Q.E.D. I don’t think you get off the hook, you said:
This isn’t entirely right either. The spring gun may or may not be illegal depending on who it kills, it isn’t illegal because of it’s inability to distinguish between child and rapist, but it may give rise to civil liability if it kills the wrong person. A fine distinction, but I’m not going down without a fight on this one! 
Free the Spring Guns!
I’ll concede your distinction, however, I still believe you’d have a difficult time proving that your spring gun killed “…[an] intruder [who] is, in fact, one whose intrusion involves danger of life and limb of the occupants of the dwelling place or is for the purpose of committing certain serious crimes…” in a court of law. Of course, as the defendant, the burden of proof is not on you, but rather on the prosection. Nevertheless, I don’t think it would be terribly difficult for the prosectuting attourney to demonstrate that there should be reasonable doubt that the intruder may have entered your premises for purposes that mayb not have intended bodily harm to you.
If I’m understanding this correctly, guard dogs are permitted because they themselves give warning. Is a ‘Beware of the dog’ sign required? Does such a sign have to name the specific type of creature or danger involved? I’m wondering whether you could put ‘Beware of Dangerous Animals’ signs on your four-metre-tall chain-link fence, then, when the intruders are expecting dogs, have them encounter your bull moose in rut and/or your moat filled with highly-visible candiru fish and pirahnas…
That’s what happens with those dye-filled clothing tags, isn’t it? The thief tries to remove them so they don’t set off the detector at the store entrance, they break, and cover thief and merchandise with dye…
Or this guy…
How highly visible can a candiru fish be, anyway? They’re only, what, a couple centimeters long?
Or has someone bred a giant version? (Eek!)
Aren’t candiru fish the ones that swim up your… :eek:
Apologies for continuing the Texas hijack, but yes, this is true - an owner shot a repo driver as he was driving away and was not charged with murder. But he could have been…
IIRC (IAA Texas CHL holder, but can’t find the list) I am allowed by law to shoot anyone causing or threatening to cause bodily harm to myself, to someone posing imminent lethal intent to someone else (the neighbor choking his wife in the driveway), or to prevent the loss of items of significant or irreplacable value. Meaning, if the bauble grandma left me in her will is in the burglar’s possession while climbing out my window, I CAN shoot him/her. Most instructors advise, however, that this can get sticky legally since the definition is so subjective, and not to shoot unless you feel threatened. My instructor said, “if he’s got one foot in and one foot out, shoot him. As far as you know he’s coming back IN to kill you.”
Only in Texas… 
Unless you have a permit for destructive devices
Wha? where/how would I go aboot getting such a thing?
Up here I worked packing dy-no-mite once. Of course there was a licensed powderman on scene at all times. Also they keep close records of every “stick” (actually they looked like a giant loaf of sausage,only pink) of dynomite.
Here is my local guy:
Posted on Wed, Jul. 31, 2002 story:
Pacific Grove booby-trapper known for late-night remodeling
By ALEX FRIEDRICH
afriedrich@montereyherald.com
“The Pacific Grove man arrested for booby-trapping his walkway and building a small home arsenal was a recluse known to his neighbors mostly for working on his aging apartment house at odd hours of the night.”
rest of story:
http://www.montereyherald.com/mld/montereyherald/3774932.htm
Darn! Monkeypants beat me to the cite I wanted to use!
I’m sure the legality of such things vary by jurisdiction, but I’m guessing that, universally, deadly force is only legally applicable when there is a human deciding when its use is necessary.
Uh, you do here in Texas.
FYI, section 9.41 refers to taking back what is yours after someone has taken it from you using force, threat, or fraud.
I have heard of this most commonly used to refer to break-ins and theft that occur at night.
There was a case I remember a few years ago where a construction contractor-type guy heard someone breaking into his truck (presumably to steal his valuable power tools) in the wee hours of the morning, and shot the thief dead through the back windscreen with a rifle as the thief was making good his escape in the stolen vehicle.
This kinda thing had repo-men up in arms (literally) because they often attempt to reposess vehicles a night or during the early morning hours (after or prior to commute time is when the whereabouts of the vehicle are more predictable). I remember at least one other case where a repo-man had been shot and killed in the pre-dawn hours by a guy who thought he was being robbed. The TV news crew was interviewing another repo-man who was clearly uncomfortable about the whole thing, but was willing to show them his newly-acquired bullet-proof vest.
Other than by the presence of a tow truck emblazoned with a company logo, how would a property owner be expected to know when his car was being reposessed as opposed to stolen?
Tony
Sorry, I forgot about this post after not finding a good answer about DD. These guys talk about such things.
http://www.37mm.com/cgi-bin/Ultimate.pl
Seems like they are playing buy the rules. On the edge perhaps, but within the legal limits.
Play with some of this stuff in your frnt yard and nobody will be taking aim at your house
HI psiekier it may be that there is no criminal liability in TX under the penal code, there could still be civil liability. It is a good point, of course, to mention that in any legal discussion there is always the possibility that there will be variations from state to state etc. We were really just discussing what the implications of the Restatement were, but the TX information is very interesting.
So, have I got this right: I have to ask the intruder what his intentions are, or infer them, before I shoot his ass? Any California Dopers care to fill me in on Ca. statute?
I tell ya what, if someone shows up INSIDE MY HOUSE in the middle of the night, if I get to my gun before he does, his ass is grass. Am I not in the right to assume someone breaking and entering has nefarious intent? Whether he ACTUALLY HAS intent to harm me, I would think I’d have no trouble defending myself in court with the “I felt I was in imminent danger for my life” defense.
I’d really like to know.
I think you’re correct on the necessity of the human deciding when and when not to use deadly force.
Texas Penal Code 9.44, Use of Device to Protect Property:
The justification afforded by Sections 9.41 and 9.43 applies to the use of a device land or tangiable, movable property if:
(1) The device is not designed to cause, or known by the actor to create a substantial risk of causing death or serious bodily injury, and
(2) use of the device is reasonable under all the circumstances as the actor reasonably believes them to be when he install the device.
So defending the safe with a knife or club may be legal, but rigging a spring gun to it probably isn’t.
Excellent idea.
Based on my understanding of the law and what seems to be the consensus of this thread, if the intruder is just a burglar and you shoot him, you could be prosecuted.
If, say, you see him before he sees you and you cannot determine his intent prior to shooting him, that could also lead to prosecution.
Or you may not be prosecuted at all.
But just because someone has invaded your home does not necessarily give you the right to shoot him.
Except in Texas. Y’all come back now, y’hear?
False urban legend, says snopes.
Thanks B & I I know what my next purchase is gonna be now…