Fitchburg man kills intruder

imported post

Here is the video link:

http://video.nbc15.madison.com/global/video/flash/popupplayer.asp?ClipID1=4136284&h1=Fiancee%20of%20Intruder%20Interview%209/17/09&vt1=v&at1=News&d1=40656&LaunchPageAdTag=News&fvCatNo=&backgroundImageURL=&activePane=info&rnd=45707090

To bad so sad, he broke into someones home, he was alone, no one forced him to do it. He really blew it. He paid the ultimate price.

My advice to all you criminals out there, think twice!

I am a poet and I didn't know it.:what:

imported post

J.Gleason wrote:

Someone breaks into my house....Chick Chick Boom it's over.

Click to expand...

Whether or not it is over depends on the DA. The lesson learned from the Fitchburg shooting is that not remembering the firearm going off due to the trama of the home invasion.

http://www.kare11.com/news/news_article.aspx?storyid=493957


http://forum.minneapolisfinder.com/about9783.html


& this is to say nothing of the civil liability. I would not be surprized to see in the Fitchburg shootingthat dead guy's relatives will be going forward with a wrongful death lawsuitto get some of that "well-heeled neighborhood" money. Lower level of responsibility than criminal charges (Remember O.J ?)

Urge your legislators to support the castle doctrine bill.

imported post

The guy that broke in has a fairly well stocked criminal record, was on probation for a felony conviction earlier this year.

According to the vidoes I just watched, His hit-list consist of aggravated stalking, armed robbery, and all sorts of wonderful criminal behavior. The person that shot this scumbag should get a reward from crime-stoppers for handling the problem permanently instead of sending him back out in society again to prey on others.



Good shot!!! Let me buy you a box or two of fresh ammuntion for your efforts!

imported post

Brass Magnet wrote:

They had a section of the news devoted to this last night. They even had a lawyer on that clarified when it's ok to use deadly force in Wisconsin.

Click to expand...

Would be nice to get a link to what that attorney had to say...

imported post

Support The 2nd wrote:

Brass Magnet wrote:

They had a section of the news devoted to this last night. They even had a lawyer on that clarified when it's ok to use deadly force in Wisconsin.

Click to expand...

Would be nice to get a link to what that attorney had to say...

Click to expand...

Don't have a link but it was pretty simple; common law self defense: Be reasonably in fear of great bodily harm or death for yourself or that of another.

imported post

HankT wrote:

Sgt_Habz wrote:

HankT wrote:

J.Gleason wrote:

Someone breaks into my house....Chick Chick Boom it's over.

Click to expand...

1. What if you are not in fear of severe physical harm or death?

2. What if it's an unarmedwoman?

3. What if it's an unarmed kid?

Click to expand...

I understand the legal complications that J.Gleason's approach might cause, but nevertheless would have to agree and emulate myself.

Breaking into my house goes far beyond my views of RKBA and triggers my primal instinct to protect and defend my life and the life of my wife and unborn child. When seconds matter, I will not be takingprecious momentsto ask if the intruder is an unarmed woman or kid. I will assume, based in the immediate circumstances that they broke into my house, that this could be a worst case scenario and in order to be effective in protecting me and mine, I will use whatever force I need to negate any and all threats.

Click to expand...

4. What if it's some drunk guy and you find him passed out just inside the door when you get home?

Click to expand...

Well, this is call a DRUNK INTRUDER. Some drunkars are very combative can and will hurt others.

imported post

HankT wrote:

Sgt_Habz wrote:

HankT wrote:

J.Gleason wrote:

Someone breaks into my house....Chick Chick Boom it's over.

Click to expand...

1. What if you are not in fear of severe physical harm or death?

2. What if it's an unarmedwoman?

3. What if it's an unarmed kid?

Click to expand...

I understand the legal complications that J.Gleason's approach might cause, but nevertheless would have to agree and emulate myself.

