14 yr old shot from 30 ft away;shooter claims Stand Your Ground (1 Viewer)

[Zow]

Whatever the defense used, theoretically: if a strange teenager steps into your front yard, and you point your gun at him from 30 feet away and tell him to freeze, and then he appears to reach for a gun, do you have the right to shoot him? Is that self-defense, if you think he's reaching for a gun?

That's the quintessential jury question. There are legal doctrines at play that would effect the instructions that the jury are given. In most states, if someone is committing a breaking and entering offense then the shooter is entitled to a presumption of a rational belief in the need for self-defense. And in stand your ground states, that rational belief is enough even if the shooter could have retreated to a safe area.

But in all cases, the jury has to find the shooter's subjective belief rational. And that could depend on whether it was dark out, etc.

Well said. The best answer Tim, as is the best answer to any legal question, is "maybe."

 

[Mr Two Cents]

I have 3 yappy little dogs (early warning system) and a decal on my front door (and car window) that says "Nothing Inside Is Worth Dying For" (link available if you want to purchase one).

If someone is stupid enough to ignore both then they are a danger to themselves and my family and deserve an intervention of one type or another.

i have a 13 yo deaf pug and a sticker on my front door that reads ''welcome''

This is the same guy who posted in the gun control thread that he never opens the front door without a loaded gun in his hand.

That's not true Tim, I NEVER said I open the front door without a loaded gun. I never go to the door without a loaded gun. I answer it all the time without a loaded gun, once I know who it is then the gun is secured. If I don't know who it is, we have a discussion at the door, yes with a loaded gun that they cannot see.

The closest I have ever come to showing a gun to someone outside my door is one time my granddaughter came in followed by her boyfriend and he extended his hand to shake mine, which was holding a fully loaded Judge. It was a little awkward but not a big deal. He did have her home on time that night.

A responsible gun owner would never open a door with a gun visible. It is illegal to brandish a weapon, even in Texas.

 

[Zow]

I have 3 yappy little dogs (early warning system) and a decal on my front door (and car window) that says "Nothing Inside Is Worth Dying For" (link available if you want to purchase one).

If someone is stupid enough to ignore both then they are a danger to themselves and my family and deserve an intervention of one type or another.

i have a 13 yo deaf pug and a sticker on my front door that reads ''welcome''

This is the same guy who posted in the gun control thread that he never opens the front door without a loaded gun in his hand.

That's not true Tim, I NEVER said I open the front door without a loaded gun. I never go to the door without a loaded gun. I answer it all the time without a loaded gun, once I know who it is then the gun is secured. If I don't know who it is, we have a discussion at the door, yes with a loaded gun that they cannot see.

The closest I have ever come to showing a gun to someone outside my door is one time my granddaughter came in followed by her boyfriend and he extended his hand to shake mine, which was holding a fully loaded Judge. It was a little awkward but not a big deal. He did have her home on time that night.

A responsible gun owner would never open a door with a gun visible. It is illegal to brandish a weapon, even in Texas.

This certainly sounds like a +EV move here.

WTF is wrong with you?

 

[Rohn Jambo]

Looks like we have another good reason to ban guns.

 

[timschochet]

I have 3 yappy little dogs (early warning system) and a decal on my front door (and car window) that says "Nothing Inside Is Worth Dying For" (link available if you want to purchase one).

If someone is stupid enough to ignore both then they are a danger to themselves and my family and deserve an intervention of one type or another.

i have a 13 yo deaf pug and a sticker on my front door that reads ''welcome''

This is the same guy who posted in the gun control thread that he never opens the front door without a loaded gun in his hand.

That's not true Tim, I NEVER said I open the front door without a loaded gun. I never go to the door without a loaded gun. I answer it all the time without a loaded gun, once I know who it is then the gun is secured. If I don't know who it is, we have a discussion at the door, yes with a loaded gun that they cannot see.The closest I have ever come to showing a gun to someone outside my door is one time my granddaughter came in followed by her boyfriend and he extended his hand to shake mine, which was holding a fully loaded Judge. It was a little awkward but not a big deal. He did have her home on time that night.

