Latest Breaking News

X_Digger

(18,585 posts)

39. Should the homeowner have to ascertain that before defending himself?

Reply to Ash_F (Reply #8)

Wed Apr 9, 2014, 05:19 PM

Apr 2014

If the intruder isn't armed, should that limit the response the homeowner can take?

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

80 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Teen shot dead and another injured after suspected home invasion in Detroit [View all] SpartanDem Apr 2014 OP

Unless there's something else we don't know brentspeak Apr 2014 #1

Yes. 840high Apr 2014 #2

If he shot at them after they exited the house exboyfil Apr 2014 #3

"Might be", did the home owner have a reasonable expectation they were going outside to get weapons marble falls Apr 2014 #7

Will be exboyfil Apr 2014 #20

Ever been to Detroit? The cops have neighborhoods they've announced they will not patrol..... marble falls Apr 2014 #37

The Detroit Police Chief encourages homeowners to protect themselves BeatleBoot Apr 2014 #4

Because their police department is so christx30 Apr 2014 #14

Breaking into someones house to steal warrant46 Apr 2014 #56

And one can avoid death christx30 Apr 2014 #60

Although to be fair--- warrant46 Apr 2014 #61

Drunk guy, late at night in Detroit christx30 Apr 2014 #62

Where I live Northern Wisconsin A/K/A Wistucky warrant46 Apr 2014 #63

were they armed? the robbers i mean leftyohiolib Apr 2014 #5

Does it matter? IronGate Apr 2014 #6

Yes Ash_F Apr 2014 #8

I think if I had been the homeowner, YarnAddict Apr 2014 #10

OK, but you would still be subject to the laws of the state you live in, afterward. Ash_F Apr 2014 #12

No. IronGate Apr 2014 #11

Wrong. /nt Ash_F Apr 2014 #13

Then show us the law that says it matters if an intruder is armed or not. IronGate Apr 2014 #15

You should not use wikipedia as a source. Ash_F Apr 2014 #16

And you should understand that any unlawful intrusion into a home IronGate Apr 2014 #17

And you should understand how a subclause works Ash_F Apr 2014 #18

Which is exactly why he was fully justified in using deadly force. IronGate Apr 2014 #19

It is relevant to whether he would have reasonable belief of bodily harm at the time Ash_F Apr 2014 #21

Excellent answer. IronGate Apr 2014 #22

If somebody kicks down your door, I think its safe to assume you're in danger of being harmed. 7962 Apr 2014 #24

Maybe. I can think of one case as precedence that agrees with you. Ash_F Apr 2014 #35

You really should have quoted the next bit.. X_Digger Apr 2014 #40

Oh my dog, read post #18 /nt Ash_F Apr 2014 #41

I did.. you seemed to miss the point. X_Digger Apr 2014 #43

It is not convoluted legalese. It is plain English . Ash_F Apr 2014 #44

Do you dispute my simpler sentence? X_Digger Apr 2014 #46

sigh Ash_F Apr 2014 #48

I know what a rebuttable presumption is, thanks. X_Digger Apr 2014 #51

"it's up to the police to rebut that presumption" Ash_F Apr 2014 #57

It's reasonable that two 19 yr olds could beat a 47-yr old to death NickB79 Apr 2014 #72

15 year olds. /nt Ash_F Apr 2014 #73

The OP says 19 yr olds NickB79 Apr 2014 #74

See post 69 /nt Ash_F Apr 2014 #75

Should the homeowner have to ascertain that before defending himself? X_Digger Apr 2014 #39

It depends. Ash_F Apr 2014 #42

No it really doesn't. X_Digger Apr 2014 #45

No, but it also doesn't mean you can shoot them no matter what and get away with it. Ash_F Apr 2014 #47

Where's this 'on my property' business?!? This is about someone breaking and entering your home. n/t X_Digger Apr 2014 #49

While you are getting sidetracked... Ash_F Apr 2014 #50

Err.. Home Invasion includes B&E in MI.. X_Digger Apr 2014 #55

All break-ins are home invasions; but not all home invasions are break-ins Ash_F Apr 2014 #58

HI 1st degree requires an occupant. 2nd, 3rd do not. X_Digger Apr 2014 #66

Not all state's castle dotrine the same someone else Apr 2014 #53

Even in Texas, you have to show you had no other reasonable way to get your TV back Ash_F Apr 2014 #59

The homeowner is 100 percent right in this case. yeoman6987 Apr 2014 #77

Well it is a good thing you aren't. Ash_F Apr 2014 #79

"Does it matter?" meanit Apr 2014 #23

I could care less about guns, IronGate Apr 2014 #25

did it matter whether trayvon martin was armed or not ? leftyohiolib Apr 2014 #27

What does Trayvon Martin have to do with this thread? IronGate Apr 2014 #29

The homeowner meanit Apr 2014 #65

did it matter whether trayvon martin was armed or not ? leftyohiolib Apr 2014 #26

Trayvon Martin didn't home invade anyone or do anything illegal. IronGate Apr 2014 #28

being armed or not does matter in that situation and this one leftyohiolib Apr 2014 #33

When someone breaks into your home while you're there, IronGate Apr 2014 #36

I am far from a gun nut... awoke_in_2003 Apr 2014 #64

That's my old neighborhood Dyedinthewoolliberal Apr 2014 #9

Yes it is. yeoman6987 Apr 2014 #78

Sounds like a legit use of force rollin74 Apr 2014 #30

Ahhh, but Trayvon Martin. IronGate Apr 2014 #31

Then why is the shooter in custody? philosslayer Apr 2014 #32

They broke into an occupied home, IronGate Apr 2014 #34

Probably to establish the facts surrounding the shooting NutmegYankee Apr 2014 #68

The biggest criminals are the ones running Detroit. nt valerief Apr 2014 #38

No, the ones who are, and have run, Michigan philosslayer Apr 2014 #52

Uh, the state of Michigan runs Detroit. nt valerief Apr 2014 #71

We're they shot in the back while fleeing! upaloopa Apr 2014 #54

Someone who decides to invade my home, SevenSixtyTwo Apr 2014 #67

Update: Suspected intruder killed by homeowner was 15 years old SpartanDem Apr 2014 #69

I suppose the owner considered his life of some value. ileus Apr 2014 #70

and 15 year olds can kill Niceguy1 Apr 2014 #76

Hopefully a lesson is learned here yeoman6987 Apr 2014 #80