Mother kills intruder with shot gun!!!

[neoflex]

Just saw this earlier this morning. Good to see the media shed a somewhat positive light on a gun owner.
Tom, I would love to hear your thoughts given your experience on the job especially given the years you have on the job and what you see that the rest of us may have missed. I'm wondering if it has to do with the mention of the possible stalker tied with the slight sense of cockiness and lack of emotion after taking another persons life. Now you have me thinking maybe there was a sour relationship there. I am honestly curious and intrigued and am by no means trying to be a smart@ss and stir the pot. Investigation stories about these types of situations have always peaked my interest.

[replicant_argent]

Originally Posted by icehog3

While I completely support the right to defend one's home from intrusion by any means necessary, it seems to me there is more to this specific story than meets the eye.

Call me skeptical....or suspicious...but I am not taking this girl's story at face value.

A thought or two along those lines had crossed my mind as well, Tom.

[357]

Originally Posted by icehog3

While I completely support the right to defend one's home from intrusion by any means necessary, it seems to me there is more to this specific story than meets the eye.

Call me skeptical....or suspicious...but I am not taking this girl's story at face value.

I've heard she was on the phone for a long time and even barricaded the door. Pure rumor as I haven't read it anywhere, but who knows.

The thing I thought that was strange was the picture they showed of her husband. She's 18 and has an infant. The picture of her late husband looked to be a senior picture taken in the early 70s. That would make her husband around 50+ years old. Not illegal, but possibly given the human gestation period of 9 months.

Originally Posted by ApexAZ

The family of the intruder will probably sue her now. In my CCW class, they said that if you need to kill someone in self defense, you should assume you'll need approximately $100,000 for litigation expenses.

Basically, don't kill someone unless you're absolutely certain you have to in order to survive.

First, I'm not an attorney. Second, IMO, too many CCW instructers are baselessly scaring the crap out of their pupils. My BIL instructor in Michigan told him the same thing. Both yours and his are wrong.

I found this, to refure your instructor's assertion:
http://www.azleg.gov/ArizonaRevisedS...s.asp?Title=13

No person in this state shall be subject to civil liability for engaging in conduct otherwise justified pursuant to the provisions of this chapter.

See 13-413 which was ammended by this (State) Senate Bill 1145
http://www.azleg.gov/legtext/47leg/2r/bills/sb1145s.pdf

30 13-413. No civil liability for justified conduct; costs
31 A. No person in this state shall be subject to civil liability for
32 engaging in conduct otherwise justified pursuant to the provisions of this
33 chapter.
34 B. THE COURT SHALL AWARD REASONABLE ATTORNEY FEES, COSTS, COMPENSATION
35 FOR LOST INCOME AND ALL EXPENSES INCURRED BY A DEFENDANT IN THE DEFENSE OF
36 ANY CIVIL ACTION IF THE COURT FINDS THAT THE DEFENDANT IS IMMUNE FROM
37 PROSECUTION PURSUANT TO SUBSECTION A.
38 Sec. 4. Title 13, chapter 4, Arizona

So, while they can sue you if some whack job civil judge allows the case to be opened, you can even be compensated by the state for your attorney fees if you can prove you're immune according to the 13-413 statute.

Also, according to this link AZ has a strong castle doctrine law that extends to vehicles, hotel rooms, and includes a right to stand your ground (aka no legal requirement to flee before using lethal force).
http://askville.amazon.com/states-Ma...estId=36523919


And, this link states AZ no longer even requires a permit to carry concealed
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_law...state)#Arizona

[replicant_argent]

Originally Posted by 357

The thing I thought that was strange was the picture they showed of her husband. She's 18 and has an infant. The picture of her late husband looked to be a senior picture taken in the early 70s.

I noted that to my wife as well this morning. VERY odd. Glad I wasn't the only one to see that as something odd.

[ApexAZ]

We are a very gun friendly state. Still, it could be a huge headache that probably isn't worth the hassle for me if I could reasonably get away.

