Law on home intrusion?

[HarryLee 0]

Didnt you clearly hear him say he was gonna rape your wife and kill you as he entered your room?

what if the unarmed home intruder walks upstairs where your family is & walk slowly towards you saying nothing?

Are you going to shoot him?

[Duppie 73]

Harry....come on, enough with the what if's.

There was more than sufficient info and legal statutes cited to make your decision if not easier,at least clearer if a home invasion occurs.

In my mind it's simple....protecting family and self is paramount...home and property can be replaced and what ever the outcome,there will inevitably be costs, whether to life,freedoms,property,emotions,resources and/or confidence in self or our justice system.

We all have to make our own choices and then be prepared to live with it.

[jgofnj 5]

I guess your right in that aspect, but Ive heard the hi points are reliable and they sure are cheap just ugly. And as long as it goes bang, who cares what it looks like.

 

I have a hi-point 9MM. It does jam every once in while. I wouldn't use it for HD. My Glock 19 NEVER jams, much more reliable. You get what you pay for,

[HarryLee 0]

Harry....come on, enough with the what if's.

There was more than sufficient info and legal statutes cited to make your decision if not easier,at least clearer if a home invasion occurs.

In my mind it's simple....protecting family and self is paramount...home and property can be replaced and what ever the outcome,there will inevitably be costs, whether to life,freedoms,property,emotions,resources and/or confidence in self or our justice system.

We all have to make our own choices and then be prepared to live with it.

yeah, ok. I was trying to drive home the point for the originator of this thread, that laws & morality are very complicated. that you can't just pop anyone who "invades" your home.

[Duppie 73]

yeah, ok. I was trying to drive home the point for the originator of this thread, that laws & morality are very complicated. that you can't just pop anyone who "invades" your home.

I hear you....one can always move to Florida... but the residents are half baked,you'll have to learn Spanglish,Yiddish and Creole and the bugs are Epic.....

[checko 180]

It always seems like we have people itching to squeeze a few off into someone in these threads.

[Duppie 73]

It always seems like we have people itching to squeeze a few off into someone in these threads.

Yes,we also share this forum with some who think it reasonable to pack a extra mag on the way to a morning bowel movement but I believe that the majority of us recognizes that to shoot a fellow human regardless of his intentions is a devastating and life altering action.

[checko 180]

Yes,we also share this forum with some who think it reasonable to pack a extra mag on the way to a morning bowel movement but I believe that the majority of us recognizes that to shoot a fellow human regardless of his intentions is a devastating and life altering action.

 

Oh not doubting that at all, just saying this makes the rest of us look bad. Ending a life for a replaceable inanimate object?

[Justjules 0]

what if the unarmed home intruder walks upstairs where your family is & walk slowly towards you saying nothing?

Are you going to shoot him?

 

If he was going into my kids room? God damn right I would, Right after I clearly heard him say he was going to harm my kids.

[Justjules 0]

Silly laws indeed. Did you know it is illegal in NJ to cover yourself with milk in the presence of a kitten?

Actually......

[Duppie 73]

Oh not doubting that at all, just saying this makes the rest of us look bad. Ending a life for a replaceable inanimate object?

Agreed but I no longer place any importance in what people think of me and my actions just as long as it's moral and right and I, my family and friends can live with it.

[checko 180]

Agreed but I no longer place any importance in what people think of me and my actions just as long as it's moral and right and I, my family and friends can live with it.

 

As a person I couldn't care less of what strangers think of me but as part of a larger group who support the 2A I don't believe that type of attitude is very productive.

[Duppie 73]

As a person I couldn't care less of what strangers think of me but as part of a larger group who support the 2A I don't believe that type of attitude is very productive.

We're already largely perceived as militant gun nuts with lapsed morals and itchy trigger fingers....a couple yahoos is unlikely to sway opinions any further either way.

