There is an interesting case playing out in deep Southern Illinois regarding Booby Traps

Most proper response would be to install video recording cameras (trailcams set to record to longest length possible) along with a pressure sensitive trigger that activates the loudest audible alarm available along with flashing lights, opens a door to a cage labeled “attack dog-beware” which has a simultaneous audible alarm mounted inside of the cage which sounds like a pack of German shepherds.

Not only does your stuff stop being messed with, free fertilizer for part of the yard.

Local restauranteer set up a similar booby trap years ago where I grew up. The business was sold by his family to cover legal expenses. He died in prison. This is one of those things where there is truly no valid argument in favor of such device. If there is no law that specifically covers the use of such a contraption then it should be handled under reckless homicide. Legal questions be damned this was not right, and the gentleman made some serious errors in judgement that seem to indicate he likely had other issues as well. What seems to be a legal option would have been for him to wait with said shotgun at the shed, but then again, what is in a shed that is worth killing a man over?

 

Anyone who ignored the no trespassing and caution signs on another person's property where they had no right to be wouldn't really be innocent though. Not that it would be grounds for an appeal.

 

Perhaps he wasn't Irish.......

 

I do truly hope that people are reading/heeding this.

Any such indiscriminate mechanism that maims/kills any/every thing it encounters irrespective
of immediate circumstance, will result in the Legal System destroying the owner in return.

 

I believe that's called a "man trap" and has been illegal for eons.

 

In this state they are called set guns; they have always been illegal since I've been on the Earth.

 

A gun goes bang in the direction of a human on purpose, congrats you employed deadly force. Deadly force is ONLY legit in defense of self, 2nd/3rd person, some narrowly worded property rights in an even narrower # of states; and only then under certain narrow defined circumstances

Just remove the scattergun and yell '' gotcha sucker!'' (on camera -pictures) that is a win IMHO.
Best yet, just have the pictures, don't play your hand . Let the perp be totally surprised when the police say those important words; ''Are you Mr. Smith? We have a warrant for your arrest and are going to search the domicile for these (ALL items previously stolen) items''

 

You would think pretty much everyone knows that lethal booby traps are illegal & a bad idea. I can understand the conviction. But under the circumstances, repeated break-ins, signs, door nailed shut, lock broken off, etc. wouldn't a 6 month sentence be appropriate?

 

Serious question: what caused the neighbor to investigate? Was it the loud noise? Or something else.

 

It used to be fairly common that if a business was burglarized, the owner would spend the night with cot and shotgun in case of return visit. This used up some thieves. I don't know how the authorities would treat this now.

 

Which would be what exactly??

 

First, the govmint protects its own--would you like to blow away a cop or fireman in the performance of their duty?
Would you like to blow away a mentally deficient person doing something dumb?

Deadly force has its place, but you really need to see the criminal to justify it.

 

Different deal, the owner saw the perp so it would probably fall under state law and be OK.

 

Hence my question/comment about a camera and 2-way communication.

 

Kinda like blowing up a terrorist with a drone!

 

They were very clear in carry permit class: lethal force is justified to defend against imminent death or greivous bodily harm.

Setting a trap to kill somone who is not an imminent threat to you does not sound justified.
In my not so humble opinion, Lethal Booby Traps are set by boobies.
You could set a booby trap and die.
Then kill an heir or other innocent party inspecting the property.
Now, in really mean mood, I might feel justified in setting up a 12ga shotgun loaded with a black powder blank aimed in a neutral direction attached by trip wire to a door or window ....

 

I think most judges and juries would ask themselves "what would a reasonable person do?". Judging by the responses that I've read, most, if not all agree that a booby trap isn't something that a reasonable person would do.

 

Good Lord....glad he was convicted.

 

As a someone living in the country I can not begin to tell you how common it is having our locked outbuildings broken into and valuable tools and equipment stolen.

The capture of the thieves is very low and the chances of them going to prison is even lower. It seems a lot of break ends are done to pay for their drug habit.

Not saying what the owner did was right but it is easy to understand why he did it. The law says you have the right to a have a jury of your peers. I wonder what the verdict would have been if a farmer or two had been on the jury.

 

I would suggest a more suttel trap. One that flings manure or dye onto the burglar. After all the bank puts explosive "DYE PACKETS" into the loot bags of robbers and it's not a crime. Seems like you oughta' be able to do the same.