This is especially true if the perp is not even inside my home. Why should I take a risk of shooting at them when I could get away. Why put my neighbors at risk? Ive never had to shoot at someone under pressure. Might be that i could avoid civil litigation, but I most certainly face both criminal AND civil litigation if i somehow shot any if rhe children who live next door on either side of my home and across the street. This is just my own personal opinion on what I would do. I respect thy others may feel differently and have varying degrees of the amount of risk they are willing to take. But there IS some risk involved whenever the choice is made to shoot a gun in a populated area. Its up to the individual to decide if it is really worth it.

[pektel]

Originally Posted by ApexAZ

We are a very gun friendly state. Still, it could be a huge headache that probably isn't worth the hassle for me if I could reasonably get away.

This is especially true if the perp is not even inside my home. Why should I take a risk of shooting at them when I could get away. Why put my neighbors at risk? Ive never had to shoot at someone under pressure. Might be that i could avoid civil litigation, but I most certainly face both criminal AND civil litigation if i somehow shot any if rhe children who live next door on either side of my home and across the street. This is just my own personal opinion on what I would do. I respect thy others may feel differently and have varying degrees of the amount of risk they are willing to take. But there IS some risk involved whenever the choice is made to shoot a gun in a populated area. Its up to the individual to decide if it is really worth it.

My closest neighbor is a half mile away through woods. No worries here. I shoot clays off my deck in the summer time.

Though I do see your point.

[Jasonw560]

Originally Posted by ApexAZ

We are a very gun friendly state. Still, it could be a huge headache that probably isn't worth the hassle for me if I could reasonably get away.

This is especially true if the perp is not even inside my home. Why should I take a risk of shooting at them when I could get away. Why put my neighbors at risk? Ive never had to shoot at someone under pressure. Might be that i could avoid civil litigation, but I most certainly face both criminal AND civil litigation if i somehow shot any if rhe children who live next door on either side of my home and across the street. This is just my own personal opinion on what I would do. I respect thy others may feel differently and have varying degrees of the amount of risk they are willing to take. But there IS some risk involved whenever the choice is made to shoot a gun in a populated area. Its up to the individual to decide if it is really worth it.

I totally understand your opinion on this. If I may play devil's advocate here, though, say you escape, make it to a neighbor's house, and call 911. The scumbag breaks in, finds no one is home, and goes to the next house where Mr. and Mrs. Smith and the 3 little Smithettes are sleeping. He breaks in, and manages to kill all 5 Smiths before the police get there. I know there would be remorse for the family, but would you think, "If I had shot his sorry carcass when he was on my property, the Smiths would still be alive"?

Texas castle doctrine includes the house and property, and any other real property under your control.

As for the lawsuit, check with your insurance company. see if they can add self-defense coverage to your homeowner's policy. State Farm can. IIRC, it's something like $100,000 coverage in case you get sued. I'll have to go back and check.

[357]

Originally Posted by ApexAZ

We are a very gun friendly state. Still, it could be a huge headache that probably isn't worth the hassle for me if I could reasonably get away.

This is especially true if the perp is not even inside my home. Why should I take a risk of shooting at them when I could get away. Why put my neighbors at risk? Ive never had to shoot at someone under pressure. Might be that i could avoid civil litigation, but I most certainly face both criminal AND civil litigation if i somehow shot any if rhe children who live next door on either side of my home and across the street. This is just my own personal opinion on what I would do. I respect thy others may feel differently and have varying degrees of the amount of risk they are willing to take. But there IS some risk involved whenever the choice is made to shoot a gun in a populated area. Its up to the individual to decide if it is really worth it.

Agreed that there is always risk in pulling the trigger in self defense. I suggest 12-guage shotguns for home defense, preferably with some sort of game load, not buck shot, for this reason. Still potent enough to handle any perp in your house with limited range/travel, limited wall penetration, less need to aim (easier to point shoot), and less expensive than handguns. It doesn't eliminate risk, but mitigates it.