[HarryLee 0]

Yes,we also share this forum with some who think it reasonable to pack a extra mag on the way to a morning bowel movement but I believe that the majority of us recognizes that to shoot a fellow human regardless of his intentions is a devastating and life altering action.

you know what it is? it's this unrealistic "kill zombie" mentality going on from movies to zombie ammo. young kids get desensitized to what human life means.

[Old Glock guy 1,127]

Just saw in the newspaper yesterday about a home invasion in Long Branch ("intrusion" sort of sounds more like when the in-laws pop over for an unannounced visit), where four masked men went into a home wielding guns. They stole various items and some cash, but none of the family members were injured.

http://www.app.com/article/20120522/NJNEWS14/305220061/4-held-gunpoint-West-Long-Branch-home-invasion-robbery

 

Had I been in that situation and known in advance what the outcome would be, I would have acquiesed to their demands, rather than shoot them. OTOH, there's no way to know if the BG's are just going to grab some stuff, or if they are going to kill everyone, after perhaps raping and torturing them. So I guess in the scenario above, if one had the means and opportunity, he or she would have to take out the intruders.

 

But legal ramifications aside, I would never end someone's life if they were carrying off my property. I certainly hope the poster who suggested doing so was just trolling.

[HarryLee 0]

Just saw in the newspaper yesterday about a home invasion in Long Branch ("intrusion" sort of sounds more like when the in-laws pop over for an unannounced visit), where four masked men went into a home wielding guns. They stole various items and some cash, but none of the family members were injured.

http://www.app.com/a...nvasion-robbery

 

Had I been in that situation and known in advance what the outcome would be, I would have acquiesed to their demands, rather than shoot them. OTOH, there's no way to know if the BG's are just going to grab some stuff, or if they are going to kill everyone, after perhaps raping and torturing them. So I guess in the scenario above, if one had the means and opportunity, he or she would have to take out the intruders.

 

But legal ramifications aside, I would never end someone's life if they were carrying off my property. I certainly hope the poster who suggested doing so was just trolling.

http://topics.nytime...mily/index.html

 

remember the petit family? don't assume the bad guys will leave you unharmed. follow all laws & use sound judgement.

[checko 180]

 

you know what it is? it's this unrealistic "kill zombie" mentality going on from movies to zombie ammo. young kids get desensitized to what human life means.

 

I think its quite the opposite actually. Sounds more like the old school macho "get off my property or I'll kill you" attitude.

 

[silverado427 10,682]

I think its quite the opposite actually. Sounds more like the old school macho "get off my property or I'll kill you" attitude.

How about just plain old respect.

[checko 180]

How about just plain old respect.

 

That doesn't make sense. How can you respectfully take someones life?

 

Edit: I think I know what you mean. My point is its just callous and excessive to kill someone over a tv or such

[silverado427 10,682]

Till people take a stand, Criminals will continue to enjoy your way of thinking.

[checko 180]

Your lack of respect for life saddens me. You would kill a women for taking something from you? How about a teenage boy?

[JrzyGuy30 0]

Bottom line if the time ever comes the last thing you should worry about is losing your firearm. If you and your family are alive to tell the story the fact that whatever gun you used is gone is meaningless.

 

+100

 

If me and my wife are cornered upstairs (sad to say since we have to "retreat"), trust me, I will use my best/most trusted firearm to make sure we live to see another day when the perpetrator is within range.. I can always get another one later.

[JrzyGuy30 0]

3) forget about a "throwaway piece". you should worry about wrongful death lawsuits coming your way even if the police don't press charges against you. are you ready to paid $$$ for lawyers & years of lost time, pain & suffering anixety on your part?

 

I just read this and it reminded me of what an old friend who is a detective in "unsaid" township in North Jersey.. he said: "If you do use your gun to protect your family, don't shoot to maim, shoot to kill because if this crook lives through the shooting, him and his family and everyone he knows in NJ will come after you to sue you and when he shows up crippled to court in this liberal state of NJ, guess who's fault it will be? Not the criminal, thats for sure!"

