Frustration.............

[Bob Wright]

The local news (WMC TV, Channel 5, Memphis) reported last night that two burglars had been shot and killed by the home owner. Reports later were that the "shooter was detained" and the District Attorney stated "No charges will be filed at this time."

This is unsettling to me. The law, designed to protect the law abiding, seems to incriminate, or at least hint at incriminating, the victim rather than the miscreants. The law should have said "Thank you for getting these off the streets", or, "Good job." Instead a person protecting his home, maybe loved ones, is placed on the spot, however briefly.

From my viewpoint, we are fighting a war against crime, and losing.

Bob Wright

 

[Kevin]

Bob:
I wanted to add to Vito’s thread about not needing a gun. I was just speaking with a colleague about using a gun in the home for self defense. His reasons for not having a gun are: is anything in his house worth killing another human being?

I understand your point of view, if it was legal to use a gun, then there should be no charges filed. But I guess I’m asking how you feel. I don’t know what the answer is. The home owner cannot reason with the bad guy and say, “I’m not going to kill you over a tv” ..

My question: “what can be done?” I guess I’m really asking about the value of human life. What’s wrong with society these days?

Don’t get me wrong, I would not let anything stop me from protecting my family. It I also am not out looking to kill someone.

What do you think?

 

[gramps]

There are lines. You cross the line, I shoot you. Therefore you don’t value your own life enough to follow the rules.
gramps

 

[Dan in MI]

Bob:
I wanted to add to Vito’s thread about not needing a gun. I was just speaking with a colleague about using a gun in the home for self defense. His reasons for not having a gun are: is anything in his house worth killing another human being?

MY FAMILY. End of conversation.




Now to the OP. We are heading towards the wonderful ways of the U.K. You hurt an intruder and YOU go to jail. Shoot him and it only gets worse.

 

[CGDustDevil]

The local news (WMC TV, Channel 5, Memphis) reported last night that two burglars had been shot and killed by the home owner. Reports later were that the "shooter was detained" and the District Attorney stated "No charges will be filed at this time."

This is unsettling to me. The law, designed to protect the law abiding, seems to incriminate, or at least hint at incriminating, the victim rather than the miscreants. The law should have said "Thank you for getting these off the streets", or, "Good job." Instead a person protecting his home, maybe loved ones, is placed on the spot, however briefly.

From my viewpoint, we are fighting a war against crime, and losing.

Bob Wright

Bob - I have to say that I would find it unsettling if some process of investigation did NOT take place. One of the burdens due process (aka justice) is to determine through investigation precisely what happened when there is a conflict. Any time anyone harms another person, there's going to be an investigation which will most always require some period of detention.

In some cases the circumstances are going to be pretty obvious. In other cases, maybe not so much. In either case, some 'authority' is going to have to make a determination as to what took place, and the results of that investigation will need to be measured against the standard of law.

I don't see this as an extraordinary burden on the citizen, all things being equal. (Meaning, everyone does their job properly, thoroughly and honestly) And in reality - Determining what happened in a conflict is a functional and fundamental component of the justice process. Failure to complete that determination wrongs the people who were hurt or killed. (They too, are entitled to due process!)

Regards, Pete

 

[blume357]

I see it a little different... someone dies and you are involved, even as a witness, you are going to be detained.

One of my best friends killed a man who had broken into his house...he and his family and even the guy who they did not know but had just dropped by to pick up a cake for a church yard sale the next day were detained for a couple of hours....

Now how the media relates these events may be the problem... but even if you are justified you are going to have some explaining... that is a fact.

 

[mike7mm08]

.....is anything in the house worth killing another human being? Your answer is not the one that matters. It is how the intruder answers that question that matters. I am not going to wait and see what that answer is.