A responsible gun owner would never open a door with a gun visible. It is illegal to brandish a weapon, even in Texas.

Thanks for the clarification. Un####ingbelievable.

 

[cstu]

I have 3 yappy little dogs (early warning system) and a decal on my front door (and car window) that says "Nothing Inside Is Worth Dying For" (link available if you want to purchase one).

If someone is stupid enough to ignore both then they are a danger to themselves and my family and deserve an intervention of one type or another.

i have a 13 yo deaf pug and a sticker on my front door that reads ''welcome''

This is the same guy who posted in the gun control thread that he never opens the front door without a loaded gun in his hand.

That's not true Tim, I NEVER said I open the front door without a loaded gun. I never go to the door without a loaded gun. I answer it all the time without a loaded gun, once I know who it is then the gun is secured. If I don't know who it is, we have a discussion at the door, yes with a loaded gun that they cannot see.

The closest I have ever come to showing a gun to someone outside my door is one time my granddaughter came in followed by her boyfriend and he extended his hand to shake mine, which was holding a fully loaded Judge. It was a little awkward but not a big deal. He did have her home on time that night.

A responsible gun owner would never open a door with a gun visible. It is illegal to brandish a weapon, even in Texas.

Where the #### do you live where you need to answer the door with a gun? Are you a drug dealer?

 

[cstu]

BTW, based on these sketchy facts the shooter regardless of race is in deep doodoo.

Not sure you're right. This same claim has been used all the time by policeman. Whenever a kid ends up dead, we're told they were reaching for something, and the police thought it was a gun, so they fired first. Logically, why wouldn't a homeowner also be able to fire first based on the same conditions?

A policeman has had training and is expected to be a better judge of whether someone is armed. If the average untrained person is allowed to use SYG with the excuse 'I thought he was reaching for a gun' then it's a license to kill.

 

[Giantseasonticketholder]

Why is a 14 year old riding his bike at 2AM?

 

[cstu]

Why is a 14 year old riding his bike at 2AM?

Even if he was stealing stuff he doesn't deserve the death penalty.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

The obvious answer was for 14 year old to have a gun. And then shoot the other guy first and claim self defense.

We then can re-live the wild wild west.

 

[Giantseasonticketholder]

Why is a 14 year old riding his bike at 2AM?

Even if he was stealing stuff he doesn't deserve the death penalty.

While this is true, it doesn't answer my question. Just seems to me like this could have been avoided if he were home vs this guys yard at 2AM.

 

[jon_mx]

Why is a 14 year old riding his bike at 2AM?

Skittles.

 

[Henry Ford]

I love the descriptions in here. "Wanders into your yard" or "walks into your yard."

Ever been to the Marigny? I bet anyone here 20 grand without looking up the address that the house had a fence at least four feet high around the property. You don't wander into a yard in the Marigny accidentally.

 

[kentric]

Thirty feet away and shot him in the head. Pretty darn good shot if that's what he was going for. Difficult to side with the shooter here.

 

[igbomb]

Why is a 14 year old riding his bike at 2AM?

Even if he was stealing stuff he doesn't deserve the death penalty.

While this is true, it doesn't answer my question. Just seems to me like this could have been avoided if he were home vs this guys yard at 2AM.

Could have also been avoided if the homeowner didn't shoot him.

 

[igbomb]

I have 3 yappy little dogs (early warning system) and a decal on my front door (and car window) that says "Nothing Inside Is Worth Dying For" (link available if you want to purchase one).

If someone is stupid enough to ignore both then they are a danger to themselves and my family and deserve an intervention of one type or another.

i have a 13 yo deaf pug and a sticker on my front door that reads ''welcome''

This is the same guy who posted in the gun control thread that he never opens the front door without a loaded gun in his hand.

That's not true Tim, I NEVER said I open the front door without a loaded gun. I never go to the door without a loaded gun. I answer it all the time without a loaded gun, once I know who it is then the gun is secured. If I don't know who it is, we have a discussion at the door, yes with a loaded gun that they cannot see.

