Shooting Home Robber in the Back

Status
Not open for further replies.
When the threat ceases to exist, legitimate claims to self defense also cease to exist- as a general rule. I too am no lawyer, and never played on on TV. This sort of question is best answered in consultation with a good criminal defense attorney, in the questioner's specific jurisdiction. It is almost always a question of case law and precedent as much as 'black letter' or law book, statute law. All the 'net advice in the world is no substitute for knowing what you can and cannot legally do in your jurisdiction.

From professional trainer John Farnam: "Winning a gunfight, or any other potentially injurious encounter, is financially and emotionally burdensome. The aftermath will become your full-time job for weeks or months afterward, and you will quickly grow weary of writing checks to lawyer(s). It is, of course, better than being dead or suffering a permanently disfiguring or disabling injury, but the "penalty" for successfully fighting for your life is still formidable." -- http://www.defense-training.com/quips/2003/19Mar03.html

hth,

lpl
 
if he is on his way out he is not an immediate threat to your life... Castle doctrines are not free reign to kill whomever you like because they are in your home. If one is breaking in regardless of your warnings, you can shoot, if they have a weapon, you can shoot, if they are approaching you in any sort of threatening manner (your judgement but likely any motion toward you.) If they are running away, not a good idea... perhaps if you are worried about your belongings you could warn to stop and get down and perhaps a warning shot...though I really would not recommend it... exactly what home-owners is for.. if they are leaving, you survived.. learn from your mistake at not being more secure and call your insurance company to collect losses...
 
My outlook on this subject agrees with 'Oro, the second post of this thread.

If BG injured or attacked my wife, I'd take deadly action, no matter which way he was traveling.

Anything else, he can run away. But that's not saying my 3 big dogs wouldn't be chasing him/her, looking for revenge.
 
I remember a case here in Texas shortly after moving here about 30 years ago, A young man had had burglery problems at his semi rural home and decided to go check on it, while he was in route his burglar alarm went off, this was pre cell phone days. He arrived before police, caught a couple of guys hauling his possessions out, so he pulls out a rifle, and laid one across a fence dead. I do not remember about the other. Another case another person shot and killed a robber ie purse snatcher in a parkilng lot af a fairly long range with a big handgun, and it was reported in the news, A few days later he turned hisself in to the authorities.

In both cases the shooters were no billed, they were at no time threatned by the criminals. Both of these cases were in the Dallas area, not necessarily the city of Dallas

A lot of what you can do and be legal depends upon where you are at the time of the incident. What might get you jail time in New Jersey, will get you a slap on the back and comment of "job well done" in Texas.
 
The purpose of shooting somebody is to stop them from what they are doing when a reasonable person would believe that were action not taken, bodily harm or death to you or somebody else would occur... EVEN IN YOUR OWN HOUSE.

The Castle Doctorine simply states that, by being in your house after an unlawful entry, there is very little burdon of proof to show you reasonably feared for your life.

Of course, if you shoot somebody in the back, all bets are off.
 
No way I would shoot him in the back in that scenario.... But I would not let him leave without being confronted by me and confirming that he was GONE (ie- scared off of my property and no longer a likely threat), at very least verbally from behind (something along the lines of "Leave my property now! I am armed!" or "that stuff isn't worth your life")... and I would "escort" him off my property (following at the pace he sets).. but if/when he turned towards me while taking steps to clear him from my property IMMEDIATELY I would consider him a viable threat once again and things would change... if he came towards me without being told to, I would not likely wait for explaination....

After all, he wouldn't be the first thief to come back into the house to get something else after making off with a VCR. I want to know that he left with a distinct fear of returning.
 
If hes in my house, and hes not welcome, he is a dead man. I would shoot him in the back, front, side, bottom, top, or while rolling. If he is running out the door with my stuff I would shoot him then drag him back in and shoot him again. The castle law is not that he forfeits his life being unwelcome in your home. It simply means that you have no duty to retreat. Make sure you practice your statement by saying that you shot him because you were in fear for your life and not just because you can. It will save you some grief. All the liberal nay sayers who say that they wouldnt shoot an intruder in the back are weak and wrong. My house is my house. If you make the mistake of thinking that you can come in and do as you please, you misread the rulebook and the penalty is death.
Click to expand...

How do you spell "state of mind?"

By the way, were the founders of the states that adopted the English Common Law as the foundations of their systems of jurisprudence, starting back in the eighteenth century, "liberal naysayers" as the term is understood today?
 
