So there I was...

[Guest Ggun]

Canyonracer:

I disagree with your assumption that ( is presumed. The shooter has to present evidence that the danger was real, or honestly believed to be real at the time. That is different from holding a reasonable belief that there is imminent danger of death or serious bodily injury.

I'll let Fallguy or somebody else give an opinon how easy things are to prove in Court, especially if the dead stranger one shoots turns out not to be a bad guy.

[Guest canynracer]

A real person I dont know in my home (now bleeding)...is proven IMO

[memphismason]

Canyonracer:

I disagree with your assumption that ( is presumed. The shooter has to present evidence that the danger was real, or honestly believed to be real at the time. That is different from holding a reasonable belief that there is imminent danger of death or serious bodily injury.

I'll let Fallguy or somebody else give an opinon how easy things are to prove in Court, especially if the dead stranger one shoots turns out not to be a bad guy.

Dead Stranger in my home will always be the bad guy.

[Guest Ggun]

Dead Stranger in my home will always be the bad guy.

Yea, but remember, mm, you first determine who they are and why they are there, and say "stop or I'll shoot."

All that adds up to ( and ©, and I dare to say that you wouldn't shoot unless all elements of self defense were there.

That is a whole lot different than shooting someone who has entered unannounced, without more.

[Punisher84]

Ggun,

I get what you are trying to point out, but you really are confusing the elements of an altercation on the street and an altercation in your home.

If someone who does not live at your residence unlawfully and forcibly enters (remember what I said earlier about what using force means) you are automatically presumed to have been in fear of your life. You do not need to prove their intent, that they had a weapon, etc

There are documented cases where people have been drunk and forcibly entered a neighbor's home, resulting in a shooting, and the homeowner has not been charged under the castle doctrine.

As far as determining who they are and saying "stop or I'll shoot" that is complete hogwash. You should identify your target to make sure it's not a roommate or family member sure, but there is NOTHING in the law stating you have to say anything to an intruder.

[Fadex]

Entering someones home that you do not know, uninvited, is a pretty aggressive action in my opinion. The homeowner does not have a responsibility to chit chat with an intruder at 2AM, to see if the dumbass in his house is drunk or already has a .357 at the his head.

If I don't know you and I find you in my house you will have a firearm pointed at you. At that point it is YOUR responsibility to explain why I SHOULDN'T shoot.

[memphismason]

Yea, but remember, mm, you first determine who they are and why they are there, and say "stop or I'll shoot."

All that adds up to ( and ©, and I dare to say that you wouldn't shoot unless all elements of self defense were there.

That is a whole lot different than shooting someone who has entered unannounced, without more.

refers back to previous post:

______________________________________

Someone enters my home without me saying "Come In". A pistol is pointed at them.

If I know them, pistol is lowered and I start to tell them how stupid that was.

If I do not know them I would say something along the lines of "Stop or I will shoot", but I can promise you, there will be no conversation prior to my front sight being aligned with the absolute best spot to "eliminate the threat".

"I would rather be tried by 12 than carried by six"...especially in this situation.

_______________________________________

I have no obligation under the law to hold any conversation with an intruder prior to putting holes in them. If you want to talk to an intruder, be my guest, but this is my castle, and inside here my wife and child's safety is number one, so if someone enters uninvited they will be dealt with in the way I described above.

I might not even say anything to the intruder, I do not owe them that, who knows what I will do in that situation, but I will promise everyone that whatever I do or say will be behind an aimed firearm. PERIOD. There is no such thing as "A Good Guy Intruder" PERIOD.

[Guest SUNTZU]

There is no such thing as "A Good Guy Intruder" PERIOD.

I doubt that anyone is going to be kicking your door in early Saturday morning and asking you if you've found Jesus.

[bteague2]

I doubt that anyone is going to be kicking your door in early Saturday morning and asking you if you've found Jesus.

It's those Jehovah's Witnesses again!

[Oh Shoot]

I doubt that anyone is going to be kicking your door in early Saturday morning and asking you if you've found Jesus.

I dunno, I've had some pretty insistent evangelicals show up here.

They've even ignored my door sticker:

Seriously.

- OS

[Guest db99wj]

Here are the likely scenarios.

You shoot guy you don't know but came into your house, dead guy, they haul him away, you have to clean the walls.

You shoot guy that you don't know but came into your house, ends up being drunk friend, dead drunk guy, they haul him away, you clean the walls, go to therapy and feel bad but are justified in your actions.

You shoot guy that you do know, it is over an argument over something, you get pissed in a drunken rage and plug you friend with a few rounds, dead guy, they haul him away in the ambulance, they question you, you lawyer up, you go to jail, trial, jury decides the rest of your life. You can claim self defense, but in the end, you are probably going to jail...for awhile.

The scenarios that this thread has been discussing is the first two. And as it has been said, there doesn't have to be a discussion with the guy that has entered into your house, I will say something to the bg in my house, like "get the f away from me" as I am unloading my XD the loud way.

Oh, I'm sure there are more scenarios, we all can come up with something, but these are the ones I wanted to lay out and seem to be comparable to what has been discussed.

[Guest m&pc9]

I will say something to the bg in my house, like "get the f away from me" as I am unloading my XD the loud way.