I can't see just shooting some one on a whim; but I wouldn't hesitate if it were a life and death situation that I felt I could influence for the better. Michigan allows CPL holders to use deadly force to protect others as well.

http://www.michigan.gov/documents/ms...6_173197_7.pdf

Self Defense Act 2006 Form the state of Michigan:

MCL 600.2922b, MCL 600.2922c, &
MCL 777.21c
The Self-Defense Act
Effective October 1, 2006
Public Acts 309 – 314 of 2006 comprise the “Self-Defense Act.” The Act affects criminal and civil liability for those who use force to defend themselves or others. Prior to this Act, the law of self-defense was gleaned primarily from the common law (judge-made law).
General Provisions of the Act
A person may use deadly force with no duty to retreat if (PA 309):
1. They are not engaged in a crime
2. They are in a place they have a legal right to be
3. They honestly and reasonably believe deadly force is necessary
4. The deadly force is used to prevent imminent death, great bodily harm, or sexual assault of the person or another

Honestly if I can save someone's life, mine or another innocent victim's, by shooting a perp, I will. I won't be wondering if I added liability insurance on my last policy. To simplify, better judged by 12 than carried by 6.

[icehog3]

Originally Posted by icehog3

While I completely support the right to defend one's home from intrusion by any means necessary, it seems to me there is more to this specific story than meets the eye.

Call me skeptical....or suspicious...but I am not taking this girl's story at face value.

Again, I want to reiterate that I completely support the right to defend one's home from intrusion by any means necessary...I am no liberal when it comes to this topic.

I just don't believe the girl's story at face value. As I said, I've been a cop for 25 years, and am pretty good at reading people in these situations, and something just ain't right with this picture.

[Coop]

Originally Posted by icehog3

I just don't believe the girl's story at face value. As I said, I've been a cop for 25 years, and am pretty good at reading people in these situations, and something just ain't right with this picture.

After watching it again, I agree that something will come out more about this story. Seems too staged with the 20 minute phone call... Also, who in their right mind would attempt a B&E with a German shepard barking??? I've never owned a German Shepard, but my last dog (Golden Ret) would bark if he heard anyone walking up the driveway let alone trying to knock the door down!!!

[bonjing]

I HATE that reporters pretty much give up all information about the defenders situation. Why give up so much information to the dirtbags friends so they can plan a retaliation? I'm sure it's not to hard for the bg to find out this info, but why just give it up to them, at least make them work even a little bit for the information!

I don't know the circumstances of course but either way they were trying to enter her home illegally and against her will and in OK once they enter against your will they are fair game whether you know who it is or not. I know that here in NC you don't even have to wait for them to make it in, if there is someone trying to break in and you believe they are intent on doing harm you can shoot them right through the door. Obviously a good idea to be sure but quit frankly if I know someone is up to no good and tell them there is a gun waiting for them on the other side and they keep trying to get in I'd just as soon not have the mess in my house and present the Darwin Award outside. If people want to act like animals I have no problem with treating them like animals, I wouldn't let a rabid dog in either.

It may seem harsh but I for one am very tired of good honest people having to live on lock down to protect themselves from social trash. Maybe it's about time for the criminals to know a little fear. I don't advocate vigilante justice but a person should have the right to defend their property and more importantly loved ones without fear of prosecution.

[ApexAZ]

Originally Posted by Dr Voss

I know that here in NC you don't even have to wait for them to make it in, if there is someone trying to break in and you believe they are intent on doing harm you can shoot them right through the door. Obviously a good idea to be sure but quit frankly if I know someone is up to no good and tell them there is a gun waiting for them on the other side and they keep trying to get in I'd just as soon not have the mess in my house and present the Darwin Award outside.

Honestly, if someone is trying to break in and I have time to escape, I would try to escape. Shooting someone dead in the yard is just too much risk. Replacing the things that got stolen or damaged would cost far less in the long run.