Everything in my house can be replaced. Except for my kids and my husband. And my dogs. That being said I would not shoot someone in the back for leaving with a thing that I could replace. Would I shoot a threat to my or my loved ones life, yes without hestitation. I had a California LEO tell me once, that if you have to shoot someone, not to shoot to wound, shoot to kill. You don't want them alive to testify against you or to sue you for damages. Yes, the BG's family can try to sue for wrongful death, but once you are cleared for the shooting that goes out the window.

Oh course in this scenario I have a hard time picturing this BG running out of my house with anything in his hands....with 2 70lb shar pei/ pit bull mix attached to his butt.
 
I don't know whether anyone is aware of this,.....

but if you have to use your weapon in a self defense situation, I believe it's POSSIBLE that a prosecuting attorney can use statements against you which you may have made on a public forum.....like this one.

It's one thing to be determined to defend yourself or your family, but telling the world how you're going to go about it may not be too good of an idea.
 
not trying to hijack this thread, but I'd like to hear about this
Click to expand...

(the horse theives) OK - this is off-topic but there are more than an average number of horse owners here so I'll post it.

OK, we own a few horses and ride quite a bit. Many of the friends we've made in this area are horse owners because of that. For those who don't know horses, they are massive investments of time, energy and emotion to train and befriend. Years of hard work to become a good rider, owner, trainer. Hours and hours of care per week, even if you don't do a thing with them. Horses also will develop powerful emotional responses to their owners - it becomes a two-way street. You can have a personal relationship with a horse for about 30 years because of their long lifespan - so this is not like a goldfish.

An older woman I know, mid 60s, childless, long widowed, one of her great things in life is her horses and caring for them, riding them. She came home one day late in the summer, and someone had driven a truck through her back property line, mashing down bushes and saplings and the fence, then hauled her two horses away. This was devastating to her - imagine a child lost, whatever you would want to compare it to. Devastating. I can not say she over reacted; it would have had the same effect on me.

Two or three months later, a few days after the end of hunting season, she woke up one morning to find her two horses, skinny and malnourished, hanging at her back gate wanting grain and hay. Presumably, they had been "kidnapped" to serve as either pack animals or mounts for some hunters. Once the season was done, and they had abused them and run them down to bones and ill-health, they dumped them back.

Personally, I would really like to get a hold of these guys and get even, for the pain they caused and I know they will go on causing to other people pulling stupid stunts like this or other crimes. Believe me, if someone pulled that stunt with my horse, I would not stop until I found them and I would shoot both their knee caps out so they could sit still and think about what they did. After an hour or two of that I'd just shoot them in the gut and tie them up and gag them so they could die slowly and painfully over several days, and I wouldn't have to worry about them coming back at me. Basically, the same plan I have for anyone that badly harms my family or an innocent person close to me. Partly out of revenge, but also so they can't do it to another person.

As you may guess, we don't have children, and the animals serve in many ways as deep substitutes for that. I did not grow up with horses, this is something I learned in mid-life. I realize know why much of the mushy horse stuff in Westerns is there - the human-horse bond can be that deep. "Hanging" for horse thieves was about more than just stealing someones transportation.

Also, "Oro" is part of my horse's name. "Oro Ocultado" - hidden gold. He really was.
 
I am about a year away from passing the bar, but here are my thoughts:

1st, always read the statute -
776.013 Home protection; use of deadly force; presumption of fear of death or great bodily harm.--

(1) A person is presumed to have held a reasonable fear of imminent peril of death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another when using defensive force that is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm to another if:

(a) The person against whom the defensive force was used was in the process of unlawfully and forcefully entering, or had unlawfully and forcibly entered, a dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle, or if that person had removed or was attempting to remove another against that person's will from the dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle; and

(b) The person who uses defensive force knew or had reason to believe that an unlawful and forcible entry or unlawful and forcible act was occurring or had occurred.

(2) The presumption set forth in subsection (1) does not apply if:

(a) The person against whom the defensive force is used has the right to be in or is a lawful resident of the dwelling, residence, or vehicle, such as an owner, lessee, or titleholder, and there is not an injunction for protection from domestic violence or a written pretrial supervision order of no contact against that person; or

(b) The person or persons sought to be removed is a child or grandchild, or is otherwise in the lawful custody or under the lawful guardianship of, the person against whom the defensive force is used; or

(c) The person who uses defensive force is engaged in an unlawful activity or is using the dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle to further an unlawful activity; or

(d) The person against whom the defensive force is used is a law enforcement officer, as defined in s. 943.10(14), who enters or attempts to enter a dwelling, residence, or vehicle in the performance of his or her official duties and the officer identified himself or herself in accordance with any applicable law or the person using force knew or reasonably should have known that the person entering or attempting to enter was a law enforcement officer.

