Sheriff makes no bones about right to self defense

[bubba1]

I don't like the closed door part either, allows people to think it's ok to shoot through a door without knowing what's on the other side. Should have either laid in wait, or just opened the door quickllly and then made the decision using cover of the side wall.

Did you look at the door?

The burglar was a 23-year-old in a mask and gloves, carrying a flashlight, screwdriver, and hammer, trying to break through a half glass door.

You think the 82 year old guy should have waited for him to finish breaking through the back door, or opened the door for him????

 

[exavid]

Yeah man, that's what I'd do, open the door.:banghead:
What could go wrong. Perhaps when the intruder kicked it open and let the geezer have it with the prybar he'd hold back long enough to say, thanks?

 

[sig220mw]

Ok now we know that the door had a window so the criminal could be seen. The shooting was justified and judged to be clean by the police on the scene.
So much for knowing what the target was. Also most drunks going to the wrong door will more than likely knock loudly and not wear a mask and carry tools for breaking in. I believe that I could tell from the sound that someone was not knocking but instead trying to break in.

Are there really still milk men dellivering now days? I'm not saying that there aren't but I sure as heck don't know of any or haven't seen any for at least 40 years. But then I don't live in an upscale neighborhood where deliveries might still be made these days.

 

[X-JaVeN-X]

I don't like the closed door part either, allows people to think it's ok to shoot through a door without knowing what's on the other side. Should have either laid in wait, or just opened the door quickllly and then made the decision using cover of the side wall. I think back to that kid who was shot because he knocked on the wrong address a few years back, and didn't speak english. He got gunned down for nothing.
Lot of seniors have a shoot first attitude, now that they can legally carry, or own a weapon. Targeting and knowledge of the situation is crucial prior to taking a life.
Even leos will tell you there is a big difference between a career burgler some of which, never carried a weapon, and a stick up artist, Robbery team or crew. I am not saying they aren't all bad guys, but the death penalty for breaking into a home should only be used as a last resort, the guy may have just taken a knee, and waited for police. You can always shoot him if he moves to go for a weapon, but shot through a door, is pushing it, in my opinion. It could have killed a neighbor. And if it did it would have been a black eye for all of us. I know someone is going to say ,'anyone who comes in my house is a dead man" but having been there, it's a last resort, not a starting point.

"Targeting and knowledge of the situation is crucial prior to taking a life."

So why are you formulating an opinion on this situation with the limited amount of information that you actually know? I'm sure the gentleman that made the decision to fire the round knew more than you do right now.

You bring up all these what ifs...like shooting a neighbor, or that maybe he should have opened the door and then made a decision...really? He's an 82 year old man and you want him to add in extra variables of throwing open a door to someone that is obviously trying to break into his home and use his wall as cover? This isn't Call of Duty...it's real life.

The sheriff and the home owner know what happened and if they determined the right decision was made, then I believe it. Why on earth would you sit there and try to postulate theories on what could have happened or how it could have played out differently? That homeowner knew what was going on and took action. He did what he felt was necessary and apparently the law agrees with him...

 

[CZguy]

The sheriff and the home owner know what happened and if they determined the right decision was made, then I believe it. Why on earth would you sit there and try to postulate theories on what could have happened or how it could have played out differently? That homeowner knew what was going on and took action. He did what he felt was necessary and apparently the law agrees with him...

That does sum it up rather nicely.

 

[Isaac-1]

Ok, lets play out a potential variation on this scenario for those of you that think the old guy should have opened the door and politely told the burglar to wait for the police to arrive:

Lets even assume the guy does not bash the old man in the head the moment he opens the door:

The old man has to get to and dial a phone while covering the burglar, leaving potential for the burglar to get away, attack the old man, or maybe just wait for his partner to go around the side of the house and break in through a bed room window come up behind the old guy and bash him in the head. The simplest solution and likely safest for the old man is to shoot the threat.