 

[Bear Paw Jack]

The local news (WMC TV, Channel 5, Memphis) reported last night that two burglars had been shot and killed by the home owner. Reports later were that the "shooter was detained" and the District Attorney stated "No charges will be filed at this time." Bob Wright

A large part of the problem is the Lame stream media "reporting" stuff from their bias perspective. They don't refer to the criminals as criminals they are "victims". We very seldom if ever get the straight scoop. We think in terms of their job being to give us the truth. They see their job as getting you to watch TV so their revenues go up. They don't give two hoots about the trauma the poor home owner has just been through. It's about scooping the other channels.

 

[RSIno1]

Based on what happened to a neighbor. They will talk to him for about 6 hours (or until the DA wakes up and reviews it). They will ask for and take all his guns. Friends of the "victim" will show up and yell and scream at him they will clutter his yard with flowers. The cops will drive by but not interact with the idiots. After about 3 months the DA will clear the shooting as justified. He'll have to hire an attorney for $5,000 to get his guns back or just decide to buy new ones because it's cheaper. He will be sued by the "Victims" parents even though the father hasn't seen him in 12 years and the mother threw him and his also homeless girlfriend out of her house 8 months prior for drug use. His insurance will settle with the family for the maximum ($500,000) on his homeowners and cancel him because that is cheaper than fighting the case. When the "victims" brother gets out of prison for setting fire to a school he will come by and threaten him. The only satisfaction he'll get is when that low life gets his probation violated and sent back to finish the last 10 years of his sentence.

 

[#1rugerman]

My perspective-my house is my castle, you invade my castle I will shoot you.

 

[wunbe]

There is a difference between detained and being under arrest. Detainment allows the preliminary determination if a crime has been committed. Arrest follows the determination that a crime has been committed. There are limits to the duration of detainment in most states.

wunbe

 

[Mobuck]

Common sense is no longer acceptable.

 

[DGW1949]

There is a difference between detained and being under arrest. Detainment allows the preliminary determination if a crime has been committed. Arrest follows the determination that a crime has been committed. There are limits to the duration of detainment in most states.

wunbe

You can be held "for investigation" for up to 72 hours in Texas. After that, you're to either be charged with a crime, or released. Either way though, make no mistake...the moment you are being held against your will, you have been arrested.

DGW

 

[Jeepnik]

I'm sort of a line in the sand type of guy. If, and that's a really big if, you manage to get inside I'll have plenty of advance notice. It's just the wife and I now so we'd just move to the rear of the house (if not already there). The windows are high and unless the intruder brings their own extension ladder they aren't coming in that way.

Access to the rear of the house is only by means of a hallway. It's exactly 23.5 feet from the furthest entrance to the hallway to our bedroom, straight shot, literally. Enter the hall, I have control of all of the lights inside and out from our bedroom, and you'll be lit up literally and figuratively.

I do not ever want to go there, again. But... What I do know is that regardless of how "right" a shooting is, I will be detained and questioned. Every firearm in the house will be confiscated until the investigation is complete. Oh by the way, if you think being in a safe and not giving them access will stop them think again, they'll get it open regardless of what you say. This is just the way things are here, sure as heck not the way we want them.

Preparation is really the key. Plan is, having already called 911 (believe it or not the local Sheriff deputies respond pretty quickly here), I'll call the attorney I have arranged to handle such things (actually it is a law firm with specialists in everything from estate law to criminal defense). Again, you might get a reasonable deputy that makes that call "less" necessary. But, you could get the complete opposite.

 

[sheepdawg]

Bob that happened about a mile and a half from my castle. There is some talk that perhaps that house had drugs being sold from it. I don't fault the police for making sure they knew all the answers. Never the less the dead had rap sheets pages long. One was only 17. When are the judges going to start getting tough with repeat offenders?

AS Baretta said, don't do the crime if you can't do the time, in this case the time is eternity.

 

[6GUNSONLY]

The basic problem is revealed in the fact the news refers to the dead criminals as "victims" and the person defending his house as "the shooter." I don't know the particulars of the case, but the terminology is typical of mainstream media these days