The closest I have ever come to showing a gun to someone outside my door is one time my granddaughter came in followed by her boyfriend and he extended his hand to shake mine, which was holding a fully loaded Judge. It was a little awkward but not a big deal. He did have her home on time that night.

A responsible gun owner would never open a door with a gun visible. It is illegal to brandish a weapon, even in Texas.

Lot of crazy in there

 

[jsharlan]

If the "victim" had been a 30 year old man instead of a 14 year old kid, would the public perception be different? At 2am in the dark, I don't know how old the person trespassing on my property is. If the guy's story is true and he didn't make it up after the fact, then I would have done the same in his situation. If he got past me, he's one step closer to my kids. I'm not going to allow that, no matter how paranoid or cult like you think it is. My family, my responsibility, not yours.

 

[jsharlan]

Why is a 14 year old riding his bike at 2AM?

Even if he was stealing stuff he doesn't deserve the death penalty.

While this is true, it doesn't answer my question. Just seems to me like this could have been avoided if he were home vs this guys yard at 2AM.

Could have also been avoided if the homeowner didn't shoot him.

And bank robberies could be prevented if they didn't store money there right?

 

[Christo]

Why is a 14 year old riding his bike at 2AM?

Even if he was stealing stuff he doesn't deserve the death penalty.

No. But there's a lot of blame to go around.

 

[StrikeS2k]

BTW, based on these sketchy facts the shooter regardless of race is in deep doodoo.

Not sure you're right. This same claim has been used all the time by policeman. Whenever a kid ends up dead, we're told they were reaching for something, and the police thought it was a gun, so they fired first. Logically, why wouldn't a homeowner also be able to fire first based on the same conditions?

A policeman has had training and is expected to be a better judge of whether someone is armed. If the average untrained person is allowed to use SYG with the excuse 'I thought he was reaching for a gun' then it's a license to kill.

tell that to Doug Zerby

 

[sho nuff]

I am not sure what this has to do with stand your ground if the guy was at home. Are you desperately looking for a better case?

He's claiming SYG- (or the "Castle" law, which is the Louisiana version- you have a right to defend yourself in your castle.) The story made the New York Daily News:

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/crime/teen-shot-head-man-thought-burglar-police-article-1.1410613

According to that story, the kid, who was black (the shooter was white) had been charged previously with two robberies (both unarmed.) He wandered onto the dude's property, dude yells at him to "freeze!", the kid appears to reach for something, the shooter shoots him in the head with one bullet.

That's all according to the shooter; there are no witnesses, apparently.

Sounds like a easy black and white case. Heck of a shot to the head.

aaaaaand heres 2 cents to add some class to the discussion

Whatever the defense used, theoretically: if a strange teenager steps into your front yard, and you point your gun at him from 30 feet away and tell him to freeze, and then he appears to reach for a gun, do you have the right to shoot him? Is that self-defense, if you think he's reaching for a gun?

Personally I think you need to see the gun or something that looks like a gun. If you're not close enough to see something, you're not in immediate danger.

Apparently 30 feet away is good enough for a head shot. How can you not be in immediate danger.

Seriously that is not obviously by reading the story.

The head shot was either lucky or made by someone not threatened with plenty of time to line up the target. You shoot at the body for defense.

im waiting to read about 2 cents being involved in a shooting....its just a matter of time

Didn't you just post something about 2 cents adding class to the discussion? And this is what you come up with not long after that?

Yeah...real classy.

 

[BustedKnuckles]

I am not sure what this has to do with stand your ground if the guy was at home. Are you desperately looking for a better case?

He's claiming SYG- (or the "Castle" law, which is the Louisiana version- you have a right to defend yourself in your castle.) The story made the New York Daily News:

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/crime/teen-shot-head-man-thought-burglar-police-article-1.1410613

According to that story, the kid, who was black (the shooter was white) had been charged previously with two robberies (both unarmed.) He wandered onto the dude's property, dude yells at him to "freeze!", the kid appears to reach for something, the shooter shoots him in the head with one bullet.

