HD shooting for "taking as shower?" Shooter Arested

[Gatorade]

Well first I wouldn't have gone to check on the other house without my gun in the first place. If I had seen that someone was in one of my properties and I was going to confront them I would want to get my gun if I had left it at my home. On the way to getting it I would have called the cops, then, depending on how long I perceived the response time would be and if too long I may try to confront. I think that is justified up to that point. Now putting 4 shots through the shower curtain without verifying the person on the other side is a threat is where this guy went wrong. All that being said there is some definite spin going on in that article. Sounds like the "compassionate educator" employed by the local elementary school has some screws loose, possibly a perv who gets off breaking into people homes and using their showers and who knows what else. Maybe he didn't deserve to die but at least he isn't around kids anymore.

[sdmc530]

Originally Posted by Gatorade

On the way to getting it I would have called the cops, then, depending on how long I perceived the response time would be and if too long I may try to confront. I think that is justified up to that point.

Now don't take this as starting anything because I RESPECT everyone's opinion here but I think you are still in the wrong here. After you call the cops and there is no initial threat I don't think you have any basis to to go back and confront the guy. I think you stand back and watch. Now all this assuming no family is in the house and you have no current actual threat to your own life. I think going back to confront is a really bad idea that just opens yourself up to issues legally and to your health.

In this case he was in the shower and maybe drunk so unless he starts after you I am not sure how dangerous he is AND neither do you going back in. I would have called on duty LEO and watched and observed from a safe but reasonable distance to protect my home. Going back in is the issue here, you are out, your family is out and the guy is in your bathroom. Nothing good can come from re-entering the house without the police.

Lawyers will eat this up I am sure.

I am going to ask one of our prosecuting attorneys and see what he says. We have the same type law here to protect your "castle".

[pony up]

Originally Posted by sdmc530

Now don't take this as starting anything because I RESPECT everyone's opinion here but I think you are still in the wrong here. After you call the cops and there is no initial threat I don't think you have any basis to to go back and confront the guy. I think you stand back and watch. Now all this assuming no family is in the house and you have no current actual threat to your own life. I think going back to confront is a really bad idea that just opens yourself up to issues legally and to your health.

In this case he was in the shower and maybe drunk so unless he starts after you I am not sure how dangerous he is AND neither do you going back in. I would have called on duty LEO and watched and observed from a safe but reasonable distance to protect my home. Going back in is the issue here, you are out, your family is out and the guy is in your bathroom. Nothing good can come from re-entering the house without the police.

Lawyers will eat this up I am sure.

I am going to ask one of our prosecuting attorneys and see what he says. We have the same type law here to protect your "castle".

This dumb bastage has earned through stupidity a long unhappy time. He might have been better off if he had shot himself instead. The drunk a hole behind the shower curtain may have even thought he was in his own home? As I recall from my shower education featuring Janet Leigh in the movie Psycho, never take a shower. Perhaps this nit whit shooter might be related to Perkins? Oooppppsss Ton y Perkins. Sorry .

[sdmc530]

Agree....media gets it all messed up, we don't even know all the details yet but here we are playing judge.

[Xbonz]

Originally Posted by sdmc530

Now don't take this as starting anything because I RESPECT everyone's opinion here but I think you are still in the wrong here. After you call the cops and there is no initial threat I don't think you have any basis to to go back and confront the guy. I think you stand back and watch. Now all this assuming no family is in the house and you have no current actual threat to your own life. I think going back to confront is a really bad idea that just opens yourself up to issues legally and to your health.

In this case he was in the shower and maybe drunk so unless he starts after you I am not sure how dangerous he is AND neither do you going back in. I would have called on duty LEO and watched and observed from a safe but reasonable distance to protect my home. Going back in is the issue here, you are out, your family is out and the guy is in your bathroom. Nothing good can come from re-entering the house without the police.

Lawyers will eat this up I am sure.

I am going to ask one of our prosecuting attorneys and see what he says. We have the same type law here to protect your "castle".

Based on details provided I am in agreement with you.. Left the house so no threat exists.. Call popo and wait..
Now we wait until further details emerge

[skosh69]

That's about as ignorant as chasing someone OUT of your house and then shooting them in the back in the front yard.

