What would you do if?

[AndersonIN]

You guys want to try again for a correct answer? Look at this one!

Trooper's Shooting Of Burglary Suspect Spotlights Self-Defense Law - Indiana News Story - WRTV Indianapolis

Police said Trooper Joel D. Wilson, 39, was alone inside his east-side Indianapolis home Monday when he fired two shots through the front door, striking Theodore E. Hixenbaugh at least once. Wilson told authorities that Hixenbaugh had first knocked on the door and, when Wilson didn't answer, Hixenbaugh tried to kick the door down.

Information on whether Hixenbaugh was armed wasn't available. Indiana University law professor Henry Karlson said state law says citizens can use deadly force to stop even an unarmed person's unlawful entry into their dwellings.

"If there are people in the residence, (burglars) are putting them at risk, and that's why Indiana law allows a reasonable person to use deadly force to prevent that," Karlson said.


Karlson said the law allows people to defend themselves from burglars without first exposing themselves.

 

[Joe Williams]

snip
Karlson said the law allows people to defend themselves from burglars without first exposing themselves.

<snicker>

 

[AndersonIN]

<snicker>

Stop that!

 

[Glock21]

glock 21- i wasnt saying kill the man lol just knock some sense into him and make him realize i could have shot him over the $89 dvd player but i spared his life

And hitting someone in the head with a rock can't kill them?

...ok - fine. Lets just say he gets brain damage, or you hit low and damage his spinal chord? Now what? You ready to pay the 10's of thousands it will cost you in civil court? Are you prepared to be criminally charged for causing such damage and accept all the time and expense of a trial?

Lets just say you hit him in the back of the head and it causes a little bleeding. If he is arrested there will be a question as to where that wound came from and how it ended up on the back of his head, and you will explain that you were just "trying to knock a little sense in him", and maybe the police investigator goes along with that, and maybe he doesn't. Maybe the perp knows his rights and signs a complaint on you for it, and maybe it costs you thousands to fight.

Folks, this is all about DEFENSE.

Hitting someone in the back of the head with a rock, while they are running away with a DVD player, and are in no way a threat, is NOT an act of defense - and the law in all 50-states will agree. Badguy runs away with your 2-year-old child and you hit him in the back of the head with a rock, you are no doubt on the right side of the law. DVD player - not even close.

Now, if you're just joking about it - fine. I'll chuckle right along with you. But if anyone here thinks they can approach defense as a means to administer punishment, you are going to be in jail before the smoke clears.

 

[.452browning]

no need for me to give chase....my 2 german sheperds can give chase

 

[peloe16]

glock21- i was just messin but i totally agree with you. it is about self defense, and you cannot go on the offensive, unless obviously as you stated a child or someone else may be in harm's way.

 

[Muddy_Ford]

12ga rubber rocket.

 

[trav8605]

A friend of mine said that you could engage through the door if they are trying to enter forcefully. They cant be knocking hard lol! Have to be trying take the door down.

 

[38special]

Stuff is a lot easier to replace than Life and Liberty.

Ditto. No way I'm shooting someone over a laptop.

 

[trnsplntfrmohio]

No Kung Pao chicken for Joe.

 

[KAS]

The more this topic is discussed it seems apparent that if your life is not literally being threatened by a lethal weapon within a reasonable distance and you choose to shoot, the likelihood of "deep doo doo" is better than probable.

 

[bigiron]

The more this topic is discussed it seems apparent that if your life is not literally being threatened by a lethal weapon within a reasonable distance and you choose to shoot, the likelihood of "deep doo doo" is better than probable.

yep, thats right.

 

[bigiron]

i would encourage them to come and steal more things. as my wife was calling 911 i would be calling my insurance guy and letting him know my new 60" flat screen and all that new surround sound stuff had just been nabbed. time to revamp the home theatre!

 

[42769vette]

they better be able to out run me and my dogs (litterally dogs not a rap saying) how am i kidding my dogs wouldn't do anything if they did catch the guy.

