Wetumpka man shoots alleged burglar

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

The homeowner was awakened when he heard noises coming from his outside utility shed, Amerson said. The 64-year-old man told deputies he went to investigate and saw Roberts coming out of the shed carrying a grass trimmer and a chain saw.

"The two men got into a struggle, and then Roberts went to his car to try and get away, but the car wouldn't start," Amerson said. "He then got out of the car and told the homeowner he was going to shoot him."

Amerson said the homeowner went inside the house, and Roberts yelled from the yard that he was going to shoot him.

The homeowner then got a 20-gauge shotgun and shot Roberts in the chest, Amerson said.


http://www.montgomeryadvertiser.com/article/20090918/NEWS01/909180306/Wetumpka+man+shoots+alleged+burglar


Another righteous (justifiable) shooting.

[peacebird]

1. ??? "righteous"??? What about just calling the cops and getting the guy arrested?

No one was in harms way here. It was a freaking grass trimmer and a chain saw. That warrents a call to the cops, NOT hauling out a gun and shooting someone.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

2. Righteous-Justifiable in the eyes of the law.

[peacebird]

3. where? In Virginia if you shoot an intruder in your home (righteous) you damn well better

be sure they fall INSIDE the house. Not outside. Because if they are OUTSIDE then you were not in immediate danger and have no justification for shooting them.

Enjoy your gun porn.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

5. See post#4

[peacebird]

7. as I said - in Virginia it would not be considered "righteous" (your view) under the law

I personally think it is stupid and barbaric to shoot someone if there was no risk to life, you obviously prefer the ways of the wild west, & I prefer use of the legal system. If there is a direct threat that is one thing, but theft of property - no.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

8. Good thing he was in Alabama.

[Name removed]

10. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

11. It's good for him, how can you disagree?

[peacebird]

12. umm - what part of post 7 don't you grasp?

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

13. So you think he would find being prosecuted a good thing?

[peacebird]

14. I presume the robber IS being prosecuted. The question is whether it is *right* to shoot people

when you & your family are NOT at risk. Why do you think it is "RIGHTEOUS" to shoot someone over minor burglary? Stealing a grass clipper and chain saw is maybe a $300 theft. You are glorifying gun violence for minor burglary.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

16. I'm just going on what the DA said.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

18. You seem to be overlooking the burglars threat.

[slackmaster]

24. The robber threatened to shoot the man

Why do you say he wasn't at risk?

[GreenStormCloud]

30. It isn't about the money, or about stuff, it is about the violence.

Routinely, whenever there is a discussion about an incident in which a person uses a gun to defend themselves, some of the anti-RKBA crowd will complain that the death penalty was dished out over a small amount of money. They say that over a TV, or over the small pain of a hangnail, we are ready to kill. They claim that for the crimes of assault, burglary, auto theft, etc. we are ready to kill.

That is not true. In each case, we are responding to a threat of deadly force with deadly force. When a robber pulls a knife and demands my money, he is displaying an instrument of deadly force with an announced intention to use it on me. Depending upon the disparity of force involved, even his fists may be deadly weapons. If a burglar is breaking into my residence, I have no way of knowing what he intends to do and I can't wait around to find out. When I am faced with a serious threat of deadly violence against myself, I am justified in using deadly force to repel the attacks. As soon as the threat is over, so is my justification for using or displaying deadly force of my own. If, in the event of stopping an attack upon myself or innocent others, the attacker dies, that is his bad luck. I did not shoot intending to kill him, but to render him incapable of further violence. If the medical system can save him so that he can be charged and tried for his crime, that is good.

It would be nice is the anti-RKBA crowd would actually discuss the issue instead of hurling insults, calling names, and making personal attacks. But I am not holding my breath. I might turn blue if I did.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

32. Why did you run off?

[AtheistCrusader]

37. And if he's a retiree living on a fixed income and 300$ exceeds his

discretionary income for the next couple months...

Aw fuck it. It wasn't about stuff. It stopped being about stuff the moment the robber said 'I'm going to kill you'.

[Statistical]

25. Nope you are incorrect.

The burgular made a threat of lethal force. If that threat was credible then the homeowner had authority to use lethal force to defend himself.

It isn't required for the Burgular to actually shoot the homeowner or even draw a firearm in order for self defense to be justified.

The question is would a reasonable person believe the homeowners life was in danger when a felon threatened to kill him durring the commission of a violent felony? The answer is yes and if yes the lethal force would be justified.

