• 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.

Intruder fatally shot at Garrard home

ChinChin

Regular Member
Joined
May 17, 2007
Messages
683
Location
Loudoun County, Virginia, USA
imported post

From where I sit the homeowner just saved the good taxpayers of Kentucky around $15K a year in having the prison system house this nimrod.

.23 cents for 1 round vs. $15K. Homeowner should get a commission check really.
 

lifer89

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 29, 2009
Messages
19
Location
New Albany , Indiana, USA
imported post

You would think that this would wake people up but it wont. All I can say is that if you come in my house like this guy did you will meet him very soon.
 

okboomer

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 18, 2009
Messages
1,164
Location
Oklahoma, USA
imported post

Well, here's the questions that I get from this:

As for the DA taking it to the grand jury, is there some way the shooter being exonerated would help his case against the two in the car?

Doesn't KY have a 'liability clause' that would protect SD shooters?

Who determines whether a shooting is justified? In some states, it is left up to the local Sheriff or the State Police.

I hope there is a defense fund set up, 'cause even one appearance by a lawyer in front of a grand jury is going to cost big $$$.
 

simmonsjoe

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 1, 2009
Messages
1,661
Location
Mattaponi, Virginia, United States
imported post

okboomer wrote:
Well, here's the questions that I get from this:

As for the DA taking it to the grand jury, is there some way the shooter being exonerated would help his case against the two in the car?

Doesn't KY have a 'liability clause' that would protect SD shooters?

Who determines whether a shooting is justified? In some states, it is left up to the local Sheriff or the State Police.

I hope there is a defense fund set up, 'cause even one appearance by a lawyer in front of a grand jury is going to cost big $$$.
Interesting. Perhaps a Grand Gury failing to indite provides a level of protectipn for the homeowner in a civil case?
 

heliopolissolutions

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 24, 2009
Messages
542
Location
, ,
imported post

I gotta say, I do not like it one bit when people throw down residential addresses in news stories, particularly in ones of such debate.

"Hey, look! This guy lives here! And he shot this guy!"
 

since9

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jan 14, 2010
Messages
6,964
Location
Colorado Springs, Colorado, USA
imported post

With a 9-year=old son myself, I feel bad for what his son will now have to go through - fatherless, mother's in jail - as the result of his father's mistakes.
 

since9

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jan 14, 2010
Messages
6,964
Location
Colorado Springs, Colorado, USA
imported post

heliopolissolutions wrote:
I gotta say, I do not like it one bit when people throw down residential addresses in news stories, particularly in ones of such debate.

"Hey, look! This guy lives here! And he shot this guy!"

I agree completely! I would vote YES on a law which required the reporter to report his or her own address with the same degree of prominence as any address mentioned in concerning a hotly debated issue.

I'd vote "Heck Yes" for a law which simply made it illegal.
 

simmonsjoe

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 1, 2009
Messages
1,661
Location
Mattaponi, Virginia, United States
imported post

since9 wrote:
heliopolissolutions wrote:
I gotta say, I do not like it one bit when people throw down residential addresses in news stories, particularly in ones of such debate.

"Hey, look! This guy lives here! And he shot this guy!"

I agree completely! I would vote YES on a law which required the reporter to report his or her own address with the same degree of prominence as any address mentioned in concerning a hotly debated issue.

I'd vote "Heck Yes" for a law which simply made it illegal.
Stop legislating morality. If you don't like it, don't buy the paper.
 

4angrybadgers

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 24, 2009
Messages
411
Location
Hattiesburg, Mississippi, USA
imported post

simmonsjoe wrote:
since9 wrote:
heliopolissolutions wrote:
I gotta say, I do not like it one bit when people throw down residential addresses in news stories, particularly in ones of such debate.

"Hey, look! This guy lives here! And he shot this guy!"

I agree completely! I would vote YES on a law which required the reporter to report his or her own address with the same degree of prominence as any address mentioned in concerning a hotly debated issue.

I'd vote "Heck Yes" for a law which simply made it illegal.
Stop legislating morality. If you don't like it, don't buy the paper.
Care to explain how that will solve the issue? The fact is that now a man who shot an intruder is open to possible retribution because his address was unnecessarily (maybe even maliciously?) publicized. Since9's (theoretical) boycott of the paper wouldn't change that one bit.
 

heliopolissolutions

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 24, 2009
Messages
542
Location
, ,
imported post

simmonsjoe wrote:
since9 wrote:
heliopolissolutions wrote:
I gotta say, I do not like it one bit when people throw down residential addresses in news stories, particularly in ones of such debate.

"Hey, look! This guy lives here! And he shot this guy!"

I agree completely! I would vote YES on a law which required the reporter to report his or her own address with the same degree of prominence as any address mentioned in concerning a hotly debated issue.