 

[Neverwinter]

The sheriff and the home owner know what happened and if they determined the right decision was made, then I believe it. Why on earth would you sit there and try to postulate theories on what could have happened or how it could have played out differently? That homeowner knew what was going on and took action. He did what he felt was necessary and apparently the law agrees with him...

That is largely a Brady tactic, to postulate that a person using appropriate force to defend themselves could have acted in some alternative way that can be safely speculated later with complete information and from the comfort of a police report.

 

[lloveless]

gym wrote: "Lot of seniors have a shoot first attitude, now that they can legally carry, or own a weapon." Where do you get this? Most seniors have more gun sense because we were raised with guns.
ll

 

[gym]

I don't stay at home an play call of duty, I have had several real life shooting experiences. I just don't believe shooting through a door is the way to end a situation. If you are holding a gun in hand, you really should not be concerned, with alternate tactical methods available. as far as explaining my point of view, that's what we do here, you are entitled to yours as a I am entitled to mine, otherwise don't open it up for discussion. if he can pull the trigger he has some resposibility. You don't just kill people unless they mean you bodily harm, equal force etc. He's lucky it happened where it did, and that he is up in age, or he would be in jail.
The proper way is you announce from cover that you are armed and will shoot to kill if he enters the house, position yourself from cover and have called 911. If that bullett would have gne through some neighboors head, it would be a sad day, and everyone would be saying how stupid it was to violate one of the main rules, like seeing your target.
The attitude of internet gunfighters is always to want blood, this is not what carrying guns is about, it's about stopping the threat.38 years I have seen a lot, i have pulled my gun many times, only had to shoot it a couple. People give up when presented with a pistol in their face when they don't have one, it's not TV. What happened to identifying the target, I missed the part about the door, Identify the target through the wooden door?
PS: this is far from over, the State prosecutor may get involved as well as a civil suit where it all could have been avoided with a clean shoot.He should have announced that he was armed from a position of safety, and allowe the guy to back off and be arrested. We don't gun down unarmed people, this was a simple burglery, I would bet this guys sheet shows he's a non violent theif. You don't get the death penalty for stealing tv's. Especially in this day and age. I think this is getting out of controlwhen folks start shooting people for misdimeanors. Especially since he hadn't commited a crime yet. You do understand the only thing he did was possesion of burgler tools. since when is that a death sentence.

 

[CZguy]

My understanding was that he was in the act of breaking in, while wearing a ski mask when he was shot. Not just standing there holding tools.

Personally I agree with gym about the proper way the gentleman should have handled it. But I'm not 82 years old. I suspect that may have made a difference.

 

[bubba1]

The proper way is you announce from cover that you are armed and will shoot to kill if he enters the house, position yourself from cover and have called 911.

Yes, indeed, it's only proper to expect 82-year-olds to expose themselves to a fistfight with 23-year-olds rather than preemptively using a firearm in self defense.

the State prosecutor may get involved as well as a civil suit

Nope, sorry!

Go read up on Florida's Castle Doctrine. Close to zero chance of them even trying to prosecute him (absent any details that aren't publicly known at this point), AND he's immune to civil suits.

 

[gym]

Not if they don't hold up to their intent, I know i live here, anyone can still sue in a civil proceeding. The burden of proof is much lower than a criminal case. Wait an see. The AG isn't going to let this one go so quick. There would be no need for a fist fight Bubba, if somone is on a staircase with a gun pointed at them, they lay down quick, this isn't Justified, it's a pis poor burgler, you aren't james bond with a license to kill. the application of the castle doctrine may easily be overturned gy the DA, AG, or expert whitness. This castle doctrine of which you speak is not a blank check to kill people.
I need not read anymore than I did when Jeb Bush signed it into law while exiting the Govenors mansion. It has been overturned before.
Have you shot anyone through a door latelly, wait for the storm to follow. This mans life is over, because of this.