That's all according to the shooter; there are no witnesses, apparently.

Sounds like a easy black and white case. Heck of a shot to the head.

aaaaaand heres 2 cents to add some class to the discussion

Whatever the defense used, theoretically: if a strange teenager steps into your front yard, and you point your gun at him from 30 feet away and tell him to freeze, and then he appears to reach for a gun, do you have the right to shoot him? Is that self-defense, if you think he's reaching for a gun?

Personally I think you need to see the gun or something that looks like a gun. If you're not close enough to see something, you're not in immediate danger.

Apparently 30 feet away is good enough for a head shot. How can you not be in immediate danger.

Seriously that is not obviously by reading the story.

The head shot was either lucky or made by someone not threatened with plenty of time to line up the target. You shoot at the body for defense.

im waiting to read about 2 cents being involved in a shooting....its just a matter of time

Didn't you just post something about 2 cents adding class to the discussion? And this is what you come up with not long after that?

Yeah...real classy.

have you been following 2 cents wild west drug dealer shoot first ask question later comments? I truly believe he will shoot someone one day...

 

[Henry Ford]

http://www.nola.com/crime/index.ssf/2013/07/legal_experts_say_landry_will.html#incart_m-rpt-2

Merritt Landry, 33, a building inspector for the Historic District Landmarks Commission, was arrested Friday morning after police said he shot Marshall Coulter, 14, while the teen was inside the fenced-in area outside Landry's home in the 700 block of Mandeville Street about 2 a.m. Detectives determined that Coulter was not posing any "imminent threat" to Landry, who was not armed, and he was booked with attempted second-degree murder.

Landry told police that he approached the boy from his front yard, near his car which, according to Landry's friends, was parked a few feet away from his back door. As Coulter grew closer, Landry said, the boy made a "move, as if to reach for something" -- possibly a weapon -- so Landry shot him, according to an NOPD arrest warrant.

Landry, who has a pregnant wife and baby daughter, believed the teen was trying to break into his house, a friend of his said on Friday.

On Friday, Coulter's family acknowledged the teen's history of burglary arrests but said he had never used a gun.

To hell with that. A few feet from my back door, inside my fence, with my pregnant wife and daughter inside at 2 a.m.? And, not that the shooter knew this at the time, but the kid's got a history of burglary arrests? Yeah. I'm calling this a clean shoot.

 

[Henry Ford]

Oh, and obviously I won't post the guy's address here, but I found it and google street-viewed the house. It's got about a 5-5.5' wrought iron fence around it.

 

[Man of Zen]

I have 3 yappy little dogs (early warning system) and a decal on my front door (and car window) that says "Nothing Inside Is Worth Dying For" (link available if you want to purchase one).

If someone is stupid enough to ignore both then they are a danger to themselves and my family and deserve an intervention of one type or another.

i have a 13 yo deaf pug and a sticker on my front door that reads ''welcome''

This is the same guy who posted in the gun control thread that he never opens the front door without a loaded gun in his hand.

That's not true Tim, I NEVER said I open the front door without a loaded gun. I never go to the door without a loaded gun. I answer it all the time without a loaded gun, once I know who it is then the gun is secured. If I don't know who it is, we have a discussion at the door, yes with a loaded gun that they cannot see.

The closest I have ever come to showing a gun to someone outside my door is one time my granddaughter came in followed by her boyfriend and he extended his hand to shake mine, which was holding a fully loaded Judge. It was a little awkward but not a big deal. He did have her home on time that night.

A responsible gun owner would never open a door with a gun visible. It is illegal to brandish a weapon, even in Texas.

I'm sorry you go through life in such fear. :(

 

[timschochet]

Oh, and obviously I won't post the guy's address here, but I found it and google street-viewed the house. It's got about a 5-5.5' wrought iron fence around it.

So, based on this and your previous comment, you are stating that the shooter was justified in shooting this kid in the head?

 

[renesauz]

Details seem a little too sketchy for a definitive conclusion here.

