19 year old burglar shot at the back door in Utah, this should be interesting

[crsides]

SC

PROTECTION OF PERSONS AND PROPERTY ACT

The stated intent of the legislation is to codify the common law castle doctrine, which recognizes that a person's home is his castle, and to extend the doctrine to include an occupied vehicle and the person's place of business. This bill authorizes the lawful use of deadly force under certain circumstances against an intruder or attacker in a person's dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle. The bill provides that there is no duty to retreat if (1) the person is in a place where he has a right to be, including the person's place of business, (2) the person is not engaged in an unlawful activity, and (3) the use of deadly force is necessary to prevent death, great bodily injury, or the commission of a violent crime. A person who lawfully uses deadly force is immune from criminal prosecution and civil action, unless the person against whom deadly force was used is a law enforcement officer acting in the performance of his official duties and he identifies himself in accordance with applicable law or the person using deadly force knows or reasonably should have known the person is a law enforcement officer.

H.4301 (R412) was signed by the Governor on June 9, 2006.

The SC Attorney General directed Law Enforcement officials across the state that no one would be prosecuted for shooting someone trying to break into their home. No more dragging dead bodies inside.

and that's why I live here. And that's why I don't live in Ca.


Charlie

 

[redlevel]

I would think that seeing an armed homeowner standing inside would be enough to discourage a would be burglar from continuing with the break in. I don't think the shooting was justified, even if it was legal to do so. The homeowner probably has an expensive civil suit in their future...

What should the homeowner do, give the bad guy the first shot? "You would think," you said. Think about this; a really rational person isn't going to be breaking in a home. Why should you "think" that the person breaking in is going to act in a rational manner and leave when he sees an armed homeowner? If there is a civil suit, I hope there aren't many with your mindset on the jury. What "justification" would reach your standard? The miscreant actually gaining entrance and charging the homeowner in a drug-crazed rage?

I say again, I'm glad I live in rural South Georgia.

 

[bountyhunter]

Texas has a lot of common sense Deadly Force Statutes.

Except for where they allow the use of deadly force to defend property. I'm not killing anybody over stuff.

 

[BUFF]

As quoted above, Utah's criminal statutes governing the use of force are pretty clear, and were written in about as simple of terms as a legislature can write on such a complex issue. Unless issues we don't know about surface, I doubt very much that the homeowner will face any kind of criminial prosecution.

Utah's legal, political and cultural climate is such that a civil suit by the family of the burglar is unlikely to be successful. Because of that, and the fact that the homeowner is just a working man without a lot of assets to pay an unlikely judgement, it is also unlikely that a local attorney would take the case on without being paid for his time by the dead fellow's family. The dead fellow's family are just working folks, too, and don't probably have that money.

Trust me, the shooter isn't at all happy with the entire event. He wasn't acting to protect his property, he was acting to protect his wife and 2 little girls.

You, and I, may have made a different choice than did the homeowner. Or, maybe we wouldn't have. I hope that none of you here ever has to be in the same shoes the homeowner was wearing. They were not and are not comfortable shoes.

 

[cmort666]

I see nothing wrong with the candle light vigil for his soul. Maybe we're a bit too hardened. A young man is dead. Maybe someone does need to pray for his soul.

Those sorts of things are INVARIABLY used as emotional blackmail against the REAL victim.

Here a few years ago, a little degenerate named Arthur Buford decided that he and a friend would rob a guy on the guy's own front lawn. Artie got shot to death for his trouble.

Of course his mutant family and "posse" organized protests over the "injustice" of Artie being killed instead of killing someone else. They declared that he wasn't a "thug" because "thugs have given up on life" and he HADN'T "given up on life".

The community reaction was a collective, "If you don't want to get shot, don't try to rob people." This incensed Artie's little circle of hoodlums who then went on to vandalize the victim's home. Again, contrary to the "script", the Cleveland NAACP and off-duty Cleveland cops took turns watching the home around the clock.

Oh yeah, I forgot to mention that Artie was on probation for (wait for it)... armed robbery.

I can feel sorry for disabled veterans.
I can feel sorry for poor children.
I can feel sorry for people who lost money in stock scams.

I can't feel sorry for armed robbers or criminals who knowingly try to force their way into an occupied dwelling and get shot.

To quote the doctor from the old joke, "Then don't do that."

 

[Joebklyn]

He shoulda waited in hiding until the creep was in the house then used a shotgun.

