If you use your gun this is what you're up against.

[Sig226GuyNJ 128]

My TX CHL instructor gave an interesting example for the rationale behind defense of property.

Say your attractive wife is mugged in a parking lot. Inside her purse is $500 cash, a Gucci purse and AMEX and your home address. Now, this thief thinks "wow, this lady is rich! I bet she has more where this came from." So he robs your house. Unfortunately, your wife is home alone because you're out on business. Not believing that his luck will work twice in his favor, he decides to leave no witnesses.

Dramatized, perhaps, but it hit home for me because my wife's purse was stolen a year before.

This definitely makes one think, however I don't know of anyone who'd be able to think of all that in the heat of the moment. However, having said that, this is a physical altercation and in my simple, non lawyer mind, I would consider shooting the mugger in this case would be justified if there was a struggle. But if the mugger quickly snatches the purse and runs off before you or your wife could react, shooting him in the back would probably land you in front of a court where you'd have to rely on a jury to decide your fate.

[EX Carnival man 223]

How do you know he felt a confrontation with the home owner was his best move? You're making a bunch of assumptions without any facts. None of us know if this was a good shoot or not. None of us were there and all the facts haven't been presented yet.

 

  

So you think it was wise of her to not only go home during the burglary, but to get out of the safety of her car and confront the scumbag? Any danger she might have been in, she brought upon herself by exiting the safety of her vehicle and approaching the pos who was exiting her home. I'm not saying the kid didn't deserve what he got. What I'm saying is as gun owners, we need to be smarter than just blindly believing that we can do anything with our guns as long as the one on the other end of the barrel is a scumbag.

First thing he was in her home uninvited.  Second  the report is there was a confrontation. If it were a hands down bad shoot she would be in jail. Its never a smart move to confront someone who has a gun especially if you are robbing there home.  Stupid games win stupid prizes.  Its not NJ its Florida. Defending her home is her business. If she stood him up against the wall and shot him than I would say it was a bad shoot. His rights went out the window when he invaded her home and confronted her.  He could have just given up.  That was his choice. 

[silverado427 10,720]

How do you know he felt a confrontation with the home owner was his best move? You're making a bunch of assumptions without any facts. None of us know if this was a good shoot or not. None of us were there and all the facts haven't been presented yet.

 

  

So you think it was wise of her to not only go home during the burglary, but to get out of the safety of her car and confront the scumbag? Any danger she might have been in, she brought upon herself by exiting the safety of her vehicle and approaching the pos who was exiting her home. I'm not saying the kid didn't deserve what he got. What I'm saying is as gun owners, we need to be smarter than just blindly believing that we can do anything with our guns as long as the one on the other end of the barrel is a scumbag.

 

Are you  Authur Kill

[Krdshrk 3,877]

 

  Florida is not NJ.  Robbing or Home invading, in Florida there is good chance you will get shot.  The criminal justice system failed this kid.  I'll bet he's been in and out a few times.  Once he confronted the home owner it was over for him.  It was his choice. The good boy he was he felt a confrontation with a woman was his best move.   I'm sure she just wanted to go home at the end of the day.   She was lucky. The good person got to go home and the bad guy went to the morgue. 

 

 

The kid had priors.  He was arrested earlier this year.  AND IT'S ONLY MARCH.....

[EX Carnival man 223]

 

 

 

 

The kid had priors.  He was arrested earlier this year.  AND IT'S ONLY MARCH.....

 

Imagine that.priors. I'm shocked.     

[Smokin .50 1,907]

Wow!

 

We got everything from "Goody Two Shoes" to "she shouldn't have gone home" (I'm paraphrasing).

 

Florida isn't NJ.  So you can't take NJ right to cower law and apply it to Florida.  You steal shit in Florida, you get SHOT!  There's no room for NJ Pussies is Florida.  Hell you'll bring an INFECTION down there, lol!