If you have no where to go and you're certain they have a weapon and intend to harm you, then that's another matter entirely.

[shilala]

Originally Posted by ApexAZ

Honestly, if someone is trying to break in and I have time to escape, I would try to escape. Shooting someone dead in the yard is just too much risk. Replacing the things that got stolen or damaged would cost far less in the long run.

If you have no where to go and you're certain they have a weapon and intend to harm you, then that's another matter entirely.

My home is exactly where I escape to.

I've had my home broken into twice and my car robbed twice. I had a vehicle stolen from my yard. The cars and driveway don't mean much, it didn't come with the sense of violation that the house being robbed did.
Our home was rural and non-descript, but apparently was inviting enough for someone to risk their life. No one was home during either break-in.

The thought of me running out the back door has honestly never even entered my mind. If someone enters this house, they will meet whichever weapon I find first. If they are armed, I hope they get time to get a quick prayer off.
People aren't stupid. They've balanced the risk before climbing in a window. With each robbery they get bolder and their odds of escaping unharmed diminish. They know that.
There's a little verse that's been in print for a few thousand years that says "...such is the end of all who go after ill-gotten gain; it takes away the lives of those who get it." (Proverbs 1:10-19)
There's not an individual in the world who doesn't innately know the essense of that passage, and there's nothing on the other side of a window that can't be gained by asking the help of others.

There aren't a lot of things I won't give ground on to keep peace, but protecting my home is one of them.

[pektel]

Originally Posted by Dr Voss

I don't know the circumstances of course but either way they were trying to enter her home illegally and against her will and in OK once they enter against your will they are fair game whether you know who it is or not. I know that here in NC you don't even have to wait for them to make it in, if there is someone trying to break in and you believe they are intent on doing harm you can shoot them right through the door. Obviously a good idea to be sure but quit frankly if I know someone is up to no good and tell them there is a gun waiting for them on the other side and they keep trying to get in I'd just as soon not have the mess in my house and present the Darwin Award outside. If people want to act like animals I have no problem with treating them like animals, I wouldn't let a rabid dog in either.

It may seem harsh but I for one am very tired of good honest people having to live on lock down to protect themselves from social trash. Maybe it's about time for the criminals to know a little fear. I don't advocate vigilante justice but a person should have the right to defend their property and more importantly loved ones without fear of prosecution.

This.

[ApexAZ]

The family of the intruder will probably sue her now. In my CCW class, they said that if you need to kill someone in self defense, you should assume you'll need approximately $100,000 for litigation expenses.

Basically, don't kill someone unless you're absolutely certain you have to in order to survive.

[elderboy02]

Originally Posted by ApexAZ

The family of the intruder will probably sue her now. In my CCW class, they said that if you need to kill someone in self defense, you should assume you'll need approximately $100,000 for litigation expenses.

Basically, don't kill someone unless you're absolutely certain you have to in order to survive.

I love Ohio. We have the Castle Doctrine. The scumbags family can't sue you if you shoot them.

[Bill86]

Originally Posted by elderboy02

I love Ohio. We have the Castle Doctrine. The scumbags family can't sue you if you shoot them.

TN too!

IMHO It makes sense. They broke into your house, they should pay the consequences. They understand the risk.

As far as what guns are best for home defense, hell I couldn't tell you. That's why I have a shotgun, 1911 and AR-15. I'll decide should the situation arise.

[Taki]

Originally Posted by ApexAZ

The family of the intruder will probably sue her now. In my CCW class, they said that if you need to kill someone in self defense, you should assume you'll need approximately $100,000 for litigation expenses.

Basically, don't kill someone unless you're absolutely certain you have to in order to survive.

Thats absolutely ridiculous!!! Although very true...

[replicant_argent]

I am going to assume anyone insane enough to try to break into my house, wherever it is, is armed, until witnessed as otherwise.