- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- 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
1
Posted on 11/13/25 at 6:43 pm to stout
Where in the article are the parents mentioned???
Posted on 11/13/25 at 6:44 pm to SallysHuman
Ok you right
Posted on 11/13/25 at 6:48 pm to stout
pffff.... was ALWAYS advised by LEO friends.... drag the body inside.
Posted on 11/13/25 at 6:48 pm to RelentlessAnalysis
quote:
Then you should definitely find a state in which that is the law ... and move there.
I live in a great State for this...
quote:
South Carolina's "Castle Doctrine" is part of its larger "Protection of Persons and Property Act," which codifies the right for individuals to use deadly force in their home, occupied vehicle, or place of business without a duty to retreat.
We can carry willy nilly, too...
quote:
South Carolina's constitutional carry law went into effect on March 7, 2024, allowing individuals 18 and older who are not legally prohibited from owning a firearm to carry it openly or concealed without a permit or prior training. The law, officially titled the "South Carolina Constitutional Carry/Second Amendment Preservation Act of 2024," authorized individuals to possess firearms in a manner not prohibited by law, regardless of a concealed weapon permit.
These two items put criminals at a bit of a disadvantage here.
Posted on 11/13/25 at 6:51 pm to HurricaneTiger
quote:In Michigan? Are you sure about that?
We are allowed to defend our property. Property includes the things we possess, and not just land. Where were some of those? Hmm, I wonder.
quote:In Michigan, you can legally use deadly force in two situations: (1) to defend your life or the life of another OR (2) to prevent a rape. That is it.
780.972 Use of deadly force by individual not engaged in commission of crime; conditions.
(1) An individual who has not or is not engaged in the commission of a crime at the time he or she uses deadly force may use deadly force against another individual anywhere he or she has the legal right to be with no duty to retreat if either of the following applies:
(a) The individual honestly and reasonably believes that the use of deadly force is necessary to prevent the imminent death of or imminent great bodily harm to himself or herself or to another individual.
(b) The individual honestly and reasonably believes that the use of deadly force is necessary to prevent the imminent sexual assault of himself or herself or of another individual.
Do you think that the law SHOULD be otherwise? That is not entirely unreasonable. But it IS unreasonable to pretend that Michigan law says something other than that which is recorded in the plain unambiguous language of the statute.
Posted on 11/13/25 at 6:53 pm to SallysHuman
quote:Without doing any research myself, and accepting your own summary of SC law, it seems that you have found a great State to live, for a person of your termperament.
Then you should definitely find a state in which that is the law ... and move there.quote:South Carolina's "Castle Doctrine" is part of its larger "Protection of Persons and Property Act," which codifies the right for individuals to use deadly force in their home, occupied vehicle, or place of business without a duty to retreat.
I live in a great State for this...
Posted on 11/13/25 at 6:53 pm to stout
quote:
A reminder not to shoot a burglar if they are running away from your house
It wasn’t always this way. The cops used to say that you just needed to drag the body back into the house and all was good.
Posted on 11/13/25 at 6:55 pm to RelentlessAnalysis
quote:
In Michigan, you can legally use deadly force in two situations: (1) to defend your life or the life of another
The above, when taken with the below, provides this homeowner a compelling defense.
quote:
may use deadly force against another individual anywhere he or she has the legal right to be with no duty to retreat if either of the following applies:
Again. 7 versus 1. Reasonable fear. No duty to retreat.
Posted on 11/13/25 at 6:55 pm to stout
If you have to shoot them outside your house be sure to drag them into your house
Posted on 11/13/25 at 6:56 pm to RelentlessAnalysis
quote:
for a person of your termperament.
That's actually a good one.
I promise I'm not that rabid though.
Posted on 11/13/25 at 7:00 pm to stout
That man has every right to defend his home with lethal force.
That being said, this:
Is negligent to say the least and completely retarded.
Just pathetic for a shooter to even consider discharging your weapon when you can't see what your shooting at.
That being said, this:
quote:
fired two shots into the garage through a windowless locked door
Is negligent to say the least and completely retarded.
Just pathetic for a shooter to even consider discharging your weapon when you can't see what your shooting at.
Posted on 11/13/25 at 7:01 pm to SallysHuman
quote:No, it does not provide a "compelling" defense. It barely provides the tiniest hint of a potential defense.
In Michigan, you can legally use deadly force in two situations: (1) to defend your life or the life of anotherquote:
The above, when taken with the below, provides this homeowner a compelling defense.
The statute requires that there by IMMINENT threat of death or great bodily harm. Here, there was certainly some remote possibility of death/harm when theses punks broke into the detached garage, but it was not remotely "imminent." It would only become "imminent" if they left the detached garage and started trying to break into the home while he cowered behind his locked doors.
I understand that you do not LIKE Michigan law on this point. Michigan is not particularly concerned with your preferences.
Again, it is not unreasonable to debate whether Michigan has enacted legislation that we Southerners believe to be represent sound policy.
It IS unreasonable to ignore the actual law of Michigan in analyzing this particular shooting.
Posted on 11/13/25 at 7:05 pm to SallysHuman
quote:He doesn't.
How was the homeowner to know this roving band of miscreants weren't going for his main residence next?
But that is not the test under applicable Michigan law.
Michigan law allows the use of deadly force when you ARE in danger, not when there exists some hypothetical possibility that you might COME TO BE in danger.
Do you grasp the distinction?
Posted on 11/13/25 at 7:05 pm to RelentlessAnalysis
quote:
The statute requires that there by IMMINENT threat of death or great bodily harm. Here, there was certainly some remote possibility of death/harm when theses punks broke into the detached garage, but it was not remotely "imminent." It would only become "imminent" if they left the detached garage and started trying to break into the home while he cowered behind his locked doors.
Or, while the homeowner legally approached his own garage with no duty to retreat. No duty to cower, either.
There is definitely wiggle room there... how much is debatable by a Michigan jury.
Posted on 11/13/25 at 7:05 pm to UptownJoeBrown
quote:
in Louisiana you can’t kill someone over property.
You can in Arkansas. That’s a pretty new law here, changed since my last class. I’m more of the “immediate threat” defensive shooter type but if they’re stealing CDs out of my truck I can waste em
Posted on 11/13/25 at 7:06 pm to RelentlessAnalysis
quote:
Michigan law allows the use of deadly force when you ARE in danger, not when there exists some hypothetical possibility that you might COME TO BE in danger.
And I assert that upon legally approaching his own garage he found himself to be in imminent danger with no duty to retreat.
Posted on 11/13/25 at 7:06 pm to stout
quote:
breaking into his garage
That right there SHOULD be enough for him not to be charged. Break into someone's house... or even attempt to... and you automatically take responsibility for ANY AND ALL consequences that may come your way.
Posted on 11/13/25 at 7:07 pm to stout
#presidentialpardon
Page 4 of 6
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News