Breaking into my house goes far beyond my views of RKBA and triggers my primal instinct to protect and defend my life and the life of my wife and unborn child. When seconds matter, I will not be takingprecious momentsto ask if the intruder is an unarmed woman or kid. I will assume, based in the immediate circumstances that they broke into my house, that this could be a worst case scenario and in order to be effective in protecting me and mine, I will use whatever force I need to negate any and all threats.

Click to expand...

4. What if it's some drunk guy and you find him passed out just inside the door when you get home?

Click to expand...

Hank, are you serious?
If you are, please renounce your title as a state researcher. You are more anti then the anti's.

If someone breaks into my home it is over for him or her which ever the case may be.

What am I suppose to do let them steal, molest and kill my children?
Or in your eyes is it OK that they steal and molest them as long as they don't kill them?

I can't even begin to try to think I would act any other way then to protect my family by all means necessary.

It it thinking like yours that has created these stupid ass laws we have in this state.

If you want to let some crack whore roam freely inside your home good for you. That doesn't mean I will.

What you don't think that kids can kill? Think again, There are many recent cases of kids killing their own families. what makes you think they won't kill a stranger.

How about an enraged drunk? Ever seen one? Ever seen what they can do to someone?

Drunk, Male, Female, who cares, anyone who breaks into another person's home is a criminal and deserves what ever happens to them.

That is what is wrong with society today, everyone thinks we should be so kind and gentle to the criminals and they just keep on being criminals.

imported post

Pal wrote:

HankT wrote:

Sgt_Habz wrote:

HankT wrote:

J.Gleason wrote:

Someone breaks into my house....Chick Chick Boom it's over.

Click to expand...

1. What if you are not in fear of severe physical harm or death?

2. What if it's an unarmedwoman?

3. What if it's an unarmed kid?

Click to expand...

I understand the legal complications that J.Gleason's approach might cause, but nevertheless would have to agree and emulate myself.

Breaking into my house goes far beyond my views of RKBA and triggers my primal instinct to protect and defend my life and the life of my wife and unborn child. When seconds matter, I will not be takingprecious momentsto ask if the intruder is an unarmed woman or kid. I will assume, based in the immediate circumstances that they broke into my house, that this could be a worst case scenario and in order to be effective in protecting me and mine, I will use whatever force I need to negate any and all threats.

Click to expand...

4. What if it's some drunk guy and you find him passed out just inside the door when you get home?

Click to expand...

Well, this is call a DRUNK INTRUDER. Some drunkars are very combative can and will hurt others.

Click to expand...

So, Pal, would you do a "Chick Chick Boom it's over" on him, like J. Gleason? Would you shoot the "DRUNK INTRUDER" who is "passed out just inside the door when you get home?"

imported post

Lets use a little bit of brainpower for this fantasy situation if a drunk broke into someones home.

If they are passed out. I wouldtry to restrain him withzip-ties or a set of cuffs, and call the police to remove him. Butif he were to become combative and I felt my wellbeing is threatened in any way whatsoever, I would end the threat in any means needed.

This manufactured scenario of a drunk breaking into ones home is the exact reason we need a solid castle doctrine in WI.
If you have some 250 pound drunk and the homeowner is some 98 pound female. he could overpower her in a real hurry and I think it would be best for her to be immune from anyprosecution if she was forced to shoot to neutralize the situation. Someone that cannot control their drinking and gets drunk to that point usually suffers from major mood swings, basically they are likea cannon with a lit fuse waiting to go off.

I am not a small guy, but anyoone taking a swing at me is a serious threat to my wellbeing.
I do not care of someone is armed or not, if they broke into my home, they will be on the receiving end of a shooting since I have no way to determine what their actions are going to be in the future. They could turn very violent and at moment, armed or not, I will not tolerate it nor should I be forced to tolerate it.

imported post

HankT wrote:

Pal wrote:

HankT wrote:

Sgt_Habz wrote:

HankT wrote:

J.Gleason wrote:

Someone breaks into my house....Chick Chick Boom it's over.

Click to expand...

1. What if you are not in fear of severe physical harm or death?

2. What if it's an unarmedwoman?

3. What if it's an unarmed kid?

Click to expand...

I understand the legal complications that J.Gleason's approach might cause, but nevertheless would have to agree and emulate myself.

