• 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.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • 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.

Home intruder shot in shower, home owner charged with murder 1

WalkingWolf

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 31, 2011
Messages
11,930
Location
North Carolina
OK then....



You discover someone cheating in a legalized gambling situation which is causing you to lose money. Legal to shoot and kill them under RCW 9A.16.050?

Washington Pattern Jury Instructions:

https://govt.westlaw.com/wcrji/Docu...ype=CategoryPageItem&contextData=(sc.Default)



The fact that the homeowner left the scene to arm himself and then returned to the scene pretty much tosses self-defense completely out the window. If found that the homeowner was in any danger at all it wasn't until he re-entered the home knowing there was an intruder in there that he placed himself in danger. Using deadly force to stop the felony if it is determined that the trespassing rose to the level of burglary making it a felony? Not according to the jury instructions above. Would a reasonable person leave the house, retrieve a gun, and re-enter the house? To me, that is not reasonable. Especially - and we don't know this - but if it is determined the homeowner had a cell phone in his possession at the time that he could have called used to call for police assistance.

Not from Washington state, but your assessment sound correct, and I think that is the way the jury will vote. Best he can do is hope for a plea deal.
 

countryclubjoe

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2013
Messages
2,505
Location
nj
I see that I am not the only one.... and my complaints to moderators have had NO EFFECT that I can see. Much nicer with the ignore feature activated!

Our esteemed member Solus, may in fact not be the problem.. The problem could in fact be, that many fail to open their minds to opinions that conflict to their own.. Hence, " new opinions are always suspected and usually opposed; without any other reason but because they are not already common.

Civil thinkers can and shall agree, that we can all agree to disagree.. I see no personal attacks from Solus, I see that he encourages discourse without blasphemy thereof the subject.. How we interpret his prose is an individual effort. I trust that our moderators are not partial to any individual poster that would indeed violate the decorum of this board.. Complaining is not the answer.. Proper civil discourse without name slinging is more respected and lends a brighter light in respect to our RKBA..

' the man of knowledge must be able not only to love his enemies but also to hate his friends'.. Fredrich Nietzsche

My .02
regards
CCJ
 

Alpine

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 10, 2012
Messages
671
Location
Idaho
In the lawful defense of [followed by a list of persons]...to commit a felony or to do some great personal injury to the slayer or to any such person, and there is imminent danger of such design [including the "or felony"] being accomplished.
That first "or" is key here. It splits it between ANY kind of felony or the injury.

In the actual resistance of an attempt to commit a felony [followed by a list of places]...in which he or she is.
The felony was still going on. Felonies can last for quite a while.
 

Alpine

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 10, 2012
Messages
671
Location
Idaho
Technically yes, if that makes one blush then time to remove that first "or" from the RCW, or add a limiting qualifier to the RCW.

As it is now, the WA state Supreme Court is playing medium/psychic and gutting half of the RCW as it grammatically stands. Not a good thing to allow the court to do...
 

Alpine

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 10, 2012
Messages
671
Location
Idaho
I think I will stick with my interpretation of the law.
A good idea in Washington state, only because our activist courts ignore the law and because we haven't voted out those activist judges.

These are also the same courts currently seizing control of the budget process (ala McCleary decision) from the legislature and also ruling any initiative they don't like as "multi-subject" while allowing others with dozens of pages and myriad subject matter covered to stand.

If one does not like the justifiable homicide RCW as written, it is better to amend it rather than let the courts gut it in the name of 'common sense' or 'decency.' If you do let them start gutting laws, pretty soon you'll have a court-imposed income tax.
 
Last edited:

deanf

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 25, 2007
Messages
1,789
Location
N47º 12’ x W122º 10’
Is it just me, or does it seem people advocate the shooting of human beings to stop felonies in progress, no matter how we currently (or in the future) define felony?
 

Leader

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 8, 2006
Messages
274
Location
Livingston Co., Michigan, , USA
Is it just me, or does it seem people advocate the shooting of human beings to stop felonies in progress, no matter how we currently (or in the future) define felony?

If it were a nation wide thing & we had constitutional carry, it would cut down on crime.

Understand that many things that are felonies, most people don't even know are crimes.
I think people would judge each case individually and after a short while, shootings would taper off & crime would go way down.

Remember, a dead felon won't commit another felony.
 
Top