There's a debate going on about a dad in Ohio killing the daughters ex-boyfriend as he tried to enter the home and was shot multiple times THRU the door. There's an disturbing video but I was debating that in NEW JERSEY with this particular shoot. You ARE GOING TO JAIL and the prosecutor is going to try to throw the book at you. You will be perceived as a cold blooded murderer and might even have to move with the press and antigunners/victims supporters showing up 500-1k  in your little neighborhood. MY question to the forum IN OUR STATE is this a justifiable shoot or no?!?  THIS IS JUST A DISCUSSION I AM NOT A LAWYER. 

 

18 minutes ago, CapGuns&SnapsKid said:

There's a debate going on about a dad in Ohio killing the daughters ex-boyfriend as he tried to enter the home and was shot multiple times THRU the door. There's an disturbing video but I was debating that in NEW JERSEY with this particular shoot. You ARE GOING TO JAIL and the prosecutor is going to try to throw the book at you. You will be perceived as a cold blooded murderer and might even have to move with the press and antigunners/victims supporters showing up 500-1k  in your little neighborhood. MY question to the forum IN OUR STATE is this a justifiable shoot or no?!?  THIS IS JUST A DISCUSSION I AM NOT A LAWYER. 

Joe Biden endorsed this very technique!  So it must be good.  To quote:  

"[if] you want to keep someone away from your house, just fire the shotgun through the door."

Joe Biden Crimestopper Tip  Just blast your shotgun through the door.

Of course, Joe has been wrong about every other pronouncement he's made about guns, so perhaps listening to someone smarter would be advised.

In NJ?

In my very humble "opinion", the first shot might have been justified. Hard to tell from the video if he broke the glass of the door, or indeed was able to force the door open.

The second and third shots, well, I don't think that he would get away with in NJ.

This would come down to 1 of 2 things IMO.

The guy was on the porch which case law has said is within the curtilage of the home. Therefore, castle doctrine would apply. NJ statute allows deadly force if "The actor demanded that the intruder disarm, surrender or withdraw, and the intruder refused to do so." It is not clear from the video if the if he was told to leave, but it makes sense that he was.

If for some reason the porch in this instance was not determined to be part of the curtilage of the home, deadly force would not have been justified as I do not think the door was actually breached by the intruder, therefore failing the requirement that the threat was imminent.

Duty to flee. 

I watched quickly but I did hear some sort of warning, like, “I have a gun!” Or something like that

 

i feel like shooting through the door was pretty irresponsible bc he couldn’t be sure of his target…but then again what if he was watching the feed from the ring cam live, does that matter?

https://www.usconcealedcarry.com/resources/ccw_reciprocity_map/nj-gun-laws/

4 hours ago, Lostboy said:

Duty to flee. 

not within ones dwelling.

i feel like that even though the porch is considered part of ones dwelling, that here in nj, the homeowner would be going to prison for this. there was a door between you and him afterall, and the jury will be easily convinced that that was enough to keep you out of fear of your life.

Fucked around and found out.

just saw the video. shots 2 and 3......side and back. homeowner's gonna get crucified......would be worse than that here.

55 minutes ago, 1LtCAP said:

not within ones dwelling.

i feel like that even though the porch is considered part of ones dwelling, that here in nj, the homeowner would be going to prison for this. there was a door between you and him afterall, and the jury will be easily convinced that that was enough to keep you out of fear of your life.

In NJ? Even Nappen teaches that you have a duty to retreat before firing. My bedroom is second floor opposite side of the house so if someone breaks in they're meeting God becuase I'm not jumping out a second story window. 

You guys are funny.

Some of you make grand summations and state emphatically that people are "going down" based on short video clips.  In this case the homeowner is likely skating away free and clear from any criminal (and probably civil) charges.

A couple of clicks to information on the web will tell you that the daughter called 911 and was on the phone with dispatch WHILE the dude was trying to break in. 

She is heard saying “Dad, is he trying to kill me?”.

As the guy starts ramming the door the father tells him to go away and tells him that he's armed.  Dude ignores this and keeps trying to break in.

After the door breaks OPEN, homeowner shoots 3 times.

A County grand jury voted 8-1 against indicting the homeowner on charges related to the killing, citing the state’s “Stand Your Ground” law.

So the big "WHAT IF" it happened in NJ??

Who knows, but SO WHAT????

If you have guns to defend you/your family then that's a situation where you use one.  If you think about lawsuits at that point you or your family will likely get hurt.