Much like the Martin case though, the initial reports certainly favor a manslaughter case. Of course, we all know how unbiased the media reports this kind of thing.

 

[Henry Ford]

Oh, and obviously I won't post the guy's address here, but I found it and google street-viewed the house. It's got about a 5-5.5' wrought iron fence around it.

So, based on this and your previous comment, you are stating that the shooter was justified in shooting this kid in the head?

I am stating that he was justified in shooting him. I have a hard time believing that he's a good enough shot to have intentionally shot the kid in the head from 30 feet with a handgun. More likely he was aiming center mass - which is why that's where you aim, because if you miss you still hit something important.

The way he was positioned based on the warrant, the layout of the house and yard, and his description, he was between the kid and the fence. There's no wiggle room to "let the guy run away." Either he's willing to freeze in place and give up, or Landry has to be prepared to shoot.

 

[renesauz]

Annnnnnd....on reading further it did indeed become murkier.

I don't have a lot of sympathy for a kid in stranger's FENCED yard at 2 AM. In the dark, at that time of night, the homeowner's story makes plenty of sense.

A few more of these and maybe crime rates will start to fall. Not saying this kid deserved to die, but when you engage in illicit activities on a stranger's property, you take that risk yourself.

Interesting how it's still unknown whether the kid had a gun.

 

[Rove!]

Jeez, glad I dont live in Louisiana

Do you break into cars often?

 

[Henry Ford]

Details seem a little too sketchy for a definitive conclusion here.

Much like the Martin case though, the initial reports certainly favor a manslaughter case. Of course, we all know how unbiased the media reports this kind of thing.

I don't think you get a jury to convict him, though, not at 2 a.m. in Louisiana, inside the guy's fence and next to his back door.

 

[Rayderr]

Annnnnnd....on reading further it did indeed become murkier.

I don't have a lot of sympathy for a kid in stranger's FENCED yard at 2 AM. In the dark, at that time of night, the homeowner's story makes plenty of sense.

A few more of these and maybe crime rates will start to fall. Not saying this kid deserved to die, but when you engage in illicit activities on a stranger's property, you take that risk yourself.

Interesting how it's still unknown whether the kid had a gun.

Link

 

[jon_mx]

Details seem a little too sketchy for a definitive conclusion here.

Much like the Martin case though, the initial reports certainly favor a manslaughter case. Of course, we all know how unbiased the media reports this kind of thing.

I don't think you get a jury to convict him, though, not at 2 a.m. in Louisiana, inside the guy's fence and next to his back door.

The key is if he imposed an immediate threat. I don't think he did. From what I gather:

- Kid was standing next to shooters car in his gate driveway after he hopped the fense.

- Kid has history of burglaries and his brother even calls him a professional theif

- Kid did not have a gun

I don't think he had legal justification to shoot the kid, but getting a jury of 12 people to all believe that is a challenge. You break in to people's property and steal stuff, you put yourself at risk. Zimmerman was a slam dunk acquital. This one will be close.

ETA: Seems there is an unidentified witness whose story conflicts with the shooter. Depending on what the witness saw, it may be enough to convict, even deep in the south.

 

[Doug B]

FWIW, while listening to WWL talk radio this morning, there were three self-identified African-American callers in a row (all local men, law-&-order hard-arsze types) that gave the shooter a total pass. They all asked rhetorically what the kid was doing over a fence at 2 a.m., then went on tangents about bad families, bad schools, and so on. Those three callers unequivocally put the blame first, second, third on the kid, basically opining that getting shot in the head was an obvious occupational hazard for burglars in the city.

Now, that was only three callers. And radio stations screen calls. But the initial local conversation, so far, doesn't seem to be stacked against the shooter at all.

 

[Chaka]

Nope, no gun problem here.

 

[Henry Ford]

Details seem a little too sketchy for a definitive conclusion here.

Much like the Martin case though, the initial reports certainly favor a manslaughter case. Of course, we all know how unbiased the media reports this kind of thing.