 

None of us was there.  We don't know what transpired for the "confrontation".  I'm not ready to say the homeowner did ANYTHING wrong.  And two pages of "What-Ifs" is great for Keyboard Commandos that would piss their pants if put in the same situation.

[Knuckle Sandwich 5]

We recently had a discussion on these boards about a similar situation.

 

So just to be the cold voice of reason, why did she need to shoot him if he was exiting the house (climbing out a window), according to the report? Lethal force should not be used to protect property, only to defend against the threat of loss of life or serious

bodily harm. Like it or not, if you can't accept that on a moral basis, recognize the legality of it, because failure to do so could

get you jail time and/or cost you a hell of a lot of hard earned money.

Are you serious? Ever heard of castle doctrine? Free men have a right to defend life, liberty, and property.

 

If the shitbag in that news story didn't want to get ventilated maybe he should have considered getting a job instead of stealing shit that wasn't his.

 

Guess what? NJ actually has castle doctrine. It is within your rights to defend your property with lethal force in the state of NJ. What a travesty, right?

[Darrenf 422]

Are you serious? Ever heard of castle doctrine? Free men have a right to defend life, liberty, and property.

 

If the shitbag in that news story didn't want to get ventilated maybe he should have considered getting a job instead of stealing shit that wasn't his.

 

Guess what? NJ actually has castle doctrine. It is within your rights to defend your property with lethal force in the state of NJ. What a travesty, right?

I'd like to see proof that you can use deadly force to defend property in NJ.

 

(Goal post shift in 3...2.......1...........)

[weekend_junkie 129]

I'd like to see proof that you can use deadly force to defend property in NJ.

 

(Goal post shift in 3...2.......1...........)

Maybe you used to kick for the Buffalo Bills...

 

Deadly Force is permitted in defense of property when Force will not suffice.

 

http://law.justia.com/codes/new-jersey/2013/title-2c/section-2c-3-6/

[EX Carnival man 223]

Those two girls should move up to NJ. Sad to say,  they would have a bright future in the NJ democrat party. 

[mipafox 438]

This is what you face if you are a cop and blow your wife away:

 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/03/10/trooper-shot-wife-pregnant-pennsylvania_n_4934916.html

 

NOTHING.

 

When's the last time that worked out for somebody like you or me?

[Kevin125 4,772]

How do you know he felt a confrontation with the home owner was his best move? You're making a bunch of assumptions without any facts. None of us know if this was a good shoot or not. None of us were there and all the facts haven't been presented yet.

  

 

So you think it was wise of her to not only go home during the burglary, but to get out of the safety of her car and confront the scumbag? Any danger she might have been in, she brought upon herself by exiting the safety of her vehicle and approaching the pos who was exiting her home. I'm not saying the kid didn't deserve what he got. What I'm saying is as gun owners, we need to be smarter than just blindly believing that we can do anything with our guns as long as the one on the other end of the barrel is a scumbag.

"Any danger she might have been in, she brought upon herself"

 

Ahh.... I've got a problem with that line of thinking. Any danger she found herself in was brought upon her by the guy robbing her home.

[njpilot 671]

He looked like such an upstanding young man. If obummer had a son........

[Kevin125 4,772]

Here's the thing. Although I've never had to do this myself, it seems to me... If you are clearing your house with a firearm drawn...and you encounter an intruder... And that intruder approaches you.... The intruder is not just approaching you... He is approaching your firearm. Very possibly with the intent to seize it....and use it against you. That moment would be decision time. If you've identified the individual as an intruder and not a family member or other non-threat... And you have a clear shot... It might just be justified to take that shot before you lose control of your firearm.

[Smokin .50 1,907]

Here's the thing. Although I've never had to do this myself, it seems to me... If you are clearing your house with a firearm drawn...and you encounter an intruder... And that intruder approaches you.... The intruder is not just approaching you... He is approaching your firearm. Very possibly with the intent to seize it....and use it against you. That moment would be decision time. If you've identified the individual as an intruder and not a family member or other non-threat... And you have a clear shot... It might just be justified to take that shot before you lose control of your firearm.

