no not baxter 0 Posted July 11, 2008 Share Posted July 11, 2008 Wowwww. Thats a pretty sad story. Sounds like A is a semi nice guy tho so hopefully nothing too bad happens too him. Glad to hear you and your daughter are safe and I would have to think the neighborhood is now safer than ever. Link to post Share on other sites
sandwedge 30 Posted July 11, 2008 Author Share Posted July 11, 2008 Oh, and A (the shooter) is the guy that, earlier in the day, I had talked with about gambling, and offered to help him with poker anytime.Something tells me that he'll be worrying about a different type of poker for the time being. Link to post Share on other sites
Pot Odds RAC 23 Posted July 11, 2008 Share Posted July 11, 2008 Can A claim self defense since the guy was trying to intrude in his home?Probably. Here in Michigan if someone is intruding in your home or you feel threatened you can defend yourself without retreating. However in some states you need to prove that you attempted to retreat before resorting to deadly force. Not certain of the law in Louisianna where it appears that this incident took place. Link to post Share on other sites
sandwedge 30 Posted July 11, 2008 Author Share Posted July 11, 2008 Can A claim self defense since the guy was trying to intrude in his home?I'm not sure. I feel he'd have a much better case if he had shot from inside his door as opposed to firing from just outside of it. Link to post Share on other sites
serge 904 Posted July 11, 2008 Share Posted July 11, 2008 If this happened in Canada, the guy would of had a black eye and it would be the end of it.Not generalizing but in the US guns are more prevalent. First time I actually saw a gun up close was at my father in laws place in California, i was 28 years old. Link to post Share on other sites
CaneBrain 95 Posted July 11, 2008 Share Posted July 11, 2008 Probably. Here in Michigan if someone is intruding in your home or you feel threatened you can defend yourself without retreating. However in some states you need to prove that you attempted to retreat before resorting to deadly force. Not certain of the law in Louisianna where it appears that this incident took place.Louisiana is just a shade above Texas in terms of how loosey-goosey the self-defense laws are. Lucky for "A".In more liberal areas, A would be screwed. This scenario really stretches self-defense to its limits because often the standard is that you have to believe you are in serious danger of bodily harm before you can unload a whole clip into someone. Not sure this would qualify. Then again, J's past history of messing with A/B might help A. At least A didnt shoot J in the back. You can only get away with that crap in Texas. Link to post Share on other sites
gfdsa146 0 Posted July 11, 2008 Share Posted July 11, 2008 this is so fkin stupid... Link to post Share on other sites
Pot Odds RAC 23 Posted July 11, 2008 Share Posted July 11, 2008 Apparently Louisanna has a "Stand Your Ground" version of the Law, meaning you have no duty to retreat anywhere, even outside of your home. Link to post Share on other sites
Pot Odds RAC 23 Posted July 11, 2008 Share Posted July 11, 2008 If this happened in Canada, the guy would of had a black eye and it would be the end of it.Not generalizing but in the US guns are more prevalent. First time I actually saw a gun up close was at my father in laws place in California, i was 28 years old....or J would have kicked the crap out of A and not stopped until he was in a coma.Just saying, speculation goes both ways. Link to post Share on other sites
Pot Odds RAC 23 Posted July 11, 2008 Share Posted July 11, 2008 Louisanna Law RS14:20Justifiable homicideA. A homicide is justifiable:(1) When committed in self-defense by one who reasonably believes that he is in imminent danger of losing his life or receiving great bodily harm and that the killing is necessary to save himself from that danger.(2) When committed for the purpose of preventing a violent or forcible felony involving danger to life or of great bodily harm by one who reasonably believes that such an offense is about to be committed and that such action is necessary for its prevention. The circumstances must be sufficient to excite the fear of a reasonable person that there would be serious danger to his own life or person if he attempted to prevent the felony without the killing.(3) When committed against a person whom one reasonably believes to be likely to use any unlawful force against a person present in a dwelling or a place of business, or when committed against a person whom one reasonably believes is attempting to use any unlawful force against a person present in a motor vehicle as defined in R.S. 32:1(40), while committing or attempting to commit a burglary or robbery of such dwelling, business, or motor vehicle.(4)(a) When committed by a person lawfully inside a dwelling, a place of business, or a motor vehicle as defined in R.S. 32:1(40), against a person who is attempting to make an unlawful entry into the dwelling, place of business, or motor vehicle, or who has made an unlawful entry into the dwelling, place of business, or motor vehicle, and the person committing the homicide reasonably believes that the use of deadly force is necessary to prevent the entry or to compel the intruder to leave the premises or motor vehicle.( B ) The provisions of this Paragraph shall not apply when the person committing the homicide is engaged, at the time of the homicide, in the acquisition of, the distribution of, or possession of, with intent to distribute a controlled dangerous substance in violation of the provisions of the Uniform Controlled Dangerous Substances Law.B. For the purposes of this Section, there shall be a presumption that a person lawfully inside a dwelling, place of business, or motor vehicle held a reasonable belief that the use of deadly force was necessary to prevent unlawful entry thereto, or to compel an unlawful intruder to leave the premises or motor vehicle, if both of the following occur:(1) The person against whom deadly force was used was in the process of unlawfully and forcibly entering or had unlawfully and forcibly entered the dwelling, place of business, or motor vehicle.