What a sad state we live in that it comes down to this... ugh

[woodentoe 14]

+100

 

If me and my wife are cornered upstairs (sad to say since we have to "retreat"), trust me, I will use my best/most trusted firearm to make sure we live to see another day when the perpetrator is within range.. I can always get another one later.

 

 

Who says you have to retreat? the law says otherwise.

[JrzyGuy30 0]

And here is what I just read today.. this homeowner didn't have a firearm obviously but Kudos to the kitchen knife.. but if he had a firearm, it would have ended this perps miserable streak of home burglaries for good I'm sure..

Aberdeen burglary leaves resident with minor injury

[JrzyGuy30 0]

Who says you have to retreat? the law says otherwise.

 

This part of the law: The actor knows that he can avoid the necessity of using such force with complete safety by retreating or by surrendering possession of a thing to a person asserting a claim of right thereto or by complying with a demand that he abstain from any action which he has no duty to take

[woodentoe 14]

This part of the law: The actor knows that he can avoid the necessity of using such force with complete safety by retreating or by surrendering possession of a thing to a person asserting a claim of right thereto or by complying with a demand that he abstain from any action which he has no duty to take

 

it helps if you post the entire clause

 

(b)The actor knows that he can avoid the necessity of using such force with complete safety by retreating or by surrendering possession of a thing to a person asserting a claim of right thereto or by complying with a demand that he abstain from any action which he has no duty to take, except that:

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

 

 

Here is the entire thing:

 

(2)The use of deadly force is not justifiable under this section unless the actor reasonably believes that such force is necessary to protect himself against death or serious bodily harm; nor is it justifiable if:

(a)The actor, with the purpose of causing death or serious bodily harm, provoked the use of force against himself in the same encounter; or

(b)The actor knows that he can avoid the necessity of using such force with complete safety by retreating or by surrendering possession of a thing to a person asserting a claim of right thereto or by complying with a demand that he abstain from any action which he has no duty to take, except that:

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

 

 

 

3)Except as required by paragraphs (1) and (2) of this subsection, a person employing protective force may estimate the necessity of using force when the force is used, without retreating, surrendering possession, doing any other act which he has no legal duty to do or abstaining from any lawful action.

c. (1) Notwithstanding the provisions of N.J.S.2C:3-5, N.J.S.2C:3-9, or this section, 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.

[Anselmo 87]

You don't have to retreat in your house. Don't buy into the rhetoric. The law says if you're in fear for your life (and this fear is reasonable) you may take lethal action.

 

The people in the original case in Colorado had reasonable fear. One of the couple had been stalked before and they gave ample warnings to the young lady to stop or they'd shoot. The police and I concur that it was a good shoot. Thankfully, the young lady was not killed.

[JrzyGuy30 0]

You don't have to retreat in your house. Don't buy into the rhetoric. The law says if you're in fear for your life (and this fear is reasonable) you may take lethal action.

 

The people in the original case in Colorado had reasonable fear. One of the couple had been stalked before and they gave ample warnings to the young lady to stop or they'd shoot. The police and I concur that it was a good shoot. Thankfully, the young lady was not killed.

 

Well in the end it doesn't really matter since my master bedroom opens up to the main hall for the upstairs and open to see downstairs.. so either way, I've already retreated at that point.. heh

[woodentoe 14]

Fear for life has nothing to do with it:

 

(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, is the encounter sudden and unexpected? are you compelled to act? If so...EITHER

 

You must reasonably believe that the intruder will hurt you (not kill)

OR

The intruder fails to comply with an order to disarm surrender or withdraw.

 

The law reads clear to me. If you come into my house where my wife and children sleep unexpectedly and without permission, one way or the other you will leave...if I have anything to say about it.

 

Disarm, Surrender, or get the Fugg out! Option four isn't going to work out well for you.

 

Hopefully, I can readily access my defense weapon and shoot straight. I don't think that shows a lack of respect for life. And, it doesn't appear to be in contravention of NJ's Castle Law (Yes, folks...this is a Castle Law)