Breaking into my house goes far beyond my views of RKBA and triggers my primal instinct to protect and defend my life and the life of my wife and unborn child. When seconds matter, I will not be takingprecious momentsto ask if the intruder is an unarmed woman or kid. I will assume, based in the immediate circumstances that they broke into my house, that this could be a worst case scenario and in order to be effective in protecting me and mine, I will use whatever force I need to negate any and all threats.

Click to expand...

4. What if it's some drunk guy and you find him passed out just inside the door when you get home?

Click to expand...

Well, this is call a DRUNK INTRUDER. Some drunkars are very combative can and will hurt others.

Click to expand...

So, Pal, would you do a "Chick Chick Boom it's over" on him, like J. Gleason? Would you shoot the "DRUNK INTRUDER" who is "passed out just inside the door when you get home?"

Click to expand...

I would the second he came towards which means my verbal commands failed or attempts to retreat further into my home. I don't know if there are others in there with him, if he has a weapon stashed, or if he is looking for something to use for one.

Some drunks are highly combative. Drink to much and your cognitive part of your brain can shut down and it's on fight or flight mode. Unknown people directing commands to you can be seen as a threat very quickly. Ask any cops.

If you are dealing with any criminal or person who is in a confused or combative state do NOT attempt to get close to them. This is also a tactic to draw people in. Even if you shoot a man his knife is going to mess you up or worse. Getting rid of the only advantage you have (distance) is also about the dumbest thing anyone can do in most situations without training and tools.

It's to bad WI doesn't have stand your ground, castle doctrine, or no civil suits if it is a legal shoot.

imported post

How do you know the guy who just broke into your house whether he is drunk or not isn't say, a 9th degree black belt that could kill you with his bare hands?

Again, Chick chick Boom!

imported post

HankT wrote:

Pal wrote:

HankT wrote:

Sgt_Habz wrote:

HankT wrote:

J.Gleason wrote:

Someone breaks into my house....Chick Chick Boom it's over.

Click to expand...

1. What if you are not in fear of severe physical harm or death?

2. What if it's an unarmedwoman?

3. What if it's an unarmed kid?

Click to expand...

I understand the legal complications that J.Gleason's approach might cause, but nevertheless would have to agree and emulate myself.

Breaking into my house goes far beyond my views of RKBA and triggers my primal instinct to protect and defend my life and the life of my wife and unborn child. When seconds matter, I will not be takingprecious momentsto ask if the intruder is an unarmed woman or kid. I will assume, based in the immediate circumstances that they broke into my house, that this could be a worst case scenario and in order to be effective in protecting me and mine, I will use whatever force I need to negate any and all threats.

Click to expand...

4. What if it's some drunk guy and you find him passed out just inside the door when you get home?

Click to expand...

Well, this is call a DRUNK INTRUDER. Some drunkars are very combative can and will hurt others.

Click to expand...

So, Pal, would you do a "Chick Chick Boom it's over" on him, like J. Gleason? Would you shoot the "DRUNK INTRUDER" who is "passed out just inside the door when you get home?"

Click to expand...

HankT, I think I will give hima pillow, a blanket, and a cup of hot coffee. I will make hima HOME-SWEET-HOME. I will wait until he's sobered and see what can he do to me or my family. :banghead:

I don't know what would I do when I see or encounter one, but I will do what I think it's the right thing to do. Some people just playing drunk so when they go to court, they will say, they don't remember what happened.

I do not wish for it, but you never know when things happen.

I doagreed with J. Gleason's comments. Thanks, Pal.

imported post

Passive101 wrote:

HankT wrote:

Pal wrote:

HankT wrote:

Sgt_Habz wrote:

HankT wrote:

J.Gleason wrote:

Someone breaks into my house....Chick Chick Boom it's over.

Click to expand...

1. What if you are not in fear of severe physical harm or death?

2. What if it's an unarmedwoman?

3. What if it's an unarmed kid?

Click to expand...

I understand the legal complications that J.Gleason's approach might cause, but nevertheless would have to agree and emulate myself.