 

[Ragnar Danneskjold]

In Michigan, our Castle Doctrine is also rebuttable. Meaning you can still be prosecuted for shooting someone breaking in your home, even with Castle Doctrine in place. Shooting through a door is a pretty good way to turn the law against you.

 

[bubba1]

There would be no need for a fist fight Bubba, if somone is on a staircase with a gun pointed at them, they lay down quick, this isn't Justified,

So the criminal wouldn't have harmed the old man, and/or he would have surrendered of the old man opened the door and confronted him?

You know all of that how?

The AG isn't going to let this one go so quick.

I wouldn't bet on it.

“ There is nothing more important to our freedom than the right to live free from fear.” -- Pam Bondi, Florida AG

Doesn't strike me as the type to side with a 23yo criminal instead of the senior citizen homeowner.

There is noting in the publicly available information that even begins to rebut the presumption of lawful self defense.

 

[gym]

Well see, you don't shoot through house doors or car doors, unless you identified the target, and they are shooting or about to shoot you. It's basic gun safety procedures, identiy the threat, "not shoot some kid coming up the stairs with burgler tools", you're missing the point, there has to be some resposibility when you carry a firearm. Should I have shot the 2 or 3 guys that surrendered when I leveled my firarm at them. Basic training of keeping distance between you and the perp, negates any fear of an attack by said person. He should have dialed 911, left the phone line open. said police are on route, and then if the guy was stupid enough to break through the door, I would agree with you.
If he didn't do any of those things he is irresposible and I can't condone his actions, again he could have easily killed an ionnocent person shooting blind through a door.
These cases get reviewed, we will see if any charges are levied when the Gov speaks with the sherriff. Unless it's Dodge City. Anyone who breaks in should be shot. he, according to all I have read, hadn't broken in. it would have been reduced to an attempted burglery, with a suspended sentence, not a hanging offense.No violence was displayed, what you think is not what you act on. We have a rotten economy and people ar losing their minds along with their jobs and food for their familys, you can't shoot all of them, I saw 3 neighboors loose their jobs in 1 month, they are professionals, but there goes the hemi challenger the house and everything else you worked for. It's going to get a lot worse, and I am fully prepared to deal with it, we have 3 army and marine snipers in my development, so I sure am not against shooting bad guys, but make sure you do it the proper way, following basic gun rules. It sounds like fear was what caused this to happen. Not a plan nor a rational sequence of what to do first. Just shoot, I still don't like the entire feel of it, did the kid have a gun?

 

[bubba1]

Well see, you don't shoot through house doors or car doors, unless you identified the target

Go back and look at the picture of the door in question - pretty clear that target identification wasn't an issue.

and they are shooting or about to shoot you.

Absolutely not required under Florida law in this situation.

Anyway, we're getting way off topic here.

The police chief says it's justified, I'm confident his people investigated thoroughly before they came to that conclusion.

 

[LongTimeGone]

FL also has a "Stand Your Ground" law.
No duty to retreat inside, outside, in your car, anywhere you feel threatened with bodily harm, deadly force is legal..

 

[gym]

Legal and right are two different things. Reference the legal section for an explanation on when to soot and why.
You may believe what you wish, I hope you never have to explain why you shot a couple kids screwing around on your lawn, because you read the castle doctrine.You have phoes neighboors lights alarms dogs, guns are a last resort not a first choice. You better know why you just shot the paper boy, because he was at your door. He better be armed and attempting to do harm to you or your castle doctrine is not going to save you.

 

[Ignition Override]

When it is windy, or the touchy security system malfunctions, the Deputies show up.

Usually the only sounds we hear are loud knocks, but no voices, and sometimes no doorbell.

 

[Ragnar Danneskjold]

Shooting another human, even when you know it's 110% justified, is not a good feeling. And it never will be. If you ever shoot someone, I hope it's knowing you had absolutely no other choice. You'll relive the memories every night forr years. I hope you can live with that.

