- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Homeowner for the win
Posted on 3/14/16 at 12:44 am to Real Pirate
Posted on 3/14/16 at 12:44 am to Real Pirate
quote:
the home owner had the right to THREATEN to shoot the burglar to stop him outside his house while on his property.
This is correct; however, you do not have the right to use deadly force.
quote:
if he reached in his back pocket, the home owner is fearing for his life. He shot him. He gets away every time.
I would agree with this also; however, in this case the jury did not. You never know how a jury will see things. Your belief that your life is in danger for the purposes of self-defense is determined objectively, not subjectively, which is why I am assuming the jury convicted.
1
Posted on 3/14/16 at 12:51 am to TigernMS12
quote:
This is correct; however, you do not have the right to use deadly force.
I didn't say you did. We agreed there.
But, if I point a gun at you and tell you to stop, putting your hands in your back pockets is going to tell me you're reaching for a gun. Then, I'm fearing for my life. I shoot. I go home, no problems.
There's more to that case than we're arguing about. Without the rest of the details, it's impossible to decipher what caused his guilty verdict.
From the little info we have, he was actually in the right.
That's why I'm saying there is more to that story than the info I could find so far.
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News