+1 Amen brother

[Guest dwrd]

I will say something to the bg in my house, like "get the f away from me" as I am unloading my XD the loud way.

I am just going to keep yelling CONTACT, CONTACT.

[Guest db99wj]

I am just going to keep yelling CONTACT, CONTACT.

And throw in a tactical bed roll....

[Guest Ggun]

Here are the likely scenarios.

snip

You shoot guy that you don't know but came into your house, ends up being drunk friend, dead drunk guy, they haul him away, you clean the walls, go to therapy and feel bad but are justified in your actions.

snip.

You guys should really think about this one. The circumstances leading up to this could really get you convicted of a homicide charge.

Remember that the scenarios we're discussing are:

Multi-tenant Apartment complex:

1) girlfriend of roommate's girlfriend walks in unlocked door, roommate shoots; 2) drunk neighbors walk in unlocked door, shooter has left door unlocked as roommate hasn't come home, shoots drunk neighbors. The deadbolted door scenario is not relevant (no intrusion).

If you guys think both shoots are absolutely justified, I caution you to think again...but I'll leave at that since the consensus of the posts suggest the gunowners in this thread feel they have the absolute right to shoot.

AND, lastly, shooting a drunken friend who walks into your unlocked door will land you in front of a grand jury in most jurisdictions, IMO.

[Guest SUNTZU]

Don't leave your door unlocked, first of all. Your firearm isn't your first means of defense. If you are going to leave your door unlocked in an apartment complex, then you probably aren't going to be anywhere near your gun, if you even have one. That's for scenarios one and two. Don't be a retard, especially a retard with a gun. Lock the door. You and your roommate need to educate friends to call before they come, then knock, then they can be let into the apartment. The scenario is dumb, since you should definitely have better situational awareness than a bowl of pudding.

[Punisher84]

You guys should really think about this one. The circumstances leading up to this could really get you convicted of a homicide charge.

Remember that the scenarios we're discussing are:

Multi-tenant Apartment complex:

1) girlfriend of roommate's girlfriend walks in unlocked door, roommate shoots; 2) drunk neighbors walk in unlocked door, shooter has left door unlocked as roommate hasn't come home, shoots drunk neighbors. The deadbolted door scenario is not relevant (no intrusion).

If you guys think both shoots are absolutely justified, I caution you to think again...but I'll leave at that since the consensus of the posts suggest the gunowners in this thread feel they have the absolute right to shoot.

AND, lastly, shooting a drunken friend who walks into your unlocked door will land you in front of a grand jury in most jurisdictions, IMO.

The roommates girlfriend thing you're probably right, but your door does not have to be locked.

TN law only states that one must unlawfully and forcibly enter. A closed door requires you to turn the knob. That is using force to enter. If you don't live there are uninvited you are there unlawfully (see trespassing).

The Castle Doctrine very clearly gives you a large latitude in considering Intent, Ability, and Jeopardy when in your own home. They give you the first 2 as assumptions. You would only need to clarify why you felt in jeopardy, but I'm not going to wait around to have a chat with someone who has entered my home that I do not know.

This doesn't mean I'm going to blast away at anyone who steps in the door, but they will have 1 second to obey my verbal commands or it will be an unpleasant ending.

[Guest canynracer]

You guys should really think about this one. The circumstances leading up to this could really get you convicted of a homicide charge.

Remember that the scenarios we're discussing are:

Multi-tenant Apartment complex:

1) girlfriend of roommate's girlfriend walks in unlocked door, roommate shoots; 2) drunk neighbors walk in unlocked door, shooter has left door unlocked as roommate hasn't come home, shoots drunk neighbors. The deadbolted door scenario is not relevant (no intrusion).

If you guys think both shoots are absolutely justified, I caution you to think again...but I'll leave at that since the consensus of the posts suggest the gunowners in this thread feel they have the absolute right to shoot.

AND, lastly, shooting a drunken friend who walks into your unlocked door will land you in front of a grand jury in most jurisdictions, IMO.

What is you do for a living?

just curious.

[Guest Ggun]

What is you do for a living?

just curious.

LOL. That's not a prerequisite for participation now is it? Let's just say I like to think of myself as a word technician...

[Guest canynracer]

Not at all...just wondering, you sound like a prosecuting attorney

[Fadex]

Word technician...sounds like a newspaper reporter to me.

[Guest Linoge]

( The danger creating the belief of imminent death or serious bodily injury is real, or honestly believed to be real at the time; and

If there is a person inside my house, and it is not my wife, and I did not allow them entrance, I honestly fear for my safety, and the safety of my family. And I will repeat that, quite honestly, for any questioning or interviewing that will happen after I shoot the individual.

The fact is, given laws, societal contracts, and simple interpersonal relations, if someone had to force entry into my house, they are putting me and my family at danger simply by being there. Just as presence is one of the first levels of the force continuum in terms of defense, so is it in terms of offense.

© The belief of danger is founded upon reasonable grounds.

There is a person in my house to whom I did not give permission to enter. Given the number of home-invasions that end in the home-owners being abused, beaten, shot, stabbed, tortured, raped, murdered, and otherwise mutilated, I would consider it to be more than "reasonable grounds" to believe one's self to be in danger simply because an unknown stranger is in one's domicile.

Word technician...sounds like a newspaper reporter to me.

That, or a lawyer... or a sea-lawyer.