(3) A person who is not engaged in an unlawful activity and who is attacked in any other place where he or she has a right to be has no duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground and meet force with force, including deadly force if he or she reasonably believes it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.

(4) A person who unlawfully and by force enters or attempts to enter a person's dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle is presumed to be doing so with the intent to commit an unlawful act involving force or violence.

(5) As used in this section, the term:

(a) "Dwelling" means a building or conveyance of any kind, including any attached porch, whether the building or conveyance is temporary or permanent, mobile or immobile, which has a roof over it, including a tent, and is designed to be occupied by people lodging therein at night.

(b) "Residence" means a dwelling in which a person resides either temporarily or permanently or is visiting as an invited guest.

(c) "Vehicle" means a conveyance of any kind, whether or not motorized, which is designed to transport people or property.
Click to expand...
Source

The statute says a PRESUMPTION is created. Generally, in statutory interpretation, that means that the burden of proof is simply shifted. Instead of you having to prove you were in fear of your life/bodily harm, the state would have to prove that you were not. Presumptions are REBUTTABLE. That means an intrepid prosecutor who wants to make a career for himself could go after you if you shot this hypothetical intruder in the back on his way out. Just for reference, the law changed in 2005. There are 5 cases on Westlaw since 2006 about this very issue, and that is at the appeals level. (at least one of the cases is about how the new law should be implemented to "offenders" who acted before the new law went into effect). That does not even count the number of cases that showed up at the trial court level, which frankly I am unwilling to go to the trouble of determining.

In Florida, if you shoot someone who is not a threat leaving your home, you are really taking a giant risk. You are banking on prosecutorial discretion, and you may not get it. And frankly, you may not deserve it.

At the very least, if you shoot someone on the way out of your home. Don't say a damn word to the police without your attorney present. Call an attorney immediately. Do what the attorney says. Don't even say anything to 911, other than, "a man has been shot at XXXX address, please respond immediately."
 
I wouldn't shoot someone unless he posed a threat to a person, either myself or someone else. For example, if he had a firearm that he had stolen from me in his posession as he was running, firing on him would be a realistic option. But as for the VCR, TV, jewelery, etc. I would not shoot someone over any (or all) of those items.

I do realize that every self-defense situation is unique and there are a lot of "gray" areas that must be addressed immediately, and with consequences that will affect many people for the remainder of their lives. While some actions are flagrantly wrong and some are clearly right, it is easy to second-guess someone else when the luxury of time and lack of stress make it convenient.
 
if he is in my house he is a threat to me and my kids.:mad:

i have no idea what he has already done and no matter where we meet he is between me and some of my kids.

he will be shot.
 
I would do it simply to protect others from having the same idiot break into their house. I wouldn't be able to sleep knowing that he is still out there. I would probably try to get him to stop and get on the ground first, but if he didn't comply I would make sure he didn't come back.
 
A similar question is being discussed over in S&T by some members. I don't know how to link it, but it's titled "how to handle a break-in" or words to that effect.

Parker
 
It is murder in Arkansas to shoot someone in the back while that person is fleeing.

If they stop, turn around and try to fire a few parting shots, fine. So be it. But if a invader sees that he or she (Or a group) decides that they need to retreat and get off and out of your house and off your lands, let them go.

The LEO's will get to them soon enough or maybe they might show up at one of the hospitals as a GSW.

As much as the stress, energy and feel the violence in your blood, you must not shoot that person who is fleeing and showing you the back. Neither must you chase after them. Just Reload, prepare for a second wave or arrival of LEO's

I am way late to this thread. But I stand firm on this.

We had one case recently where a aggressor pulled onto another's property with a shotgun in truck. That man then sees owner on porch with long gun (Rifle) and wisely decides to back vehicle up and get away. Unfortunately, the retreating man died with two bullet holes in the head from rifle on porch.

That man got arrested and put in jail charged with murder.
 
I dont have anything else to contribute other then I am still confused as to when you are certain the BG is leaving, and not just seeking a better defensive situation, just like I would do in a gunfight (I guess....)

A couple of years ago, this was discussed about a store robbery and Lee posted the following link that was pretty informative so I thought I would repost it...

http://www.teddytactical.com/archive/MonthlyStudy/2006/02_StudyDay.htm
 
I would do it simply to protect others from having the same idiot break into their house. I wouldn't be able to sleep knowing that he is still out there. I would probably try to get him to stop and get on the ground first, but if he didn't comply I would make sure he didn't come back.
Click to expand...

