“Reasonable person” is what the average person would be expected to do in a similar situation. Like at my apartment if someone is pounding on the door telling me they want in, or want to hurt me, or steal my stuff, rape my bicycle, etc, the motive doesn’t really matter, they want in. My door is a metal door that I keep dead bolted. I don’t have reason to fear for my life, since I have a sturdy barrier between me and them. I could still brandish a gun but I don’t have enough justification as a reasonable person to shoot through the solid door.
Okay, so let’s pretend I’m still a reasonable person and I have a door that has a glass window in it (like the Co. Springs shooting). The person who wants in to my apartment, that has no reason to be there (I live alone) is pounding on the door demanding to be let in (Co. Springs). Sure my door is less secure than my metal one, but its still a barrier between me and them. That person then breaks the glass (like Co. Springs again) and reaches in and unlocks the door. Two things have happened there; 1) Part of their body crossed the threshold and 2) by unlocking the door the person removed the barrier between me and them (Co. Springs again). The security of a fixed barrier is gone as all it takes to gain full access is to turn the door knob and push (or pull). Since that barrier is gone, and security along with it, I as a reasonable person have the right to fear for my life (breaking stuff is violence) and act accordingly. I have immediate fear for my life, I have no physical barrier between me and them, they are in the house (not all the way in, but this isn’t football). All the requirements are met to shoot the person in self defense.
Others have already answered, but just so you don’t think I’m ducking:
#1 doesn’t give us a lot of information to go on, but generally I think most people would tend to think that “a reasonable person” would try to get a look at the person before shooting, and perhaps even yell “freeze” or some such. So it may well be this was an unjustified shooting, and open to prosecution. It’s clearly a case of a kid behaving stupidly and putting themselves in harm’s way, akin to someone who pulls a cap gun out and points it at a cop.
#2 does not have a shooting, and the police do appear to have identified themselves, so I don’t see the relevance. If we want to hypothetical a raid where the police made an erroneous no-knock, failed to identify themselves, and got shot … it’d be a tragedy, but the fault would lie with the police. They did not follow proper procedure, they possibly were using unneeded force to begin with (many experts would argue that most no-knocks are unnecessary), and they went to the wrong damn house. A cop makes that many mistakes, bad shit’s gonna happen. I’m glad that, so far as we know, it’s never happened.
#3 is clearly not a case of “someone breaking into your house,” and thus irrelevant here. The homeowner was not acting out of reasonable fear (they were out of the house, moving away, apparently non-threatening) and should be prosecuted.
Hey, let’s play a game! How about DanBlather posts as many cites of ACTUAL misguided shootings that involved ACTUAL HOME INVASION SITUATIONS as support for his arguments, then I’ll post as many cites as I can of situations where a home invasion that DIDN’T involve the homeowner shooting anyone ended up in dead/raped/kidnapped/otherwise traumatized people. You go first, Dan! Let’s see who comes out on top here…sure you have more than three examples, one of which had NO SHOOTING, another where there was NO HOME INVASION, and another where there was NO FATALITY.
The idea that an adult family member might go into the backyard after dark and then into a downstairs bathroom when she returned doesn’t seem unreasonable. Calling her behavior stupid, “akin to someone who pulls a cap gun out and points it at a cop”, is absurd.
Well, the thing is we’re missing all kinds of information here, so we’re just guessing.
It says she’s 18, so yes, she is technically an adult; but she is also living in her parent’s house, and there are lots of parents that impose rules on 18-year-olds living at home. I turned 18 during my senior year of high school, but still had a technical curfew until I graduated. I had friends with curfews at 19 or 20. The fact that she’s leaving late at night without telling anyone, then steathily coming back in through a basement door suggests to me she was breaking some kind of rule. At any rate, she was certainly not walking in the front door as one would would expect if she in fact was perfectly free to come and go late at night.
When you know your dad has guns and trains regularly in their use, but you’re sneaking into the house through the basement at 4 am … yeah, I call that stupid. Typical-18-year-old stupid, I-did-even-dumber-crap stupid, but stupid nonetheless.