THIS!  All you need to prove is fear for your life.  The totality of the circumstances will come into play.  BANG!  Perp is 10-7!  Call the wagon.  Ain't Florida great?

[Darrenf 422]

Maybe you used to kick for the Buffalo Bills...

 

Deadly Force is permitted in defense of property when Force will not suffice.

 

http://law.justia.com/codes/new-jersey/2013/title-2c/section-2c-3-6/

 

Did you miss this part??

 

© Deadly force does not become justifiable under subparagraphs (a) and (b) of this subsection unless the actor reasonably believes that:

 

(i) The person against whom it is employed has employed or threatened deadly force against or in the presence of the actor; or

 

(ii) The use of force other than deadly force to terminate or prevent the commission or the consummation of the crime would expose the actor or another in his presence to substantial danger of bodily harm. An actor within a dwelling shall be presumed to have a reasonable belief in the existence of the danger. The State must rebut this presumption by proof beyond a reasonable doubt.

[mipafox 438]

Here's the thing. Although I've never had to do this myself, it seems to me... If you are clearing your house with a firearm drawn...and you encounter an intruder... And that intruder approaches you.... The intruder is not just approaching you... He is approaching your firearm. Very possibly with the intent to seize it....and use it against you. That moment would be decision time. If you've identified the individual as an intruder and not a family member or other non-threat... And you have a clear shot... It might just be justified to take that shot before you lose control of your firearm.

 

It's seems to me it's going to look like the Fourth of July turned horizontal.

 

I'm more concerned about insurance coverage, fire extinguishers, spackle, and my Home Depot points.

[Kevin125 4,772]

It's seems to me it's going to look like the Fourth of July turned horizontal.

I'm more concerned about insurance coverage, fire extinguishers, spackle, and my Home Depot points.

That reminds me. I'm totally out of incendiary rounds. Zip... Nada....

 

Home Depot has a point program?

[mipafox 438]

I don't know They always try to get me to sign up for something or another but I decline. Not that I've been killing people or anything, just routine repairs.

[Kevin125 4,772]

I'd be more concerned if you mentioned limestone and heavy plastic......

[mipafox 438]

My buddy said you have to bring the ears to get points LOL

[Bt Doctur 188]

With all the shooting in Fla, why even notify the Police of the shooting.Using your unknown piece you can throw in the the alligator pond,

911 ,there`s a body in my driveway, send the police.

What happened ?

dont know, just came home and he was lying right there

know anyhing about the bullet holes

What bullet holes, like I said I just got home

[weekend_junkie 129]

Did you miss this part??

 

© Deadly force does not become justifiable under subparagraphs (a) and (b) of this subsection unless the actor reasonably believes that:

 

(i) The person against whom it is employed has employed or threatened deadly force against or in the presence of the actor; or

 

(ii) The use of force other than deadly force to terminate or prevent the commission or the consummation of the crime would expose the actor or another in his presence to substantial danger of bodily harm. An actor within a dwelling shall be presumed to have a reasonable belief in the existence of the danger. The State must rebut this presumption by proof beyond a reasonable doubt.

No, in fact it would show that "An actor within a dwelling shall be presumed to have a reasonable belief in the existence of the danger." puts a rather clear hurdle in front of any prosecutor who tried to charge someone defending themselves or their possessions within their home.

 

I don't read it to state that you can chase someone down the street, but it seems clear that having your house robbed gives the presumption that you are in danger and which opens the window to use deadly force.

 

(Insert the 'I am not a lawyer' disclaimer here)

[Darrenf 422]

No, in fact it would show that "An actor within a dwelling shall be presumed to have a reasonable belief in the existence of the danger." puts a rather clear hurdle in front of any prosecutor who tried to charge someone defending themselves or their possessions within their home.