Breaking into my house goes far beyond my views of RKBA and triggers my primal instinct to protect and defend my life and the life of my wife and unborn child. When seconds matter, I will not be takingprecious momentsto ask if the intruder is an unarmed woman or kid. I will assume, based in the immediate circumstances that they broke into my house, that this could be a worst case scenario and in order to be effective in protecting me and mine, I will use whatever force I need to negate any and all threats.

Click to expand...

4. What if it's some drunk guy and you find him passed out just inside the door when you get home?

Click to expand...

Well, this is call a DRUNK INTRUDER. Some drunkars are very combative can and will hurt others.

Click to expand...

So, Pal, would you do a "Chick Chick Boom it's over" on him, like J. Gleason? Would you shoot the "DRUNK INTRUDER" who is "passed out just inside the door when you get home?"

Click to expand...

I would the second he came towards which means my verbal commands failed or attempts to retreat further into my home. I don't know if there are others in there with him, if he has a weapon stashed, or if he is looking for something to use for one.

Some drunks are highly combative. Drink to much and your cognitive part of your brain can shut down and it's on fight or flight mode. Unknown people directing commands to you can be seen as a threat very quickly. Ask any cops.

If you are dealing with any criminal or person who is in a confused or combative state do NOT attempt to get close to them. This is also a tactic to draw people in. Even if you shoot a man his knife is going to mess you up or worse. Getting rid of the only advantage you have (distance) is also about the dumbest thing anyone can do in most situations without training and tools.

It's to bad WI doesn't have stand your ground, castle doctrine, or no civil suits if it is a legal shoot.

Click to expand...

In your home, I think this is about the letter of the law in Wisconsin (good job, you might just stay a free man).

Also agree with the "don't get close to the person", AT ALL, for any reason. One never can guess what the bad man is thinking. Keep him at a very good range for a single shot take down. At that point if needed, a dbl. tap is my choice. I like to side with safety first. If you put a hole in him, and are waiting for the cops, do not get close. If you want to help him, throw him a towel. He might just want to kill you more then ever now.

imported post

The Fitchburg shooter has been - will be very luckynot beingcharged with homicide under Wisconsin's current law.

http://host.madison.com/news/local/crime_and_courts/article_53bd183a-a701-11de-9ab3-001cc4c002e0.html

Another DA in another county could have very easily reached a different conclusion.

imported post

It took over 5 minutes for police to arrive on scene.

imported post

Flipper wrote:

Another DA in another county could have very easily reached a different conclusion.

Click to expand...

I disagree.

There was a shooting last year in Crawford County Wisconsin. The woman was in her house, the guy was outside the house. He was breaking out her windows, not trying to enter, just breaking the windows with a pipe. She shot him. No charges filed.

In that case, she had no reasonable expectation of being killed as he was outside the home, but the DA left it alone.

So is there "equal protection," good question!

imported post

So even though there's no castle doctrine on the books, chances are they won't charge for fear of it going to a higher court?

That's not legal advice saying to shoot regardless, but seems to be a trend...

imported post

gollbladder13 wrote:

So even though there's no castle doctrine on the books, chances are they won't charge for fear of it going to a higher court?

That's not legal advice saying to shoot regardless, but seems to be a trend...

Click to expand...

I would say 2 out of 100+ DA's is not a trend, just pure luck. Let's keep the heat on for all three (Transport, School Zone, Castle Doctrine).

Also keep in mind, that a decisionto not charge today carries no wait tomorrow. The "people" can elect a new DA and that DA can choose to prosecute.

imported post

So I guess the moral of the story is shoot 'em good and shoot 'em dead? That way when you say you felt threatened for your life because they said they would kill you, he's too dead to talk?

(somewhat sarcastic)...

imported post

gollbladder13 wrote:

So even though there's no castle doctrine on the books, chances are they won't charge for fear of it going to a higher court?

That's not legal advice saying to shoot regardless, but seems to be a trend...

Click to expand...

That is only half the reason to have a castle doctrine. The other half is to prevent being sued into homelissness for defending your self.