 

[feralmerril]

I dont belive the shooter will be charged. He done just fine. Why get excited about it unless he does get charged?

 

[cowart]

The SC Attorney General directed Law Enforcement officials across the state that no one would be prosecuted for shooting someone trying to break into their home.

How does that help the subject of this discussion, who is in Utah?

 

[bountyhunter]

Those sorts of things are INVARIABLY used as emotional blackmail against the REAL victim.

Unfortunately, the media always focuses on these ceremonies and use it to villify the poor guy who shot the burglar and they show pictures of the dead guy's cute kids and all to get sympathy.... and, of course, the usual suspects use it as an excuse to demand that more restrictive gun control laws be passed.

Nothing like a bunch of people standing around holding candles with tears streaming down their faces to crank up the ratings.

 

[crsides]

How does that help the subject of this discussion, who is in Utah?

Well, we had already heard how it was done in ME, TX, GA, south rural GA, CA, NV, LA, north LA, OH, CN, AZ, TN, NJ, MA and the whole US air space. I didn't want to come in behind NM.

 

[cmort666]

Unfortunately, the media always focuses on these ceremonies and use it to villify the poor guy who shot the burglar and they show pictures of the dead guy's cute kids whom he's never supported a day in his life

There, fixed that for you...

 

[Black_Sheep]

What should the homeowner do, give the bad guy the first shot? "You would think," you said. Think about this; a really rational person isn't going to be breaking in a home. Why should you "think" that the person breaking in is going to act in a rational manner and leave when he sees an armed homeowner? If there is a civil suit, I hope there aren't many with your mindset on the jury. What "justification" would reach your standard? The miscreant actually gaining entrance and charging the homeowner in a drug-crazed rage?

I say again, I'm glad I live in rural South Georgia.

Fair enough, my response was based on what my own reaction would be if I was breaking into a home and came face to face with a homeowner wielding a firearm. Of course that perspective would be flawed because I'm not a "drug-crazed" miscreant. My mistake. The comment that the shooting wasn't justified is strictly opinion, but deep down I also have to wonder if he "really needed to shoot a man that had yet to actually enter his home". I hope none of us ever have to make that decision...

 

[Alk8944]

Alk, does the second statute supersede the first or are they considered equally in cases such as this? And I had the same thought about the change of DA that is going to take place in the upcoming months and how that could affect this case. Although, I could see this being a priority for the current DA as she was drug through the mud in the recent election and may want to leave the office trying to save some respect that her democratic opponent recently questioned.

If you are asking is does 76-2-405 (2) supersede 76-2-405 (1) then the answer is no. The only reason that I bolded (2) was to emphasize the presumption of justified use of deadly force if the conditions defined in (1), and repeated in (2) are met.

This all goes back to what is commonly referred to as the "Reasonable Man" test. This being basically "If a reasonable man, presented with a certain set of circumstances would react in a specific manner, then if the individual in question acted in the same fashion his actions would be considered as normal or reasonable under the same set of circumstances. In this case we have a case of a person, burglar, attempting to enter a "habitation" in the middle by force and in a "tumultuous manner". It would seem, from the information aired by the media, that the immediate circumstance which preceded and precipitated the shooting of said burglar fits the conditions spelled out in the statute virtually to the letter. And by the "reasonable man" test can there be any doubt that said "reasonable man" would have reached the same understanding, that the burglar was attempting to forcibly enter the house, he was armed, that he did so with evil intent and the home owner properly understood that his and his families lives were in danger if the person was able to gain entry to the house?

And to clarify, 76-2-405 is one statute in total. The sub-sections complement and support each other.

So far as Mrs. Miller and Mr. Gill are concerned there probably won't be any difference in how either handles the case. Regardless of the philosophy of either concerning firearms and use of deadly force is concerned it is unlikely either would pursue charges against the home owner in this situation as it would ultimately be a massive waste of time and resources to do so when the applicable statute so clearly applies and there is little doubt there would be an acquittal at trial, probably a directed verdict!

Personally I have always seen it as odd why such offices as County/District Attorney, Surveyor, Appraiser, Treasurer, Sheriff and many others are partisan offices. What possible reason can there be to presume that any individual would be better suited to any of these offices, or perform in any particular way beneficial to the public at large based on party affiliation of the office holder??? Professional qualification for the position should be the only basis for a campaign. Even the word campaign, " a connected series of military operations forming a distinct phase of a war" seems odd as it has come to be applied to an election. Who is "at war" against whom? Generally when one party "wins" the citizens of the nation lose.