 

I don't read it to state that you can chase someone down the street, but it seems clear that having your house robbed gives the presumption that you are in danger and which opens the window to use deadly force.

 

(Insert the 'I am not a lawyer' disclaimer here)

And there is the goalpost move. You stated you can defend property with deadly force (in the context of conversation about people shooting someone running away with a tv) and now you have shifted it to the presumption that someone in your house is putting you at risk. No shit, that is self defense, not defense of property.

[silverado427 10,720]

Until criminals fear Law abiding citizens, The crime rate will continue to climb. The revolving door policy of the justice system is a fk n joke. Call me old fashion but until people learn to respect other people's property,  they should be met with extreme prejudice. Until the criminal system  "I mean politicians " stop pandering to criminals "their voting block "nothing will change . Which means you will be a victim. JMHO.

[Zeke 5,504]

The sister and cousin did not appear overwhelmed with grief.

[Old Glock guy 1,127]

Here's the thing. Although I've never had to do this myself, it seems to me... If you are clearing your house with a firearm drawn...and you encounter an intruder... And that intruder approaches you.... The intruder is not just approaching you... He is approaching your firearm. Very possibly with the intent to seize it....and use it against you. That moment would be decision time. If you've identified the individual as an intruder and not a family member or other non-threat... And you have a clear shot... It might just be justified to take that shot before you lose control of your firearm.

 

Kevin, sorry to single you out, but in the hypothetical scenarios that you and others have presented, you completely ignore the fact that in the first 10 seconds of the video, the newscaster says, "Police say that she shot and killed the teenaged thief as he was climbing out her window."

 

If the perp is fleeing, and no longer a threat, neither I, nor the law, can see any justification for shooting him.

[Zeke 5,504]

Kevin, sorry to single you out, but in the hypothetical scenarios that you and others have presented, you completely ignore the fact that in the first 10 seconds of the video, the newscaster says, "Police say that she shot and killed the teenaged thief as he was climbing out her window."

 

If the perp is fleeing, and no longer a threat, neither I, nor the law, can see any justification for shooting him.

It also said "confrontation" between to 2.

Until more is revealed about the confrontation I will reserve my judgement.

[Krdshrk 3,877]

Kevin, sorry to single you out, but in the hypothetical scenarios that you and others have presented, you completely ignore the fact that in the first 10 seconds of the video, the newscaster says, "Police say that she shot and killed the teenaged thief as he was climbing out her window."

 

If the perp is fleeing, and no longer a threat, neither I, nor the law, can see any justification for shooting him.

 

She was not inside the house - she was outside.  Climbing out the window and a confrontation could have been him approaching/attacking the homeowner.  Not running away by jumping out the window.  It doesn't sound like a shot in the back as they were fleeing.

 

Again - none of us were there so stop making presumptions.

[Rob0115 1,105]

How do you know he felt a confrontation with the home owner was his best move? You're making a bunch of assumptions without any facts. None of us know if this was a good shoot or not. None of us were there and all the facts haven't been presented yet.

 

  

So you think it was wise of her to not only go home during the burglary, but to get out of the safety of her car and confront the scumbag? Any danger she might have been in, she brought upon herself by exiting the safety of her vehicle and approaching the pos who was exiting her home. I'm not saying the kid didn't deserve what he got. What I'm saying is as gun owners, we need to be smarter than just blindly believing that we can do anything with our guns as long as the one on the other end of the barrel is a scumbag.

 

Any danger she was, regardless of her motivation to return to HER HOME, was brought on by the invader.  Just because NJ has weak castle doctrine don't try and dilute the Florida stand our ground laws.  She had every right to immediately return home to defend her property.  

 

With that attitude you actually may be a good fit for NJ.  I love blaming the victim, did you agree he shouldn't have been shot because, as his cousin said, where he suppose to get his stuff?