I don't think you get a jury to convict him, though, not at 2 a.m. in Louisiana, inside the guy's fence and next to his back door.

The key is if he imposed an immediate threat. I don't think he did. From what I gather:

- Kid was standing next to shooters car in his gate driveway after he hopped the fense.

- Kid has history of burglaries and his brother even calls him a professional theif

- Kid did not have a gun

I don't think he had legal justification to shoot the kid, but getting a jury of 12 people to all believe that is a challenge. You break in to people's property and steal stuff, you put yourself at risk. Zimmerman was a slam dunk acquital. This one will be close.

ETA: Seems there is an unidentified witness whose story conflicts with the shooter. Depending on what the witness saw, it may be enough to convict, even deep in the south.

Unidentified witness is likely the lookout - the other kid who was riding bikes with him 15 minutes earlier on security cam footage from nearby.

If you encounter someone in your yard, in the dark, and you're between that person and the only way out, and that person is between you and your back door, with your pregnant wife and young daughter inside, what's your way out, there? If I tell him to hold still and he moves an inch, I shoot him.

 

[Henry Ford]

Nope, no gun problem here.

I am firmly of the belief that Zimmerman should have been convicted of at least manslaughter and gone to prison. I'm also firmly of the belief that this particular incident isn't an example of a gun problem, but a teenage criminal problem.

 

[top dog]

Oh, and obviously I won't post the guy's address here, but I found it and google street-viewed the house. It's got about a 5-5.5' wrought iron fence around it.

So, based on this and your previous comment, you are stating that the shooter was justified in shooting this kid in the head?

I am stating that he was justified in shooting him. I have a hard time believing that he's a good enough shot to have intentionally shot the kid in the head from 30 feet with a handgun. More likely he was aiming center mass - which is why that's where you aim, because if you miss you still hit something important.

The way he was positioned based on the warrant, the layout of the house and yard, and his description, he was between the kid and the fence. There's no wiggle room to "let the guy run away." Either he's willing to freeze in place and give up, or Landry has to be prepared to shoot.

I have to agree here. I would vote justified if I were on this jury (assuming the above information is accurate). We can pretend we live in some perfect world where you should know that: a) this kid was only 14, b) he was really ONLY there to steal something, c) that in the dark at 2am inside a fenced in yard he did not have a weapon, but the reality is much different.

If the above description are accurate (and I think it is way too early to know)

 

[Henry Ford]

Louisiana RS 14:19

§19. Use of force or violence in defense

A. The use of force or violence upon the person of another is justifiable when committed for the purpose of preventing a forcible offense against the person or a forcible offense or trespass against property in a person's lawful possession, provided that the force or violence used must be reasonable and apparently necessary to prevent such offense, and that this Section shall not apply where the force or violence results in a homicide.

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 force or violence 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 the force or violence 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 force or violence 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 force or violence 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 force or violence in defense of his person or property had a reasonable belief that force or violence was reasonable and apparently necessary to prevent a forcible offense or to prevent the unlawful entry.

Fact is, if the shooter had been inside the house or the car when he shot, there wouldn't even be a conversation. But his wife and kids were - and defending them from outside is a reasonable use of force in my opinion. Does he get the statutory presumption? Likely not. But that doesn't mean he wasn't justified.

 

[humpback]

Oops:

Another neighbor said that he witnessed two black teens cruising the area on bikes and looking at different houses hours before the shooting occurred.


"I thought about calling the cops, but the last thing I want to do is racially profile a little kid who's just biking," the white neighbor, who wished to remain anonymous, told the Times-Picayune.

 

[[icon]]

PROTIP: Don't go jumping 6' fences and trespassing into people's property at 2am.

Justified shooting.

 

[Charlie Frown]

Whatever the defense used, theoretically: if a strange teenager steps into your front yard, and you point your gun at him from 30 feet away and tell him to freeze, and then he appears to reach for a gun, do you have the right to shoot him? Is that self-defense, if you think he's reaching for a gun?

GET OFF MY LAWN!!! POW!

 

[Charlie Frown]

I am not sure what this has to do with stand your ground if the guy was at home. Are you desperately looking for a better case?

