Drunk 21 year old intrudes into the wrong house

[hd2000fxdl 422]

I think by page 3 in this thread, this will have turned into a huge fish story..

 

I still say it's a sad thing that happened, she is lucky to be alive, the homeowners got a scare and reacted and will not be charged under CO Law. Could have turned out a lot worse for everyone.

 

Yes there could have been a different ending to this story, but all the facts and real intension of the girl need to be take into account. Not making light of anything, and sure not going to joke about it, and it's not something that should be swept under the rug either, but if this was a real non malicious event, it should be treated accordingly.

[hd2000fxdl 422]

You know what is disgusting? You understanding of laws pertaining to the use of deadly force in NJ and what you perceive as an "imminent threat" to your life. Your perception of when it is ok to shoot someone is far off living in NJ. Perhaps in Colorado it ok to shoot someone for simply intruding in your home, but I can assure you in NJ in this case you would be held criminally and civilly liable if you had shot here.

 

I think you may have misunderstood PA's response. I took it as he thought it was disgusting that you would make a joke about this situation. Now if this went to page 3 or 4 and a few days from now and we did a bunch of thread drifting it may be seen differently, but this is probably way to soon and early.

[Anselmo 87]

I think you may have misunderstood PA's response. I took it as he thought it was disgusting that you would make a joke about this situation. Now if this went to page 3 or 4 and a few days from now and we did a bunch of thread drifting it may be seen differently, but this is probably way to soon and early.

 

I took Jule's statement to meant that he wouldn't just assume a drunk girl was an imminent threat to him only because she intruded into his house.

[Justjules 0]

I think you may have misunderstood PA's response. I took it as he thought it was disgusting that you would make a joke about this situation. Now if this went to page 3 or 4 and a few days from now and we did a bunch of thread drifting it may be seen differently, but this is probably way to soon and early.

 

See my edited post, in response to his post. I posted the laws pertaining to using deadly force in your home in NJ. They read VERY tricky, a ton of "or" and "ands" need to be met. IMHO this girl did not deserve to be shot, that is someones daughter and her intentions were IMO not in malice. Had this happened in NJ the homeowner would be screwed beyond reality.

[Justjules 0]

I took Jule's statement to meant that he wouldn't just assume a drunk girl was an imminent threat to him only because she intruded into his house.

Perhaps my comment was in bad taste or flew over everyone's heads. Buy yeah, I find a 21 year old drunk college girl in my house more of a blessing than a "imminent threat to my life" where it would require me employing deadly force.

 

Keep in mind, we live in a liberalized state where no one is held responsible for their own actions except the sane people. I mean we entertain lawsuits that should be laughed out of court..

 

Try and convince a liberal NJ jury that you had no other choice but to employ deadly force on a 110 lb drunk 21 year old girl in your home and how you wer in imminent fear for you life...Right..Good luck with that. Juries and judges dont care about the "WHAT IF" the care about the "FACTS-LAW-AND WHAT HAPPENED" I.E. totality of the circumstances.

[hd2000fxdl 422]

I took Jule's statement to meant that he wouldn't just assume a drunk girl was an imminent threat to him only because she intruded into his house.

 

Got-cha..

[hd2000fxdl 422]

See my edited post, in response to his post. I posted the laws pertaining to using deadly force in your home in NJ. They read VERY tricky, a ton of "or" and "ands" need to be met. IMHO this girl did not deserve to be shot, that is someones daughter and her intentions were IMO not in malice. Had this happened in NJ the homeowner would be screwed beyond reality.

 

OK, it's sad though how the law is in the PR of NJ, but it is what it is and we have to take responsibility under it if something happens. I do agree that I wouldn't have just shot at something or someone I have not identified as an immediate threat. The only problem for all of us that are Monday morning QB'ing this, is we weren't there, we don't know the sequence of events and how quickly this escalated. Either way, this case is not in NJ and luckily for the homeowners it's in CO that has laws to cover situations like this as well as many other states may I add.

[Justjules 0]

The only problem for all of us that are Monday morning QB'ing this, is we weren't there, we don't know the sequence of events and how quickly this escalated. Either way, this case is not in NJ and luckily for the homeowners it's in CO that has laws to cover situations like this as well as many other states may I add.