Most of VA self defense criteria is not codified legislative (a mistake IMHO) so we need to rely on case law because it will be used in future prosecutions for similar acts as precedent (to either the benefit of prosecution or defense).

"Self-defense is an affirmative defense which the accused must prove by introducing sufficient evidence to raise a reasonable doubt about his guilt." Smith v. Commonwealth, 17 Va. App. 68, 71, 435 S.E.2d 414, 416 (1993) (citing McGhee v. Commonwealth, 219 Va. 560, 562, 248 S.E.2d 808, 810 (1978); Yarborough v. Commonwealth, 217 Va. 971, 979, 234 S.E.2d 286, 292 (1977)). "<A> person assaulted while in the discharge of a lawful act, and reasonably apprehending that his assailant will do him bodily harm, has the right to repel the assault by all the force he deems necessary, and is not compelled to retreat from his assailant, but may, in turn, become the assailant, inflicting bodily wounds until his person is out of danger." Dodson v. Commonwealth, 159 Va. 976, 979, 167 S.E. 260, 260 (1933) (quoting Jackson's Case, 96 Va. 107, 30 S.E. 452 (1898))."

The homeowner was threatened with death or bodily injury while in a lawful act (trying to stop burglary) and as such per case law had the right to NOT RETREAT but instead use force even lethal force.

[Treo]

21. Did you forget the part where the criminal threatened to kill the homeowner? NT

[Statistical]

23. Please cite the statute that says you can't use lethal force on someone threatening to kill you...

outside your home.

Ever heard of curtilage?

[AtheistCrusader]

36. Every state varies.

In Washington, this would be justifiable, assuming everything actually unfolded as the news article describes.

[AtheistCrusader]

34. Why not just say 'justifiable homicide'?

Since that is typically the statue. 'Righteous' implies something else entirely.

Oh well, at least your thread titles are improving, thank you for specifying 'alleged'.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

4. Here's a quote from the DA.

The homeowner acted within his rights, said District Attorney Randall Houston.

"The bad people need to realize that folks in Elmore County have guns and aren't afraid to use them," Houston said. "A man has the right to protect his life and his property, and all the evidence gathered in this case shows that's just what happened."

Houston said his office will present the case to a future session of the Elmore County grand jury, but he didn't expect any charges would be filed against the homeowner.

[gorfle]

15. "it's just property"

I do not accept the argument that "no one's life is worth property".

It's not "just property". Everything I own represents a finite part of my finite life span that I invested to acquire it. When someone steals or attempts to steal my property they are therefore stealing a part of my life that I will never get back.

If you do not think that your life is worth a grass trimmer or a chain saw, don't steal them from me!

Because I assure you, I certainly don't value your life more than my grass trimmer or my chain saw.

[peacebird]

17. I feel sorry for you.

If you don't realize life is worth more than a chain saw or a grass trimmer then you are truly damaged. I pity you.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

19. Again overlooking the burglars threat.

[proteus_lives]

22. FMD, don't.

Antis don't like facts. They confuse and hurt them. They don't want to be distracted from their crusade against the evil magic of guns.

[friendly_iconoclast]

20. What part of "Roberts was threatening to shoot the homeowner" did you not get?

You need to stop pretending this was about yard equipment.

I swear, every time something like this gets posted, someone pops up and tells us about how the poor burglar/mugger/
carjacker just wanted stuff and really wasn't going to harm anyone.

Roberts (the burglar) had the chance to run. Instead, he stood on the guys' property and threatened to shoot him.

If that wasn't what a reasonable person might take as a threat to life and limb, nothing is.

[gorfle]

29. Even if it was about yard equipment it does not matter.

I brought up the yard equipment. My point is that even if it was just about yard equipment, it is still justification for shooting someone.

My property represents pieces of my life that I exchanged to acquire it. Stealing my property is thus stealing pieces of my life that I will never get back.

You steal pieces of my life, and I'll steal pieces of yours. You may not like the exchange rate, though.

[PavePusher]

31. I've raised that argument once or twice myself.

In my case, being in the military, some of my team-mates died while I was earning the money to buy my material objects. So, when someone attempts to steal them, not only are they trying to take parts of my life, they are, in my opinion, trying to steal from the scrifices of the dead as well.

Also (to play the "what if" game), what if the items being stolen are essential to the livelyhood and well-being of the owner? If your car gets stolen, can you get to work? will you lose your job? House? Health insurance?