Further proof that some people shouldn't own firearms.

[Gatorade]

As I said the shooter made a number of poor decisions and deserves what he will get.

So just to continue discussion, at what point do I no longer have a right to defend my property? The article said the second house was where he ran a business. Where does the law say I need to sit and watch someone break into my business and possibly destroy my livelihood? Yes I know in this case the burgler was just taking a shower but what if it were someone trying to steal or otherwise put my livelihood at risk? Say I own a jewelery store and I see a thief robbing my store? Do I have a right to try and detain them from fleeing before the police arrive? That was the angle I was getting at. If I see someone illegally on any of my property I can't gaurentee I will sit on my hands a wait for someone else to come and tell me they got away and my business is in shambles.

[FfNJGTFO]

Originally Posted by Gatorade

As I said the shooter made a number of poor decisions and deserves what he will get.

So just to continue discussion, at what point do I no longer have a right to defend my property? The article said the second house was where he ran a business. Where does the law say I need to sit and watch someone break into my business and possibly destroy my livelihood? Yes I know in this case the burgler was just taking a shower but what if it were someone trying to steal or otherwise put my livelihood at risk? Say I own a jewelery store and I see a thief robbing my store? Do I have a right to try and detain them from fleeing before the police arrive? That was the angle I was getting at. If I see someone illegally on any of my property I can't gaurentee I will sit on my hands a wait for someone else to come and tell me they got away and my business is in shambles.

I hear ya. I think of all the store owners in places that suffered rioting and looting, etc. in recent times. I think of the grocery store owners that sat on roofs armed with long rifles and waited.

It's times and circumstances like that, that I wish we had deadly force/threat of deadly force as a defense against property crimes... similar to Texas.

That said, I think this gentleman is going to be in world of hurt. If it were NJ, there'd be no question that he'd face all kinds of charges (manslaughter at minimum) as NJ has a duty to retreat, even inside your house/property.

[TLE2]

If you are in fear of a wet, naked man in your shower, shoot. But I think you'll have a hard time proving it was a reasoned response, regardless of the Castle doctrine.

[sdmc530]

Originally Posted by Gatorade

As I said the shooter made a number of poor decisions and deserves what he will get.

So just to continue discussion, at what point do I no longer have a right to defend my property? The article said the second house was where he ran a business. Where does the law say I need to sit and watch someone break into my business and possibly destroy my livelihood? Yes I know in this case the burgler was just taking a shower but what if it were someone trying to steal or otherwise put my livelihood at risk? Say I own a jewelery store and I see a thief robbing my store? Do I have a right to try and detain them from fleeing before the police arrive? That was the angle I was getting at. If I see someone illegally on any of my property I can't gaurentee I will sit on my hands a wait for someone else to come and tell me they got away and my business is in shambles.

See this is where I too get a bit antsy.

I remember one case in where a local truck repair shop was being robbed. The owner who was in the back room doing book work. The robber was not aware the owner was in the building. The owner who carried like everyone else in SD. Anyways the owner seeing it all unfold on camera goes out to the store front and tells the guy to get out! the guy drops everything and runs out. The owner then shoots the guy in the "rear" as he is fleeing from the store.

The owner was charged with assault. Because the perceived threat was leaving and even though he was destroying the store and trying to steal but because he was running away he should not have shot him. Even if he had items he would not have been justified in shooting the bad guy because there was no threat to live or the property. They ruled that a few items wasn't enough but say if he were trying to burn the building down then it would have been justified.

I think its a fine line and you will have to answer for.


Now if I owned a business in my home and a guy was in there stealing jewels but nobody was in danger in the home and I was outside the home. I would call the police and watch very closely. If he is just in making a mess I can live with that. BUT if he were to try to destroy the home by fire or whatnot I would get involved I think. If the bad guy tried to leave I would then also step in so he would not get away. But that is me, I know that suspects are not always caught.

AND we all know how difficult insurance companies can be with events such as theft and what not. Its a hard call yes. I hope none of us here have to make that call ever.