 

I actually for once agree with you on both points.

 

Now imagine my job where I have to make life and death decisions like this more often and get Monday morning quarterbacked by supervisors,media,prosecutors,judges and juries...

 

i almost shot a kid the other night who pointed an Airsoft gun with a imitation laser sight at me while an elevator door was closing in the projects...We were there on a call of a kid with a BB gun, so my reaction was that at worst it was a BB gun, but I tell you one thing, if it was a real gun and he wanted to shoot me, he had me dead to rights. I didnt expect it at all.

[hd2000fxdl 422]

You're comming around I see...

[silverado427 10,827]

See my edited post, in response to his post. I posted the laws pertaining to using deadly force in your home in NJ. They read VERY tricky, a ton of "or" and "ands" need to be met. IMHO this girl did not deserve to be shot, that is someones daughter and her intentions were IMO not in malice. Had this happened in NJ the homeowner would be screwed beyond reality.

How is that possible. ? How is a person or the prosecutor going to tell me what and how my fears of imminent danger are. If you enter My house with out my permission while i'm sleeping, Guess what i'm naturally going to fear for mine and my family's life.

[Justjules 0]

How is that possible. ? How is a person or the prosecutor going to tell me what and how my fears of imminent danger are. If you enter My house with out my permission while i'm sleeping, Guess what i'm naturally going to fear for mine and my family's life.

Then thats on you and you lawyer to articulate how a 21 year old 110lb drunk girl stumbeling around your house posed an "imminent threat" to your life where deadly force was the only justifiable option at that point....Just saying..Dont hate the messenger.

 

On a side note,( and I know Im absolutely going to get flamed for this comment, )however I feel I must point out, that your very comment and mindset is what scares the general non gun owning public (I.E. Anti gun people) to death of gun owners. Your comment and mindset portrays a blood thirsty kill or be killed image to the general public and puts all of us gun owners in a negative light allowing the anti-gun people to paint us with a broad brush. I understand your point of view and believe me, I dont blame you one bit.

 

Confronted with a situation like this one has to make a "legal" as well as "moral" assessment of the situation in a split second, thats why a clear and working understanding of the use of deadly force laws in NJ are of the utmost importance. Where a wrong decision will haunt you for life and a delayed decision may cost you your life. Welcome to my world sir...

 

*flame suit activated*

[Soju 153]

Oddly, I agree with Jules here mostly. I didn't find anything wrong with his joke either. I'm a single male, that isn't gay. I can't say my first thought would be to shoot if I saw a hot college girl entering my home. Sorry, but especially if I was sleeping, I'm pretty sure thinking with my penis is instinctual, while it takes some time for my brain to warm up after just waking up.

 

There is no doubt that the shooter would be charged if this took place in NJ. Not to say he wasn't justified, (I find it hard to blame him), but NJ has some whack-a** laws and general philosophy when it comes to things. As Jules pointed out, the laws regarding use of force have some many stipulations, exceptions, exemptions, and scenarios, it wouldn't be too hard to swing it one way or the other.

[Soju 153]

On a side note,( and I know Im absolutely going to get flamed for this comment, )however I feel I must point out, that your very comment and mindset is what scares the general non gun owning public (I.E. Anti gun people) to death of gun owners. Your comment and mindset portrays a blood thirsty kill or be killed image to the general public and puts all of us gun owners in a negative light allowing the anti-gun people to paint us with a broad brush.

 

 

Unfortunately you are right. That isn't to say silverado is wrong, but perception is reality. In fact, I agree with silverado. If you're in genuine fear for your safety/life, even if you're really not, it doesn't necessarily make your actions illegal if you use deadly force. That is where you have two different mindsets.

 

1. If someone perceives their life is in danger (because it really feels like it is to them in the moment), then deadly force is justified. This is actually substantiated in NJ law. Whether it holds up or not is a different story, which leads to...

 

2. If someone wasn't actually in danger, and they used deadly force, it was not justified (regardless that they thought they were in danger). This is not substantiated in law, but is in practice and reality, as it has the advantage of being formed AFTER an incident.

 

I would imagine the #2 wouldn't be the case with people who have actually been in a situation like described. It is easy to judge someone else.

[Justjules 0]

Here are some more factors that come into play in court and prosecution of use of force:

 

Ability: does the suspect have the ability to cause you harm?