Some years ago, in Washintgon DC, alone at home, in the wee hours of the morning I heard something going on downstairs. I quietly moved to the top of the stairs and I could see there were two people with flashlights quietly moving around in the dark.
What to do? I yelled “who’s there? I’ve called the police!”
A calm voice responded “we ARE the police!”
Turning on the lights revealed they were, indeed, the police.
Driving in the back alley they had seen my back door wide open and wondered if there might be a burglary going on. It seems I had not locked it properly when I took the garbage out and later it must have swung open with the wind.
I wonder if by coming down shooting I could have got even for an unfair ticket they gave me a year earlier. But the chance was lost forever.
Oh, I guess I should wait until they climb into bed with me and start fondling my earlobes (attractive female cops excepted).
I have no position on anything, reasonable or unreasonable. I stay out of these threads for fear of being shot by mistake. I just told a humorous anecdote.
If you grow up in a house where you know your parents are willing to shoot an intruder to defend themselves, you don’t do this. You might open the back door with your key and enter, but you do it while saying ‘Mom, Dad, it’s catsix!’ very loudly. I wouldn’t surprise them in the middle of the night, either. And if I were staying with them and expected to come in very late, I would say ‘I’m not planning to be back until $time_estimate.’ I’ve still had my dad do the ‘Who’s there?’ and I just identify myself.
That’s the way things are supposed to happen.
Well that really depends on whether they knock and present the warrant, or whether they kick in the door without announcing themselves, doesn’t it?
My doors are never unlocked unless I’m actually walking through them at that very minute. Anyone who thought they were at my house for a party would have to knock, which means they’re outside, which means I would not shoot them. If they did, however, manage to get through the locked steel door and into my house, I have no moral problem with shooting them.
In general, for a home invasion you should be able to shoot the intruder, with no repercussions wahtsoever.
In the case at hand I have some very serious questions if the “intruder” really needs to be shot though. (and yes, I put intruder in inverted commas deliberately)
Reading for Comprehension (and stating my assumptions)
This happened before 10 pm - so it was not the small hours of the morning (yes it does matter)
He came from a golf club - I could be projecting, but presumably he had been either playing golf or attending a function - so he was probably (maybe?) dressed relatively well
He lived one block over with several room-mates. I remember my young guy days living with other young guys - back then it was not out of the question that one housemate might forget his keys or that the others would find it funny to see him locked out.
I listened to the audio, the shooter did not appear to shout any warning to the intruder at all (but it is a 50 / 50 proposition though, maybe he did shout but the phone didn’t pick it up)
I would like to know more details on what the obscenities actually were - could it be along the lines of “hey you m#####r F###%r let me in, I forgot m keys” or was it a more threatening and incoherent rant.
All of this makes a difference - I suspect that it would have been very easy to avoid a shooting here - by shouting a warning. HEY dude I am armed, the police are on their way, this is not your house etc etc.
Also, do note, the home owner did shoot before the guy entered the house - but after he had unlocked the door (a bit nit picky I know). Could he have stood at the other end of the room and given a final warning?
Could he have turned on the porch lights and tried to talk to the intruder through the door? (maybe he did and it isn’t mentioned, but I see no evidence of this)
I do support the idea that we should be able to shoot home intruders - but I just get the vibe (not fact, and I have limited info to hand, so I would concede quite quickly) that the homeowner was a little more aggressive that he needed to be and this trajedy could have been avoided with a little more restraint. I don’t get the feeling that he exhausted all reasonable possibilities before shooting.
A deadbolt (th story says deadbolt rather than safety chain) that can be opened without a key doesn’t do a whole hell of a lot to prevent burglary - it can still be opened from inside. My doctrine on a deadlock is that the intention is to stop the door from being opened from the inside if a burglar gains entry through a window.
If you do have a keyed deadbolt I prefer not to have it locked when people are at home - you don’t want to be searching for a key to get out if there is a fire.
In a previous gun-related thread, Gonzomax made some rather outlandish claims regarding the numbers and usages of handguns in colonial America. Until he either provides cites or admits he was making shit up, I will gently remind him of those unsubstantiated claims when he shows up in other gun-related threads.