 

12 minutes ago, Lostboy said:

In NJ? Even Nappen teaches that you have a duty to retreat before firing. My bedroom is second floor opposite side of the house so if someone breaks in they're meeting God becuase I'm not jumping out a second story window. 

Duty to retreat ends AT your home.

1 hour ago, 1LtCAP said:

just saw the video. shots 2 and 3......side and back. homeowner's gonna get crucified......would be worse than that here.

He got off I believe. I also was under the impression he got through the door. 

 

Edit:just checked. He got shot when he got the door open. 

1 hour ago, Lostboy said:

In NJ? Even Nappen teaches that you have a duty to retreat before firing. My bedroom is second floor opposite side of the house so if someone breaks in they're meeting God becuase I'm not jumping out a second story window. 

 

1 hour ago, 124gr9mm said:

Duty to retreat ends AT your home.

https://law.justia.com/codes/new-jersey/2013/title-2c/section-2c-3-4/

45 minutes ago, Cheflife15 said:

He got off I believe. I also was under the impression he got through the door. 

 

Edit:just checked. He got shot when he got the door open. 

I don't even see the issue if the door was closed. With video recording, you only need to show his intent to enter the home. 

On 8/29/2022 at 10:42 AM, CapGuns&SnapsKid said:

IN OUR STATE is this a justifiable shoot or no?!?

All depends on skin color and immigration status.

Caucasian American male- The state will try to put you away for life.

POC and/or third world illegal alien- DA lets them plead out to a lesser charge and the judge imposes a sentence on the low end of guide lines.

2 hours ago, Lostboy said:

In NJ? Even Nappen teaches that you have a duty to retreat before firing. My bedroom is second floor opposite side of the house so if someone breaks in they're meeting God becuase I'm not jumping out a second story window. 

Nappen should know better

3 hours ago, Cheflife15 said:

He got off I believe. I also was under the impression he got through the door. 

 

Edit:just checked. He got shot when he got the door open. 

glad homeowner got off. little surprised too. shots were slow. first hit badguy in front. second hit in side. third hit in back. that last one was the one i was worried about

54 minutes ago, 1LtCAP said:

glad homeowner got off. little surprised too. shots were slow. first hit badguy in front. second hit in side. third hit in back. that last one was the one i was worried about

I personally think the 3rd one was a bad  shot from a legal standpoint but I imagine it all happens so quick it's impossible to process.  

10 hours ago, Shocker said:

what if he was watching the feed from the ring cam live, does that matter?

I would not trust a wireless video feed for real time info.  There is always lag. 

7 hours ago, Scorpio64 said:

I would not trust a wireless video feed for real time info.  There is always lag. 

I didn’t mean using the feed for tactical purposes, I was wondering if a lawyer could use that on his behalf like “he had a PID he wasn’t shooting blind!”
 

But it seems it’s moot in this case, as the guy had broken through the door before the shots were fired

I cant seem to find the disturbing video,  I have found one that shows a guy breaking into a house and someone shooting him to defend themselves.     The only disturbing thing is that the homeowner was forced to use deadly force and will probably go through life now wondering why the fuc this guy would continue his assault once told by the homeowner that he was armed.   I wonder that myself,  once told by the intended victim that you are armed with a gun and will shoot to defend yourself why would a attacker continue?   did they do an autopsy to see if he was on drugs?

2 minutes ago, revenger said:

I cant seem to find the disturbing video,

Redit has been paying whack-a-mole with the video.  It's been deleted several times, but pops up elsewhere.

23 minutes ago, Scorpio64 said:

Redit has been paying whack-a-mole with the video.  It's been deleted several times, but pops up elsewhere.

nnaawwwww!!! a online provider censoring news? navah!

On 8/29/2022 at 4:45 PM, Lostboy said:

In NJ? Even Nappen teaches that you have a duty to retreat before firing. My bedroom is second floor opposite side of the house so if someone breaks in they're meeting God becuase I'm not jumping out a second story window. 

Where does Nappen teach that do you have a duty to retreat in your home (which is the exact polar opposite of a castle doctrine which New Jersey has)? 

5 minutes ago, Variant said:

Where does Nappen teach that do you have a duty to retreat in your home (which is the exact polar opposite of a castle doctrine which New Jersey has)? 

Maybe he doesn't anymore but I was at a seminar years ago and he said if you have a backdoor and it's accessable you better retreat out of it. Maybe I heard it out of context. Idk.