 

[Isaac-1]

I just don't see where there is any gray area here, the guy had clear site of his target (big window in the door), had reason to think the guy was a threat (wearing ski mask and prying at door frame), so he shot him. There is not and should not be a requirement to let the bad guy get off the first shot/swing, particularly when we are talking about an elderly man defending himself. Chances are the older man's reactions would have been slower, perhaps he would have been less steady, maybe sending off stray shots in panic fire if the bad guy did not surrender, and attacked instead, etc.

 

[we are not amused]

I see that several people still have not watched the videos or read the news stories.

Five days after the incident, Gym in Post#59 claims the burglar was merely holding burglar tools, completely ignoring the fact he was caught actively trying to force the door. Others claim the homeowner blindly shot through the door, without seeing the suspect. Obviously the picture of the door was too inconvenient of a fact for them to aknowlege

I looked online for other News Stories about the incident, few are as revealing as the one I posted earlier, which clearly showed the door in question, with the very large window in it. There is one however, where the Chief of police states that the intruder was shot as he opened the door, and another where the home owner states that he saw the intruder wearing a black mask and holding a hammer and screwdriver. Neither story gives a detailed account, and perhaps the news reporter misquoted the people in question, but they certainly contain more detail than the critics of the home owner seem to possess.

I have noticed before on this web site, that there are many who jump to condemn the actions of others in an almost knee jerk reaction, especially in a self defense situation.
This doesn't seem very High Road of them, but perhaps making false statements and making irresponsible attacks with incomplete facts, serves a higher purpose than I can comprehend.

Others, such as Neverwinter, who originally objected to my comparison of a critic as behaving in a Brady Gun control fashion, seems to have come around to my position. (see post 34, 35, and 57) Thanks for the belated support of my position.

Gym has a point about not executing burglars for stealing TV's, but this guy was breaking into an occupied dwelling, which certainly raises questions about his intent to the occupant.
When you commit a crime, such as burglary or purse snatching or mugging, you are leaving yourself open to misinterpretation of your intent. Yes we all know that you are just this harmless little product of a deprived childhood, who needs money for your drug habit, and you wouldn't dream of hurting anyone who doesn't resist your demands for money, but the victim may not be aware of your good intentions, and may misinterpret your breaking into his home as an attack.
In other words, you are taking your life into your own hands when you commit robbery, burglary or other potentially violent crimes. Maybe you believed the house was unoccupied, (seems unlikely in this case) but the home owner doesn't know that, especially when he is an 82 year old man, who would be extremely vulnerable to a physical attack.
But, I guess that some feel that the elderly victim should have invited the young man in for a discussion of his intent over coffee and donuts.

 

[Neverwinter]

Others, such as Neverwinter, who originally objected to my comparison of a critic as behaving in a Brady Gun control fashion, seems to have come around to my position. (see post 34, 35, and 57) Thanks for the belated support of my position.

We were arguing past each other on what tnxdshooter had meant. Ultimately the underlying positions regarding justified use of force were shown to be equivalent, so I guess it worked out fine.

We must always be responsible in everything we do and also we must think many times before doing such act. Our economic condition is not an excuse for us to do something that involves violence. All we need is to look for jobs in order for us to have that money we need to survive life. And it does not include robbery.

It is an admirable goal to reduce the economic conditions which contribute to situations where people feel like the only way they can survive is through violence.

 

[Mike1234567]

Neverwinter... Unless I'm terribly wrong AllisonP's post is SPAM at best and might even have a malicious link. If I'm wrong I do apologize to AllisonP. But... I think I recognize appropriate sarcasm in your post regarding "goodness" of payday loans.

 

[Neverwinter]

Neverwinter... Unless I'm terribly wrong AllisonP's post is SPAM at best and might even have a malicious link. If I'm wrong I do apologize to AllisonP. But... I think I recognize appropriate sarcasm in your post regarding "goodness" of payday loans.

Was it a supposed payday loan site link or some malicious content embedded in the post?