Burglar arguing self-defense

Status
Not open for further replies.
yeah its a shame the homeowner didn't get the oppurtunity to blow them away. hell, the perps will probably try to make the homeowner restitution for not helping them carry his stuff to the car.
 
The guy did have prior felonies, but not offenses of violence or drug offenses. Ohio law puts a person under disability, meaning they canot own or possess a firearm, if they have a prior conviction for a felony offense of violence, a prior drug conviction, have been adjudicated metally ill, or are a chronic alcoholic/drug dependant.

As a note, for all you interested people, a purely black letter reading of the law, with supporting case law, means that a conviction for misdemeanor marihuana possession as an adult pouts one under disability. Think about that little college bust for possession of a joint coming back to haunt you years later...
 
But isn't it federal law that any felony conviction (including Martha Stewart stuff) or any misdemeanor with a potential sentence of 1 year or more bars possession of any firearm? This defendant is lucky he didn't get "Project Exiled."
 
Just thank God that this silliness happened in Ohio, and not the RPK! If it'd been in Kalifornistan, it'd be all over the media, and the perp probably would be free by now!
 
In CO, one can only defend oneself or another against unlawful force. Use of force against an intruder is generally not unlawful. Ergo, an intruder has no right to claim self-defense when confronted by an armed homeowner.
 
"self-defense is the right the homeowner very well could have used... and maybe should have used... against you in this case, not the other way around."
i'd like to buy this judge a beer. :D
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top