Here's a relevant posting in response to a very similar statement made on the Strategies and Tactics Forum by moderator Jeff White. Read and head:

...no law anywhere in the United States, no so called Make my Day law or castle doctrine law gives you the legal right to impose and carry out a death sentence. It is not your job nor your civic duty to kill an intruder so that he won't intrude on someone else. Dispensing of justice is still a function of the state.

Castle doctrine laws simply give you an official presumption that you were justified in using deadly force. They do not forbid the police and states attorney from investigating the circumstances of the shooting and if the physical evidence makes it look like you killed someone who no longer presented a threat to you or anyone else's safety by retreating, expect to be arrested, charged and quite possibly convicted. Expect to have your computer seized during the investigation and expect to have this thread and your posts in it found and used to help convince a jury that you have a cavalier attitude towards the use of deadly force and killed someone who was no threat to you or anyone else at the time you killed him.

Only the state can decide someone will be a threat in the future and take action to see that they aren't. You cannot shoot someone for what they might do in the future.

I think too many people have bought into the Brady Organization's propaganda that Castle Doctrine laws are a license to kill. They aren't.
Click to expand...



http://www.thehighroad.org/showpost.php?p=5641344&postcount=73
 
A few months back a couple of criminals stole my ATV, fortunately for them I was about 2-3 minutes behind them and the cops arrived on the scene before I did and they ran off and abandoned their stolen truck along with my ATV but I must say in all honesty that if I had of caught them in the act I was going to shoot to kill them.

Here in GA we have established case law, statutory law and civil lawsuit protection that would have backed me up, plus I have several defense attorney friends who owe me personal favors.

So if somebody comes to try to take from me my personal possessions or violate my dwelling I'm going to shoot them no matter which way they're facing. The issue is quite simple to me and I'm willing to take my chances in front of a jury.
 
Life threatened in the middle of the night

Every situation is different but myself i will feel threatened anytime if i am awoke by a bg in my house in the middle of the night. Thats why i have 5 mags for my glock 23 loaded with winchester ranger t series the best ammo ready to go and my girl has my sig 250 with 3 15 rd mags loaded with the ranger t series ready to go also in her nightstand.i don't know how good a shot i would be half asleep at 3 in the morning i do have night sights meprolight but i havent ever had to shoot like that before. Technically in the night everyone could feel their life was threatened cause nobody is ready for a break in, everyone is caught off guard so if you shot someone you have a good shot at getting away with it, armed or not your life was threatened the bg is fully awake you are not. I live in nj and my uncle is a lieutenant he says just make sure its in the front of the bg's body. And if you shoot make sure he is dead so he cant sue you that's why i have the t series i wanna make sure they are dead they shred. If anyone wants to check them out go on winchesters website g and r tactical and mah supplies have these in stock.:);) but too make sure they are 100% in your house not in the doorway for the front door or whatever
 
rangerhaaf

it's easier for you I live in nj it is impossible to get a permit to carry unless you are a cop firearm id card serperate pistol permit for each handgun 15 rd magazine limit you have alot more relaxed laws thats why i wanna move soon
 
Long time ago 2 guys were trying to steal my Dads 69' GTO from the drive way..middle of the night..Dad grabbed the .20 pump Mossberg, tube always loaded, an went out..they ran towards the lake an across the swamp..Dad said he waited till they were around 50 yrds or so an put some #6 birdshot into his butt area...guy scream an cussed an an cried to his buddy this SOB is trying to kill me! They got to a rode an a 3rd party pulled up in a mustang an they got in an took off, just as Dad (WWII vet from the Pacific) arrived behind them, an put the last 4 shells into the trunk an taillights as it took off. I know Dad didn't want to kill them...bad thing is I found the shell he fired first, an remembered I had been groundhog hunting an changed the regular 6 shot to a 3" magnum 6 shot!!!! An hadn't changed it back...I ran an told Dad.....Dad looked at the shell an just said..." I thought that guy was yelling awful lowd, come to think of it, that first shot did seem to kick harder for some reason."
I think justice was served that night. .....being a thief can be very dangerous....an don't mess with a mans GTO....these are the lessons I learned that night in 1974.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

A
  • Locked
Man shoots and kills home-invasion robber
Replies
9
Views
590
RLsnow
R
R
  • Locked
Woman home alone sick, shoots house robber
Replies
4
Views
1K
texas bulldog
T
B
  • Locked
Maple Grove, MN home invasion
Replies
2
Views
674
QuickDraw
Q
A
  • Locked
Home Invasion Turns Deadly As Resident Kills Robber
Replies
15
Views
1K
Dave P
D
H
  • Locked
Gun more likely to be used against a relative in the home?
2
Replies
46
Views
3K
SCKimberFan
S
Back
Top