(2) The person who used deadly force knew or had reason to believe that an unlawful and forcible entry was occurring or had occurred.C. A person who is not engaged in unlawful activity and who is in a place where he or she has a right to be shall have no duty to retreat before using deadly force as provided for in this Section, and may stand his or her ground and meet force with force.D. No finder of fact shall be permitted to consider the possibility of retreat as a factor in determining whether or not the person who used deadly force had a reasonable belief that deadly force was reasonable and apparently necessary to prevent a violent or forcible felony involving life or great bodily harm or to prevent the unlawful entry. Link to post Share on other sites
CaneBrain 95 Posted July 11, 2008 Share Posted July 11, 2008 Louisanna Law RS14:20Justifiable homicideA. A homicide is justifiable:(1) When committed in self-defense by one who reasonably believes that he is in imminent danger of losing his life or receiving great bodily harm and that the killing is necessary to save himself from that danger.(2) When committed for the purpose of preventing a violent or forcible felony involving danger to life or of great bodily harm by one who reasonably believes that such an offense is about to be committed and that such action is necessary for its prevention. The circumstances must be sufficient to excite the fear of a reasonable person that there would be serious danger to his own life or person if he attempted to prevent the felony without the killing.(3) When committed against a person whom one reasonably believes to be likely to use any unlawful force against a person present in a dwelling or a place of business, or when committed against a person whom one reasonably believes is attempting to use any unlawful force against a person present in a motor vehicle as defined in R.S. 32:1(40), while committing or attempting to commit a burglary or robbery of such dwelling, business, or motor vehicle.(4)(a) When committed by a person lawfully inside a dwelling, a place of business, or a motor vehicle as defined in R.S. 32:1(40), against a person who is attempting to make an unlawful entry into the dwelling, place of business, or motor vehicle, or who has made an unlawful entry into the dwelling, place of business, or motor vehicle, and the person committing the homicide reasonably believes that the use of deadly force is necessary to prevent the entry or to compel the intruder to leave the premises or motor vehicle.( B ) The provisions of this Paragraph shall not apply when the person committing the homicide is engaged, at the time of the homicide, in the acquisition of, the distribution of, or possession of, with intent to distribute a controlled dangerous substance in violation of the provisions of the Uniform Controlled Dangerous Substances Law.B. For the purposes of this Section, there shall be a presumption that a person lawfully inside a dwelling, place of business, or motor vehicle held a reasonable belief that the use of deadly force was necessary to prevent unlawful entry thereto, or to compel an unlawful intruder to leave the premises or motor vehicle, if both of the following occur:(1) The person against whom deadly force was used was in the process of unlawfully and forcibly entering or had unlawfully and forcibly entered the dwelling, place of business, or motor vehicle.(2) The person who used deadly force knew or had reason to believe that an unlawful and forcible entry was occurring or had occurred.C. A person who is not engaged in unlawful activity and who is in a place where he or she has a right to be shall have no duty to retreat before using deadly force as provided for in this Section, and may stand his or her ground and meet force with force.D. No finder of fact shall be permitted to consider the possibility of retreat as a factor in determining whether or not the person who used deadly force had a reasonable belief that deadly force was reasonable and apparently necessary to prevent a violent or forcible felony involving life or great bodily harm or to prevent the unlawful entry. B(2) should save Mr. A here. Lucky guy. Link to post Share on other sites
Pot Odds RAC 23 Posted July 11, 2008 Share Posted July 11, 2008 B(2) should save A here. Lucky guy.A should be home in time for lunch. Link to post Share on other sites
CaneBrain 95 Posted July 11, 2008 Share Posted July 11, 2008 A should be home in time for lunch.yep. That is about as lax a self-defense law as you will ever see. Link to post Share on other sites
terradawg 0 Posted July 11, 2008 Share Posted July 11, 2008 Can A claim self defense since the guy was trying to intrude in his home?without reading the LA statute, the general rule is that deadly force cannot be used in the defense of property alone. that being said, mr. A simply needs to say that he felt like he was in danger. but then deadly force can only be used if A reasonably felt like deadly force was being used against him. Link to post Share on other sites
CaneBrain 95 Posted July 11, 2008 Share Posted July 11, 2008 without reading the LA statute, the general rule is that deadly force cannot be used in the defense of property alone. that being said, mr. A simply needs to say that he felt like he was in danger. but then deadly force can only be used if A reasonably felt like deadly force was being used against him.sorry terradawg. you gotta read that statute. What you are saying is the NORM for self-defense statutes but there are certain states with (much) looser standards. Lousiana is one of them.if I was a prosecutor I wouldnt bother on this case......the only argument you have is unloading the whole clip was excessive.... Link to post Share on other sites
