joeroket
Regular Member
imported post
Bear 45/70 wrote:
I agree with the police not arresting the homeowner, especially since after the display of the weapon the perp charged him with a weapon of his own, but if the case is assigned to an overzealous prosecutor that has a anti-2a stance it would not suprise me if the home owner is charged with a violation of 9.41.270.
Bear 45/70 wrote:
You are mostly correct Bear. We are allowed to prevent an attempted felony with deadly force but in the incident we are talking about in this thread the homeowner had no authority to brandish his pistol. At the time he did that the crime was simply trespassing which, as you stated the perp needs to leave. If he does not an shows no agression the only thing you can lawfully do is to go hands on and detain him.joeroket wrote:The micro second the home ownerfeel threated,he has theright to shoot, trespass or not. The trespasser has to leave, NOW, not after he charges the home owner to disarm him, which would be assault I believe, so there is your felony.You have the right to defend your property against a felony. Trespassing is a gross misdemeanor at best. I am not twisting the law, it is very simple and black and white. You need to read it as it was written and not the way you want it to read Bear.
I agree with the police not arresting the homeowner, especially since after the display of the weapon the perp charged him with a weapon of his own, but if the case is assigned to an overzealous prosecutor that has a anti-2a stance it would not suprise me if the home owner is charged with a violation of 9.41.270.