If the lawn mower or trimmer are essential to your landscaping business, will you be able to fulfill your agreed-upon work, get paid, pay your laborers?

Theft has many ramifications beyond simple loss of material goods. Anyone who doesn't understand that is a fool.

[rd_kent]

27. I think you missed the point

The value of life is subjective and how a person feels about his/her life. If one feels that their life is worth MORE than a chainsaw, then they should NOT gamble with their life by stealing one from somebody. I get the concept here, do you?

[gorfle]

28. Pity the fool who tries to steal my property instead.

If you don't realize life is worth more than a chain saw or a grass trimmer then you are truly damaged. I pity you.

Damaged or not, if you don't realize that I value your life less than my chain saw or my grass trimmer you will be in for a surprise if you try to steal them.

If more people realized that people do value their property more than the lives of those who would steal them less people would steal.

[AtheistCrusader]

35. I think it was the alleged theif that made the mis-valuation of life over property.

If he had been caught stealing and went all prostrate and 'mea culpa', or even just fled, I could find a little sympathy.

But if you get caught stealing, and your immediate tactic is to threaten the LIFE of the person who caught you, well... It's no longer about 'stuff' at that point.

[rrneck]

6. I dunno about that one.

Went inside, got a shotgun, and came back out to shoot him. I don't know if he need to do that, specially if the burglar's car wouldn't start. If it wasn't stolen it wouldn't be a big deal to track down the owner. Unless the burglar was completely out of control and it was really obvious he would carry out the threats to shoot the homeowner the best thing to do would have been to stay inside and wait for the cops.

[Statistical]

26. It isn't a crime to not do the best thing. It is only a crime to do something illegal.

Was it the best thing for the homeowner to stay inside? Likely. We don't have all the facts.

Did the homeowner have a right to stop the burglary? In most states yes but not lethal force.
Did the homeowner have a right to use lethal force once the burglar threatened to kill him? Yes in virtually all states that don't require a duty to retreat.

So had the homeowner gone outside the the shotgun, the criminal didn't threaten him, attempted to leave and the homeowner shot him I would say bad shoot (unless Alabama allows lethal force to prevent stealing property).

That wasn't the situation. He went outside and was threatened with lethal danger and he used lethal force to stop/prevent that danger. It doesn't matter if the criminal was armed he stupidly threatened an armed man with killing him (threat of bodily injury or death) which made the shooting lawful.

Rules for criminals
1) Burglary is dangerous
2) If caught leave
3) If you can't leave don't threaten to kill people
4) If you forgot 1,2, & 3 remember to not threaten people armed with weapons.

[jtuck004]

9. Burglar School

Notes:

1. Park your car far enough away so you won't be embarrassed when it doesn't start

2. Watch "The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly" again. Pay particular attention to the part where Tuco says "If you are going to shoot, shoot. Don't talk".

3. If the homeowner catches you, drop or throw the stuff and run. Far and fast. Remember note #1 and don't forget where you parked, especially if the car might start.


I agree that life-threatening options should be reserved if possible. In a couple situations I have been in I stopped once the situation was contained. I knew support was not too far out. But this was Wetumka, rural, and potentially a relatively long time until help could arrive (30 minutes, 45 minutes, with a potentially armed person who has made threats against you somewhere close?). Waiting for the police may not have been his best option, because this situation was certainly not contained at that point. Most burglars will grab stuff and run, or drop it and run if confronted. This guy was not your average burglar. He went from stealing to assault to (allegedly) threats against someone's life. Going back into the house and waiting presumes you know what door the burglar will use to come after you. He may come through a bedroom window with a tire iron and hurt your wife or child, he could throw a torch through an opening or set your house on fire, or he may have had access to weapons in his car with which he could injure people in the house from the outside. While decisions have to be made in the heat of the moment, what this homeowner did in this situation may have been his best option.

That said, gathering your family and a cell phone into a closet with a weapon is still probably the best option in _most_ situations. Whether you have all that available to you is the question.

[spin]

33. K&R because I'm thinking about buying a shotgun. (n/t)

[PavePusher]

38. Depending on what you want to use them for...

I'd recommend Mossbergs 500 series or Remington 870 series pump actions. Highly customizable, and just swap barrels around to go from home defense to bird hunting to trap/skeet to deer, etc., etc.

The equivalent semi-autos would be the Mossy 830's and the Remmy 1100's.

Very good quality and utility for excellent prices.

[Hoopla Phil]

39. Another innocent saved through the use of a firearm.