Means: doe he have the means to cause you harm?

Motive: does he have the motive to cause you harm?

 

Other factors: suspects mind set-is he crazy? Suspects physical size- is he 6-10 350 lbs and your 5-1 110lbs? Suspects ability-is he a 3rd degree Jedi master kungfu expert?? Weapons- is he armed? Duh..

 

There are many things that factor into the use of deadly force that falls upon the responsibility of the homeowner.

Also here is another factor one must consider in NJ law.

 

Deadly Force and Civil Duty to Retreat

A deadly force is not justifiable when an opportunity to retreat with complete safety is known by the defender to be at hand. The use of such force is not justifiable if the defender knew that it could have been avoided with complete safety to himself by retreating. Where these conditions are present, the defender has a duty to retreat, and his use of a deadly force under these circumstances cannot be justified as an act of self defense.

[JackDaWack 2,895]

If you wake me up while im in MY bed, and i point a gun at you and tell you to stop and leave, and the person progresses towards me... im shooting them regardless of the circumstance. It's great that she is a hot 21 year old blonde who was just 3 times over the legal driving BAC limit, try figuring that out in the darkness of your house, hell if you just woke up you might think it was a zombie. At 12 accounts PER year of this happening, is your first thought, hey this is just some drunk person who doesn't know where they are.... its great that people have minutes hours or days to think about what they might do in this situation, but i guarantee this all took place in under a min.

[jermz1987 243]

Yeah I didn't see anything wrong with Jules post either. 21 year old drunk girl walks into my house. shit, Most porn flicks start that way.

 

 

See I made a joke. Was it in bad taste?

 

Yes......Yes It was.

[Justjules 0]

Like I said, NJ is the most liberal pussified state they even made a "run and hide" provision of the law. Your required to retreat to safety...You believe that?

 

Scenario: Drunk guy picks a fight with you in an open parking lot, takes a swing at you....You proceed to hit him several times knocking him to the ground,hitting his head and he dies....Guess who is getting charged with manslaughter cause the law requires you run and hide... (and a prosecutor will articulate how you could have ran away in the open parking lot to safety)

[hd2000fxdl 422]

Agree, but the all factors at the time need to be taken into account. In addition to the ones listed a good point was brought up, are there others with her, is she a decoy, when told by the home owner that they have a gun and are ready to shoot does she stop. Can they completely identify the person, do they know she is a female, is she advancing and now a unknown threat is there.

 

All split second decisions and all of us who own firearms and chose to defend ourselves have to be able to not only take into account, unfortunately in the PR of NJ, there are other factors to consider.

 

Hopefully none of us will ever have to deal with any of these situations, but any of us who do decide to defend ourselves need to know, it's not always going to be a black and white case while we are in NJ.

[JackDaWack 2,895]

Deadly Force and Civil Duty to Retreat

A deadly force is not justifiable when an opportunity to retreat with complete safety is known by the defender to be at hand. The use of such force is not justifiable if the defender knew that it could have been avoided with complete safety to himself by retreating. Where these conditions are present, the defender has a duty to retreat, and his use of a deadly force under these circumstances cannot be justified as an act of self defense.

In NJ your duty to retreat ends in your dwelling. The rest is great and all but it is a smoke screen to blind people into thinking WHAT IF. What if the guy was 5'6" and 120lbs......what if he was also a lightweight MMA fighter who could beat the shit out of you.... size doesnt matter.... ability and means and motivation is not something people can determine by just looking at someone... do i know this guy is a heroin addict? who would kill for drugs... no or is it just some drunk guy who stumbled into my house... NJ is a load of shit.

[Justjules 0]

In NJ the homeowner not only would not be justified in shooting her, but he would have to render medical assistance for her intoxication and call her a cab home..then the next day he would be arrested and charged for sexual assault probably..LOL (joke)

[Soju 153]

Deadly Force and Civil Duty to Retreat

A deadly force is not justifiable when an opportunity to retreat with complete safety is known by the defender to be at hand. The use of such force is not justifiable if the defender knew that it could have been avoided with complete safety to himself by retreating. Where these conditions are present, the defender has a duty to retreat, and his use of a deadly force under these circumstances cannot be justified as an act of self defense.

