a can of bear spray.

 

[IndySSD]

I have first hand experience with real life criminal activity. Maybe thats why I don't live in Marion county anymore. Have you ever had a gun to your head? Do you really know how quickly these things can develope? Honestly, I don't care. I'm just letting you know I'm not as naive as you may think.

NOTE: The accidentals don't make the news. See, not everything that happens in the world can be found on that picture box in your living room. So, just because all you hear about are the criminal tresspass situations, that doesn't mean that's all that is happening out there.

Did you even read my posts in this thread? If you had you'd know the answer to every question you just asked.

Also, I don't watch TV for anything other than sports and outdoors type stuff other than a few prime time shows my wife likes. I don't get my information from newscasters, I get my information from first responders of various types and my own personal and family experiences.

Bigus, take off the blinders man, I'm not saying that there aren't "accidental entry" scenarios, I'm saying they are few and far between compared with criminal entries.