SHERIFF ENCOURAGES CITIZENS TO SHOOT HOME INTRUDERS: 'WE PREFER THAT YOU DO, ACTUALLY’

[ricco]

Are we still talking about shooting intruders in a home?

Inside or outside, just saying that sometimes things don't go like you think they will.

Everyone wants a "bright line" in the law, a clear interpretation, but especially in cases where violent force is used questions will be raised.

Everyone should do what they need to do protect themselves and the people under their protection but it behooves the protector to make sure all their I's are dotted, T's are crossed and ducks are in a row because there will be questions. As an example, a bad guy fires his weapon and makes a 180 degree turn, that happens in less than a second. That means if you return fire at that turning bad guy you now have shot him in the back and it will appear you have shot a person who is trying to escape, that will raise questions. Will it be enough to get you charged, dunno, neither does anyone else until it crosses the Prosecutors desk.

From Force Science Institute,

“As expected, all three ‘time-to-shoot’ motions were much faster than a person could react to the shooting, draw, and fire their own gun. After discharging their weapon, the subjects were able to turn their backs toward the target in under 1 second, regardless of their starting position or shooting motion.

 

[JEVapa]

Inside or outside, just saying that sometimes things don't go like you think they will.

Everyone wants a "bright line" in the law, a clear interpretation, but especially in cases where violent force is used questions will be raised.

Everyone should do what they need to do protect themselves and the people under their protection but it behooves the protector to make sure all their I's are dotted, T's are crossed and ducks are in a row because there will be questions. As an example, a bad guy fires his weapon and makes a 180 degree turn, that happens in less than a second. That means if you return fire at that turning bad guy you now have shot him in the back and it will appear you have shot a person who is trying to escape, that will raise questions. Will it be enough to get you charged, dunno, neither does anyone else until it crosses the Prosecutors desk.

From Force Science Institute,

“As expected, all three ‘time-to-shoot’ motions were much faster than a person could react to the shooting, draw, and fire their own gun. After discharging their weapon, the subjects were able to turn their backs toward the target in under 1 second, regardless of their starting position or shooting motion.

This doesn't have much to do with the OP's post being about a Florida county sheriff and encouraging homeowners to shoot home intruders.
It also doesn't apply much here in OK WRT our castle doctrine. Is your point to make sure a homeowner is too scared to death of being arrested or sued to the point that they won't shoot a MF that broke into their home? Or that they will be too concerned about getting busted and the hesitation will cause them to get whacked, or robbed, or BF'd by the bad guys breaking into their home? I don't get it.

 

[TerryMiller]

This doesn't have much to do with the OP's post being about a Florida county sheriff and encouraging homeowners to shoot home intruders.
It also doesn't apply much here in OK WRT our castle doctrine. Is your point to make sure a homeowner is too scared to death of being arrested or sued to the point that they won't shoot a MF that broke into their home? Or that they will be too concerned about getting busted and the hesitation will cause them to get whacked, or robbed, or BF'd by the bad guys breaking into their home? I don't get it.

Unless things have changed since I worked at the OSBI, even if the perpetrator is in one's home, if they are shot in the back, castle doctrine doesn't apply because the law will look at it as if the perpetrator was exiting and was no longer a threat to the residence's occupant that did the shooting.

 

[JD8]

Just sayin', you never know how a thing will turn out.

Doing everything possible to avoid contact with the criminal justice system is always the best move.

Remember George Zimmerman, the police chief said they couldn't arrest Zimmerman because of Florida's SYG law but 6 weeks later he was charged by a special prosecutor appointed by the Governor, so much for SYG laws, mostly not worth the ink it takes to write them.

Maybe it takes 74 days for an arrest to be made.

Maybe the county Prosecutor get's fired and is arrested resulting from not filing charges.

Maybe the state AG takes over and the case is prosecuted.

The above occurring in the McMichael's incident.

You just never know.

I'll take Jack Handy's Apples to Oranges comparisons for $1000 Alex....

 

[ConstitutionCowboy]

If someone shoots at you while they are in the commission of a crime then turns away, I believe I would not wait around to see if that person is going to turn back around and take another shot. They shot at you once already. I see nothing but just cause to protect your life. Does it matter where the bullet or bullets enter the criminal's body?

Woody

 

[Gadsden]

Unless things have changed since I worked at the OSBI, even if the perpetrator is in one's home, if they are shot in the back, castle doctrine doesn't apply because the law will look at it as if the perpetrator was exiting and was no longer a threat to the residence's occupant that did the shooting.

It's not necessarily that clear cut. Just because the perpetrator was shot in the back it doesn't mean the homeowner wasn't still in danger. Just like happens with some shootings by law enforcement that were ruled justifiable, if the perpetrator was armed he could have been shooting at, or turning to shoot at, the homeowner while fleeing. In that case the homeowner would have been in fear of his or her life and deadly force would be justified.

 

[TerryMiller]

It's not necessarily that clear cut. Just because the perpetrator was shot in the back it doesn't mean the homeowner wasn't still in danger. Just like happens with some shootings by law enforcement that were ruled justifiable, if the perpetrator was armed he could have been shooting at, or turning to shoot at, the homeowner while fleeing. In that case the homeowner would have been in fear of his or her life and deadly force would be justified.

Proving that in a court might be difficult.

 

[Gadsden]

Proving that in a court might be difficult.

Maybe, lots of people have video in their homes these days. Also, if the intruder had a gun in his possession and there was evidence that it had been fired and that it had been fired in the direction of the homeowner that would be pretty clear cut evidence. In a conservative state like this one, in a case where you have, what would most likely be a felon in possession of a gun breaking into a home and a homeowner defending him or herself I would inclined to believe that any case, if an arrest was made and if the prosecutor took the case and it went to court, the homeowner would win.

 

[ricco]

If it goes to trial........

There is a reason, actually a couple of reasons, that on average Prosecutors have 90+% win rates. Prosecutors typically take cases they believe they can win and the other reason is that most people don't have the money to go trial and are forced into a plea bargin. On a killing charge bail alone might be half a million dollars, that's $50,000 you will never see again. If you want to have a CHANCE of winning you will spend in the mid to high 6 figures, possibly more. You will need expert witnesses and private detectives, you will have to try to match hour for hour and dollar for dollar everything the state can to bring to the trial. Can you take the stand in your own defense, most people can't and shouldn't, Prosecutors are very skilled in shredding the average person. Watch some homocide trials, it will give you a new perspective on the criminal justice system.

 

[JEVapa]

Unless things have changed since I worked at the OSBI, even if the perpetrator is in one's home, if they are shot in the back, castle doctrine doesn't apply because the law will look at it as if the perpetrator was exiting and was no longer a threat to the residence's occupant that did the shooting.

Is this OSBI policy? Because I thought an investigation would occur first to determine any criminality, but if this is a policy, then we should probably get this addressed by our state lawmakers and corrected.