-
We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
-
If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
-
Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.
Intruder Shot by home owner Southern Albemarle County
- Thread starter Jay
- Start date
stickslinger
Regular Member
Sounds like Mr. Scott is being charged for causing himself to be wounded. (BG is responsible for all crimes committed during the commission of a felony?)
If so, it just warms the everloving out of that last cockle in what passes for my heart.
stay safe.
Mayhem
Regular Member
I did not read anywhere about the homeowner getting charged with the shooting... a good thing...!!
But also did not read anything to where the shooting was required. In other words did the homeless guy make a move to threaten the life of the home owner? Just thinking out loud.
Rule of thumb here... do not walk into another man's house uninvited!!
But also did not read anything to where the shooting was required. In other words did the homeless guy make a move to threaten the life of the home owner? Just thinking out loud.
Rule of thumb here... do not walk into another man's house uninvited!!
Last edited:
The Airframer
Regular Member
I did. He broke in... Good shoot!
jmelvin
Founder's Club Member
That kind of logic will land you in the state's pokey in pretty quick fashion, if you shoot someone during the daytime and the only thing they've done is break in. You'd best be able to establish that the person broke in during the daytime with intent to commit some other felony. Fortunately for the homeowner, the prosecutor has charged the man not only with malicious wounding (a felony), but also with breaking and entering with the intent to commit a felony.
TFred
Regular Member
The Airframer
Regular Member
I'm no genius but I'd be willing to bet that dude wasn't letting himself in through the window to make himself a sandwich. I'm sure there was proof of intent to commit a felony and even fear of injury/death that led to his new orifices.
Mayhem
Regular Member
Not sure that is a good enough reason. What if it was some old drunk that thought it was his house?
Still worth taking a life when the worst he would have done is pee in your flower pot in the corner before passing out?
Way too many reasons someone could be in your house in error. Unless I see an immediate threat to harm my family, I am not going to blast him. Life is too precious and I do not want the thought of a bad shoot on my mind for the rest of my life.
Mayhem
Regular Member
Well, you can be "sure" of it all you want but I am still not reading it in the paper. Not only that but these two actually now each other. If there was any justification for the shooting I suspect it would have also been released.
The Airframer
Regular Member
No doubt Mayhem, the more that surfaces about this story, the more fishy it becomes. There's more to it than we'll ever know lest they bring him before a grand jury.
Had that happen to me many years ago. I was probably 13-14 or so and was sitting in the living room watching TV.... the guy who lived across the street opened the front door (wasn't locked) and stumbled on in as if he owned the place. He got about halfway across the living room before stopping and looking at me with a confused look on his face. I just told him 'Terry, you're in the wrong house.... you live across the street'. He mumbled 'thanks', and back out the door he went. lol
Today, the door is rarely unlocked when we are inside.... so anyone coming in might receive a different reaction. But it does make one think.....
The Airframer
Regular Member
Had this problem while i was stationed in Japan living in the barracks, every floor looks exactly the same & no elevators, same boring pictures each wall, fire extinguisher and water fountains in the exact spot. I'd get so pissed when my key didnt work, or embarrassed when I walked into bobby's unlock room below mine. Its easy to do after a kegger and about 20 winning rounds of horseshoes. I don't see this as a possibility of the shooting, I believe this was personal, unless the shooter's judgement was terribly diminished also.
TFred
Regular Member
Folks this is the sort of blur that the anti-self-defense crowd is not only eating up, but actively pushing out there for the apathetic to consume.
I can't remember ANY case of a plain-old-drunk being shot by a home defender. There are a few cases of belligerent drunks, who did actually attack, or attempt and eventually succeed to violently break into homes even after being warned away, but that is a completely different scenario.
Stand-your-ground laws do not allow you to shoot drunks who wander into your house, unless they are otherwise threatening you. The content of their bloodstream may contribute to why they are there and not somewhere else, but it has no bearing on your decision to defend yourself. That decision must be made on your perception of the threat your safety, and that alone.
JMHO, as always, YMMV.
TFred
I can't remember ANY case of a plain-old-drunk being shot by a home defender. There are a few cases of belligerent drunks, who did actually attack, or attempt and eventually succeed to violently break into homes even after being warned away, but that is a completely different scenario.
Stand-your-ground laws do not allow you to shoot drunks who wander into your house, unless they are otherwise threatening you. The content of their bloodstream may contribute to why they are there and not somewhere else, but it has no bearing on your decision to defend yourself. That decision must be made on your perception of the threat your safety, and that alone.
JMHO, as always, YMMV.
TFred
That's true ..to an extent, but uninvited guests deserve some pain!
That's one of the things that concerns me about the new generation of gun owners. They see the starting point as calling 911 and the next step as shooting him when in reality, there is a great big world of things that can be done to unwelcome intruders that will not only remove him, but give a great deal of satisfaction in the process.
Remember, the joy is in the giving!:uhoh:
Marco
Regular Member
It's much better to give than receive!!
I like to have my dogs escort folks, so they don't get lost.
When we lived in NoVA, we had a drunk that belonged to the party across street that wouldn't/couldn't understand that he was at the wrong house, inspite of the barking dog and my verbal commands.
The drunk finally made it on the the back deck (via secured gate door) and was trying very hard to get the sliding door open.
I called PD and told the dispatcher that I had a drunk that couldn't be reasoned with and that he had broken my gate and was trying to gain entry into the home inspite of verbal warnings and a barking dog.
The dispatcher actually asked what I wanted the police to do. I stated they could either remove him know or wait until I called them back as he would be needing an amubulance to transport him to the hospital for dog bite injuries or possibly worse. The PD arrived within minutes.
I choose not to press charges as the neighbor paid to repair the gate and applogized for the incident.
Sheriff
Regular Member
This shooting took place just a few miles from me. I am quite surprised the homeowner wasn't charged, with the commonwealth's intent being that it's up to a jury to clear him/her of any wrongdoing. The only problem here of course, it would cost $50,000 to $75,000 for the homeowner to present his defense in a shooting like this. I am guessing charges weren't placed based solely on the fact that the shootee had such an extensive criminal record to begin with.
Contrary to what others may say or experience, we do not have a gun friendly atmosphere in the city and county here. The only reason we don't have more negative police-citizen encounters is because the cops have been educated on open carry. They don't like it, but they have been educated.
Contrary to what others may say or experience, we do not have a gun friendly atmosphere in the city and county here. The only reason we don't have more negative police-citizen encounters is because the cops have been educated on open carry. They don't like it, but they have been educated.
jmelvin
Founder's Club Member
Beyond the question "do I need to shoot this person to stay alive", the financial aspect of it all can have a very calming effect if you're the type who would tend to jump and shoot anything and everything that walks through your door at any time. Whether in the homeplace or out in public, it's often a good idea to have something additional to a gun to help you deal with your self preservation needs.
Last edited:
roscoe13
Campaign Veteran
"Do I need to shoot this person to stay alive/keep my spouse/so/children/anyone else who may be in my house alive?"
There, fixed it for you
Roscoe
jmelvin
Founder's Club Member
Well yes, but I figured it was inherently understood. Thanks for clarification.