I'd vote "Heck Yes" for a law which simply made it illegal.
Stop legislating morality. If you don't like it, don't buy the paper.


Friend, I think you might not appreciate the issue, which is one of privacy.

Each and every one of us would have bones to pick if the local paper printed a piece that said something to the effect of: "Hey! Guess what?! This guy has lots and lots of guns in his house! This is his address!!"

And that is small potatoes compared to the retribution or hate mail or vandalism this man might recieve as the result of failed journalistic responsibility.
 

LoveMyCountry

State Researcher
Joined
Oct 20, 2006
Messages
590
Location
Ocean Shores, WA
imported post

since9 wrote:
With a 9-year=old son myself, I feel bad for what his son will now have to go through - fatherless, mother's in jail - as the result of his father's mistakes.
Nope, a mistake is taking the wrong exit. This guy made a choice to do harm and many people are paying the price. He thought it out and planned ahead with forethought and malice - no mistake at all.

LoveMyCountry
 

Old Grump

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 22, 2010
Messages
387
Location
Blue River, Wisconsin, USA
imported post

Just between you me and the neighbors dog I would have deleted the mans address before I posted that article. Now he not only has the lunatics who read the local paper knowing his address but its available to everybody who has read this post.

As far as his choice of gun you use what you have, I will not second guess, bad guys have been put down by 12 year old boys protecting their mother with a 22 rifle and some mope always comes up with "Well he shoulda used a 357." Dead is dead and I don't care what caliber it is I want no gun pointed at me.

Obviously a long barreled .410 shotgun worked just fine, using a Taurus Judge would not have improved the effectiveness of the round or the accuracy of the round. Just be glad the guy had a gun and refused to be a victim.
 

Two Hands

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 7, 2010
Messages
28
Location
Front Royal, Virginia, USA
imported post

Having been born and raised in Breathitt ("Bloody Breathitt") County and seen first hand what a shotgun can do to the human body, I agree with the Old Grumpy one. Dead"IS" Dead.
 

Statesman

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 20, 2008
Messages
948
Location
Lexington, Kentucky, USA
imported post

Old Grump wrote:
Just between you me and the neighbors dog I would have deleted the mans address before I posted that article. Now he not only has the lunatics who read the local paper knowing his address but its available to everybody who has read this post.
True, but the information is public to begin with, and the address was originally posted by Kentucky.com. Google probably snagged it and saved it to eternity well before I saw the article.
 

Carnivore

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 29, 2008
Messages
970
Location
ParkHills, Missouri, USA
imported post

lil_freak_66 wrote:
kentucky seems like a nice place to live,when i went to harlan(which i guess is a bad part of the state) to offroad,i saw idk how many OC'ers

the guy running the shop at the trailhead had a stainless 1911,and i had seen a sig just outside of there,and in the stores i had seen 2 revolvers being OC'ed

i wanna move there,like minded people.

glad the homeowner wasnt hurt(gotta stay on topic here) but id reccomend more than a .410,unless its the taurus judge.
What do you think a tuarus judge will do that a 410 shotgun isn't capable of? other than maneuverability..
 

boredstudent

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 17, 2010
Messages
28
Location
, ,
imported post

heliopolissolutions wrote:

Friend, I think you might not appreciate the issue, which is one of privacy.

Each and every one of us would have bones to pick if the local paper printed a piece that said something to the effect of: "Hey! Guess what?! This guy has lots and lots of guns in his house! This is his address!!"

And that is small potatoes compared to the retribution or hate mail or vandalism this man might recieve as the result of failed journalistic responsibility.
I would call that a definite +1. I think at some times the Freedom of information act is a bit ridiculous and reporters tend want to overstep boundaries and cause chaos for a story. Like when they got the list of everyone with a CCW in Lucas County in Ohio and decided to publish it.
 

PT111

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 31, 2007
Messages
2,243
Location
, South Carolina, USA
imported post

boredstudent wrote:
heliopolissolutions wrote:

Friend, I think you might not appreciate the issue, which is one of privacy.

Each and every one of us would have bones to pick if the local paper printed a piece that said something to the effect of: "Hey! Guess what?! This guy has lots and lots of guns in his house! This is his address!!"

And that is small potatoes compared to the retribution or hate mail or vandalism this man might recieve as the result of failed journalistic responsibility.
I would call that a definite +1. I think at some times the Freedom of information act is a bit ridiculous and reporters tend want to overstep boundaries and cause chaos for a story. Like when they got the list of everyone with a CCW in Lucas County in Ohio and decided to publish it.
One cannot pick and choose which freedoms they want. As much as it may be in bad taste to do certain things like publishing addresses it is part of the FOIA and we must takke the good with the bad. If you allow the gubmint to hold back some information then who draws the line, you or them?
 
Top