 

This actually is not applicable to the situation, as it does not apply when in ones dwelling. There are of course a list of other stipulations that must be followed.

 

except that:

 

(i) The actor is not obliged to retreat from his dwelling, unless he was the initial aggressor

 

furthermore...

 

the use of force or deadly force upon or toward an intruder who is unlawfully in a dwelling is justifiable when the actor reasonably believes that the force is immediately necessary for the purpose of protecting himself or other persons in the dwelling against the use of unlawful force by the intruder on the present occasion.

 

(2) A reasonable belief exists when the actor, to protect himself or a third person, was in his own dwelling at the time of the offense or was privileged to be thereon and the encounter between the actor and intruder was sudden and unexpected, compelling the actor to act instantly and:

 

(a) The actor reasonably believed that the intruder would inflict personal injury upon the actor or others in the dwelling; or

 

(b) The actor demanded that the intruder disarm, surrender or withdraw, and the intruder refused to do so.

 

So in this case, had it been in NJ,

 

It was his home. Check.

It was sudden and unexpected. Check.

There may not have been reasonable belief that the intruder would inflict harm, but there is an or...

They demanded the intruder withdraw. So check.

 

Regardless of whether he would be convicted or not, it seems like it may in fact pass as legal, based on the law, from my interpretation. Results would vary.

 

The quoted parts are straight from 2C:3-4 Use of force in self-protection.

[Justjules 0]

In NJ your duty to retreat ends in your dwelling. The rest is great and all but it is a smoke screen to blind people into thinking WHAT IF. What if the guy was 5'6" and 120lbs......what if he was also a lightweight MMA fighter who could beat the shit out of you.... size doesnt matter.... ability and means and motivation is not something people can determine by just looking at someone... do i know this guy is a heroin addict? who would kill for drugs... no or is it just some drunk guy who stumbled into my house... NJ is a load of shit.

 

And that are all valid points your lawyer would be forced to argue for months and months in court in NJ costing you tens of thousands in legal fees.. Great aint it?

[Justjules 0]

This actually is not applicable to the situation, as it does not apply when in ones dwelling. There are of course a list of other stipulations that must be followed.

Im just showing examples of how silly NJ law is...

[JackDaWack 2,895]

Im just showing examples of how silly NJ law is...

Honestly, i don't even think the law is the issue, at least in this circumstance, its the overzealous prosecutors. There just isn't a law that protects us from prosecution, like Florida and CO.

[Justjules 0]

Honestly, i don't even think the law is the issue, at least in this circumstance, its the overzealous prosecutors. There just isn't a law that protects us from prosecution, like Florida and CO.

 

Well, we see how well that worked out in FL once the special interest groups and lying media got involved...

[JackDaWack 2,895]

Well, we see how well that worked out in FL once the special interest groups and lying media got involved...

No argument there.... and again that prosecutor is challenging the law, of whether or not what took places falls under the law. It becomes an issue, like you brought up, when things that have nothing to do with what transpired start influencing the outcome.

[silverado427 10,827]

Well thanks for all your thoughts, this was a pretty civilized post. Me personally I don't wish to hurt anyone. i live in the delusional world of respect for others, and their property. my world is black and white. I have no gray area. Just right and wrong !!! that's how I live my life. And as far as the persona I give off , Oh well Lib's are going to hate folks who don't see their way Whether its guns , knives , knuckles or ideas.

[jgofnj 5]

If a 21 yo college girl broke into my house, I would actually be pretty excited...I wouldnt shoot her...

 

Not sure about the "excited" part, but I wouldn't shoot her either.

[mipafox 438]

She'd look pretty good handcuffed to the steampipe in my basement.

[Anselmo 87]

Sadly, life is not black and white. It's mostly gray.

 

Drunk girl intrudes in your house.

"Stop. I've got a gun. What are you doing in my house?"

"Oh my god, I'm sorry. I thought this was my friend's house."

 

A farfetched scenario that she is a forward scout for a band of intruders is possible but not that likely. It's a reason to call the cops and keep up your guard but not a reason I'd want to tell anyone after shooting an unarmed drunk girl.

 

I really feel for the cops having to deal with these decisions on a daily or weekly basis. No way I could do it. My adrenaline would be peaking.