He's claiming SYG- (or the "Castle" law, which is the Louisiana version- you have a right to defend yourself in your castle.) The story made the New York Daily News:

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/crime/teen-shot-head-man-thought-burglar-police-article-1.1410613

According to that story, the kid, who was black (the shooter was white) had been charged previously with two robberies (both unarmed.) He wandered onto the dude's property, dude yells at him to "freeze!", the kid appears to reach for something, the shooter shoots him in the head with one bullet.

That's all according to the shooter; there are no witnesses, apparently.

Sounds like a easy black and white case. Heck of a shot to the head.

At 30'. Now that is gun control.

 

[[icon]]

Whatever the defense used, theoretically: if a strange teenager steps into your front yard, and you point your gun at him from 30 feet away and tell him to freeze, and then he appears to reach for a gun, do you have the right to shoot him? Is that self-defense, if you think he's reaching for a gun?

1) 14yo can be rather difficult to distinguish from a 20yo at 2am under cover of darkness

2) If a homeowner finds himself justifiably fearful for his/her life (ie sees other party apparently reaching for a weapon) on their own property... PARTICULARLY if that property is on hte other side of a 5'+ tall fence... yes.. .you have the right to shoot him.

 

[Henry Ford]

Whatever the defense used, theoretically: if a strange teenager steps into your front yard, and you point your gun at him from 30 feet away and tell him to freeze, and then he appears to reach for a gun, do you have the right to shoot him? Is that self-defense, if you think he's reaching for a gun?

GET OFF MY LAWN!!! POW!

It probably makes a difference if he scales your fence at 2 a.m. in order to step into your front yard and is ten feet from your back door when you confront him.

 

[igbomb]

Oh, and obviously I won't post the guy's address here, but I found it and google street-viewed the house. It's got about a 5-5.5' wrought iron fence around it.

So, based on this and your previous comment, you are stating that the shooter was justified in shooting this kid in the head?

I am stating that he was justified in shooting him. I have a hard time believing that he's a good enough shot to have intentionally shot the kid in the head from 30 feet with a handgun. More likely he was aiming center mass - which is why that's where you aim, because if you miss you still hit something important.

The way he was positioned based on the warrant, the layout of the house and yard, and his description, he was between the kid and the fence. There's no wiggle room to "let the guy run away." Either he's willing to freeze in place and give up, or Landry has to be prepared to shoot.

I have to agree here. I would vote justified if I were on this jury (assuming the above information is accurate). We can pretend we live in some perfect world where you should know that: a) this kid was only 14, b) he was really ONLY there to steal something, c) that in the dark at 2am inside a fenced in yard he did not have a weapon, but the reality is much different.

If the above description are accurate (and I think it is way too early to know)

This is where I am at. I hate guns, and I hate that some folks are so quick to use them, but it's hard to ask someone to be patient when a stranger is INSIDE your fence in the middle of the night.

It's sad that is was just a kid. And it's sad to take a life to protect some stuff. But if this guy's story is true (still a big IF) then I can't fault him.

 

[timschochet]

So just to get this straight: if a kid jumps into your gated yard in the middle of the night, you have the right to shoot him? That seems to be the gist of the arguments being made here on behalf of the shooter.

 

[Rayderr]

So just to get this straight: if a kid jumps into your gated yard in the middle of the night, you have the right to shoot him? That seems to be the gist of the arguments being made here on behalf of the shooter.

I'm not sure you oversimplified this enough.

 

[Todd Andrews]

Nope, no gun problem here.

I am firmly of the belief that Zimmerman should have been convicted of at least manslaughter and gone to prison. I'm also firmly of the belief that this particular incident isn't an example of a gun problem, but a teenage criminal problem.

I am in total agreement with Henry Ford.

 

[humpback]

So just to get this straight: if a kid jumps into your gated yard in the middle of the night, you have the right to shoot him? That seems to be the gist of the arguments being made here on behalf of the shooter.

I'm not sure you oversimplified this enough.