Baseball bat defense

 

Prosecutor quote:

 

“In New Jersey, the law allows a person to use force, even deadly force, upon an intruder who is unlawfully in a dwelling when that person reasonably believes that the force is necessary for the purpose of protecting himself or another in the dwelling against the use of unlawful force,”

 

Wonder if this would've played the same way if that bat was a shotgun.

Wonder if this would've played the same way if that bat was a shotgun.

I wonder the same thing but also wonder why there was no mention of charges of assault and only trespass. Let's hope that's an oversight of the reporter and not actually the case.

There was just a home invasion in Brick. Guy had a pistol. He ran out when the women in the house screamed. Thats about all I know

A Madison police officer turned onto Kinney Street from Park Avenue and saw the alleged intruder walking toward him. He had lacerations to the head.

 

This part makes me happy + =

Baseball bat defense

 

Prosecutor quote:

 

“In New Jersey, the law allows a person to use force, even deadly force, upon an intruder who is unlawfully in a dwelling when that person reasonably believes that the force is necessary for the purpose of protecting himself or another in the dwelling against the use of unlawful force,”

 

Wonder if this would've played the same way if that bat was a shotgun.

 

Since this prosecutor apparently knows the laws, there would be no difference. Deadly force is deadly force. A baseball bat to the head, a brick to the temple, a pole vault pole to the heart or a 00 buck to the face it's all the same. If the circumstances fit within the castle statutes that permit deadly force, the method of employing that force doesn't matter. I suppose they might not be happy if you used some form of exotic method to kill but as long as there were no laws broken related to the method, it's a clean kill as long as there was a valid threat. Luring someone into a feces covered punji pit is probably out whereas, in a press like at the end of The Terminator is probably ok because the person is actively threatening and there is no where else to go.

Luring someone into a feces covered punji pit is probably out whereas, in a press like at the end of The Terminator is probably ok because the person is actively threatening and there is no where else to go.

The inner workings of your mind...

The inner workings of your mind...

 

You beat me to it! I guess that means I need to buy a high speed 10 ton hydraulic press for my bedroom.

The inner workings of your mind...

 

What, you've never set a booby trap for your enemies?

What, you've never set a booby trap for your enemies?

Oh, the innuendo. I get it.

I have an Acme anvil hanging over an "X" marked "free bird seed."

Since this prosecutor apparently knows the laws, there would be no difference. Deadly force is deadly force. A baseball bat to the head, a brick to the temple, a pole vault pole to the heart or a 00 buck to the face it's all the same. If the circumstances fit within the castle statutes that permit deadly force, the method of employing that force doesn't matter. I suppose they might not be happy if you used some form of exotic method to kill but as long as there were no laws broken related to the method, it's a clean kill as long as there was a valid threat. Luring someone into a feces covered punji pit is probably out whereas, in a press like at the end of The Terminator is probably ok because the person is actively threatening and there is no where else to go.

Sorry Mark, a brick to the head is not considered Deadly in California. Remember Reginald Denny?