Dratj 0 Posted July 11, 2008 Share Posted July 11, 2008 I think it's probably just firecrackers left over from last week. Just to be on the safe side, I grab my .357 and my "home defender shotgun", and place them next to me. AS I'm drifting off to sleep, I can hear the sounds of police radios down there.I found this sentence to be interesting. Can't do that in Canada here.Not at the WSOP this year I guess. Glad you are ok though. How are things? Link to post Share on other sites
TravisG 0 Posted July 11, 2008 Share Posted July 11, 2008 Talked to one of the guys this morning. Here's what happened:Roommates A, B, and C."Bad Guy" J, who lives in another apartment.Roommates A and B do not like J. He apparently has done/said some bad things to B's girlfriend. In the near past, J has been told not to go near their apartment.Roommate C is friends with J.Roommate C gets drunk, causes some problems, gets into an altercation with B. Roommate C then leaves to go to J's apartment.J shows up. Roommate B meets J out front (around a corner) and tells him to go no further. J ignores him and continues toward the apartment, rounding the corner.Roommate A is waiting right outside the door and tells him to stop. J continues coming forward, so A unloads a .22 clip into him.J falls, gets up, leaves, and falls again out in front of the building. He is in the hospital. I have no idea how bad it is.Roommate A calls the police, tells them what has happened. They show up and take him into custody.All in all, it's basically a typical college-age dispute, with a handgun thrown in. In my opinion, it's more sad than anything.Now, before this turns into a gun ownership debate, I just want to say that I was happy to know that I was legally waiting behind my door with much more firepower, and felt much more safe as a result.Put that into the Gun/Homegame discussion. That's what guns cause. I'm glad you and your daughter are safe. Link to post Share on other sites
Pot Odds RAC 23 Posted July 11, 2008 Share Posted July 11, 2008 Put that into the Gun/Homegame discussion. That's what stupid irresponsible people doing stupid irresponsible things cause. I'm glad you and your daughter are safe.FYP Link to post Share on other sites
Dr_Jeff 0 Posted July 11, 2008 Share Posted July 11, 2008 FYPI would have to agree with potodds here. It's like the old cliche' - Guns don't kill people, people kill people. Link to post Share on other sites
DoinSublime 0 Posted July 11, 2008 Share Posted July 11, 2008 Glad youre safe sandwedge. :)And stop the gun debate. The real reason to have armed civilians in the US is so that they are on equal grounds with the government and can defend themselves from tyranny, as well as anyone who intrudes upon their liberty.Second time I've posted this today. Read it if you want to know why people are pro gun. http://rkba.org/comment/cowards.htmlHint: Tyrannical governments have been around more often than not throughout history. And, surprise surprise, the US government has been trying to take away this right of civilians for a while now. I wonder why. Link to post Share on other sites
mhoward29 0 Posted July 11, 2008 Share Posted July 11, 2008 I would have to agree with potodds here. It's like the old cliche' - Guns don't kill people, people kill people.QFT Link to post Share on other sites
MJINK3 0 Posted July 11, 2008 Share Posted July 11, 2008 On the whole gun thing I am really on the fence. Yes, they protect you if someone tries to invade your home. But on the other hand I see waaaaaaaaaaay too many news stories about innocent bystanders being shot by stray bullets(some while the person is inside a home and the shooting is outside the home) so no way a gun can protect you there, while I can't remember the last story I heard about a homeowner protecting himself and shooting an intruder. Link to post Share on other sites
CaneBrain 95 Posted July 11, 2008 Share Posted July 11, 2008 I would have to agree with potodds here. It's like the old cliche' - Guns don't kill people, people kill people.I am pretty sure most anti-gun people agree with this. They just think guns make it a lot easier to kill people. And they have a point too.Let's all agree not to do this debate again. Let's focus on the fact that the OP is safe but should consider a move. Link to post Share on other sites
Elo and AG 0 Posted July 11, 2008 Share Posted July 11, 2008 this is so fkin stupid...Oh, and glad that nothing happened to you and your daugther. Stay safe......Peace out Link to post Share on other sites
mhoward29 0 Posted July 11, 2008 Share Posted July 11, 2008 On the whole gun thing I am really on the fence. Yes, they protect you if someone tries to invade your home. But on the other hand I see waaaaaaaaaaay too many news stories about innocent bystanders being shot by stray bullets(some while the person is inside a home and the shooting is outside the home) so no way a gun can protect you there, while I can't remember the last story I heard about a homeowner protecting himself and shooting an intruder.At the end of June here in Portland there was a bad guy trying to break the door of an apt down and he had a gun. The guy inside the apt had a wife and a newborn, and a shotgun. The good guy called the police right away, grabbed his gun and stood as far away as he could from the front door while still being able to see it. The bad guy busted the door down finally with gun in hand. The good guy shot him three steps into his apt. Momma and baby were not harmed. Police showed up 12min later.The bad guy did not know anyone in that apt. It was random. Sorry, I cant find the link. But here is another one just in my neighboring town of Salem if you scroll down.Link Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now