 

[Rey B]

Wow another round of hypothetical questioning. Can I play? What if grasshoppers had shotguns? Would the birds still try to eat them?

 

[TripleL]

Personally, I would try to take a shot...with my camera (if the BG didn't take that one, too).

 

[gunsisgood]

12ga rubber rocket.

yep, or a bean bag.
Serious additude adjustment.

 

[finity]

Good point. Since I am firing to protect my property, and I can't catch them, I would need to follow them until they set my laptop down and then shoot them. That way they wouldn't drop it!

But seriously, this is a good point, how do you justify shooting someone to protect your property when the act of shooting them will likely damage the property? Does it change the scenario if they steal your bowling ball?

Well, since you're not allowed to use deadly force to protect your property in the first place, you wouldn't be able to justify shooting them in either case. So to answer your question, no, it doesn't change anything no matter what they steal.

You guys want to try again for a correct answer? Look at this one!

Trooper's Shooting Of Burglary Suspect Spotlights Self-Defense Law - Indiana News Story - WRTV Indianapolis

Police said Trooper Joel D. Wilson, 39, was alone inside his east-side Indianapolis home Monday when he fired two shots through the front door, striking Theodore E. Hixenbaugh at least once. Wilson told authorities that Hixenbaugh had first knocked on the door and, when Wilson didn't answer, Hixenbaugh tried to kick the door down.

Information on whether Hixenbaugh was armed wasn't available. Indiana University law professor Henry Karlson said state law says citizens can use deadly force to stop even an unarmed person's unlawful entry into their dwellings.

"If there are people in the residence, (burglars) are putting them at risk, and that's why Indiana law allows a reasonable person to use deadly force to prevent that," Karlson said.


Karlson said the law allows people to defend themselves from burglars without first exposing themselves.

What some people are saying IS the correct answer. You can't shoot someone who is running out your door even if they have your stuff in their hands.

The scenario above is that the home invader was on the way IN not OUT. There is a HUGE difference. IN law says you can use deadly force to prevent or terminate an attack as long as that deadly force is reasonable. If the guy is running away & is no longer in your home then the attack is ALREADY terminated. The presumption is that if someone is forcibly/illegally entering your occupied house they are there to injure you so deadly force is justified to protect yourself. If the guy is running away you are no longer threatened & therefore deadly force is not justified.

...BUT...

Reasonable force is. You can still chase them to get your stuff back. You can use reasonable force (but not deadly force) to protect your belongings. If, during the course of your using legal reasonable force to protect your property, the person escalates the threat to you to the point that deadly force was necessary then so be it. It's legal at that point to protect yourself. But remember it has to be REASONABLE. IOW, you have to be able to make a jury think it was fairly necessary in the eventuality of a trial.

Folks, this is all about DEFENSE.

The more this topic is discussed it seems apparent that if your life is not literally being threatened by a lethal weapon within a reasonable distance and you choose to shoot, the likelihood of "deep doo doo" is better than probable.

Um...yep...and that's the way it should be. Is there a question here?

Wow another round of hypothetical questioning. Can I play? What if grasshoppers had shotguns? Would the birds still try to eat them?

So what's wrong with hypotheticals? Thinking about & discussing REASONABLE (which this is) hypothetical situations is probably one of the best ways short of actual experience to work through scenarios in your head to come up with a response plan. Obviously there are a lot of people out there/here who don't know what the laws are but think they do. That's dangerous.

If instead of participate, you just want to ridicule those who want to try to possibly learn something, just ignore these types of threads. It's fairly easy. Just don't hit the little "clicky" thing.

 

[jeremy]

The more this topic is discussed it seems apparent that if your life is not literally being threatened by a lethal weapon within a reasonable distance and you choose to shoot, the likelihood of "deep doo doo" is better than probable.

So what do you consider a "lethal weapon"?!

 

[Gpfury86]

Hey trav, if there running my way just give me a call and I'll set up a "booby" trap and retreive the objects from the intruder and let him go on bail.