I'll get off my soap box now.

 

[reerc]

Thank heavens the homeowner was ready, willing, and able to defend his family. I pray that I'm never in his shoes.

 

[Senior Citizen]

So here in Salt Lake a 19 year old male was trying to break into someones house through the back sliding glass door. The homeowner saw the man and shot him through the glass door. Maybe a warning shot would have been nice. Heck, maybe it was a warning shot and the guy has terrible aim (that would be my defense).

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

I haven't seen any one raise this question yet, so I will. If the home owner is INSIDE the house, just exactly where is he supposed to shoot the warning shot? The 60" TV by the back door? Through the ceiling, whick might also the be floor to the upstairs bedroom? Through the floor.............. Warning shot(s) from inside a house are expensive. Especially from a shotgun.

SC

 

[bitstream]

The people who argue that this was just a 19 year old and that the homeowner should have done something else like issue a warning or confront the criminal, etc: In today's news is an 18 year old in Oklahoma (4-Year-Old Dakota Lane Killed in Home Invasion Was Stabbed 36 Times) who stabbed a 4 year old 36 times for no apparent reason whatsoever.

We don't live in an age of enlightenment where we can be civilized and generous in our use of force to protect our households. We can't wait to see if that young teen is just out on some silly stunt or if he is an armed, drug crazed killer. You can't tell the difference by looking at him fumbling with trying to open your door/window. Bottom line, until the thugs start identifying themselves clearly as unarmed/harmless versus armed/dangerous so we know who to shoot and who to just challenge, I recommend you shoot first to stop them (state laws allowing) and then figure out who they are and why they willfully entered your property and started to try and break into your house. Remember, THEY started it by WILLFULLY entering your property.

 

[BarbC]

Every occupation has its risks.

 

[cmort666]

Every occupation has its risks.

And gun control is an attempt to mitigate those risks... solely for the practitioner of this particular "occupation".

 

[neiljrosen]

Guy that shot the burglar is probably regretting it big time. His life would be a lot easier today if he just scared the criminal off. Unintended consequences can be a nightmare. Unfortunately the way things work in the real world.

 

[scooter123]

Personally, I wouldn't have shot someone trying to break into my home, I would have waited until they actually broke in. At that point they would find themselves looking down the barrel of my gun. If they look closely they might even be able to see that it's loaded with either a Speer Gold Dot or Winchester Ranger T depending on whether I select my P239 or S7W 610. Because it's going to be aimed right between their eyes and my finger will be on the trigger.

They will then have just 3 choices.

Run like they have a pack of rabid wolves after them, which I'll allow them to do without firing a shot. I'll then call 911 and report the break-in and make any temporary repairs that might be needed. Then I'll do some shopping for a good steel framed security level insulated door a lot more resistant to break-ins.

Strip down to their underwear AFTER lifting their shirt and doing a full turn. Then they can call 911 on the wall phone right next to the back door and report that they are a Home Invader and would like to be arrested. Then they can wait proned out until the cops arrive. Still no shots fired and no real damage beyond a door that I intend to replace sometime.

Or they can show resistance or aggression, in which case I'll pull the trigger. BTW, it's a small house with a maximum sight line of only 15 feet to the doors, a distance at which I can rountinely hit a silver dollar in double action. Note, I've been the victim of 3 armed robberies (back in the 70's) and many very close calls in my cars, for me the shakes don't hit until AFTER it's all over. During these incidents I've always been a bit like Spok with a total Vulcan calmness, I'm quite certain I won't miss. Then I'll call 911 and start the process of getting in touch with my Lawyer.

Now, I live just 1 mile north of the Detroit border and we do get some "bleedover" from that city. Fortunately, it's a community with a superb police force so I do feel moderately safe. However, I'm also a realist and have a Sig Sauer P239 on my hip as I type this and I practice with it frequently.

I also won't feel at all guilty about shooting someone who intended to do harm to me. At most, I'll be pissed at having to pay for legal assistance to insure that my rights are well protected. I'll give a criminal every chance to run or face the charges without harm and IMO that is my ONLY moral obligation. Try and do me harm, and that animal will find that this old fart enjoys target shooting quite a bit and rarely misses.