http://gma.yahoo.com/video/news-26797925/oklahoma-mother-18-kills-intruder-breaking-into-her-home-while-on-phone-with-911-27777235.html great story, i wonder if she announced she had a weapon or just shot the second the door opened.
I think she shot him the 3rd the door opened
Why is the fact that she had a 3 month old son relevant?
Similar story out here in Nc. 14 year old kid shot an intruder dead while his sister was on the phone with police. Completely legal here even if the intruder is unarmed.
NY - 18 y/o mother gets charged with muder, endagerment of a child, reckless discharge of a weapon. ect. ect.
^precisely. (not that i really believe it, but its funny)
She seemed to keep cool, i cant imagine a 20+ min call with 911… while you have a baby in your arms, while people are breaking in, while you’re freaking out, scary
Kablam! Court adjourned.
You can shoot a intruder who enters your house in NYS as long as you hit him in the front. lol Thats what i was told by a ToT cop at least.
Right. You can’t shoot someone in the back because you technically have a chance to escape without deadly force. If you can prove you NEED deadly force then you’re good. Also if you unload 10 rounds into a guy you will get questioned lol so you can only use as much force as needed.
That girl still had her gun. NY would have taken the gun for at least a year. You would have been arrested until proven innocent. All that being on your record for life. Even trying to get a job with that.
All the hate on NY, yet wasn’t it just last year the guy in amherst shot the drunk teacher who walked into his house and didn’t so much as get arrested or charged with anything?
I guess I was right…
New York’s justification statute dates from 1968 and allows deadly force to be used in a number of circumstances. Under Penal Law § 35.15, in general, deadly force may be used as necessary to defend against unlawful deadly force used by another. Retreat is required when one knows it can be done with complete personal safety to innocent parties. Even then, no retreat is required when a person is in his dwelling and not the initial aggressor, or is defending against kidnapping, forcible rape, forcible criminal sexual act or robbery, or is preventing arson or is terminating a burglary or attempted burglary of an occupied building as allowed by Penal Law § 35.20.
§ 35.20 Justification; use of physical force in defense of premises and in defense of a person in the course of burglary 1. Any person may use physical force upon another person when he or she reasonably believes such to be necessary to prevent or terminate what he or she reasonably believes to be the commission or attempted commission by such other person of a crime involving damage to premises. Such person may use any degree of physical force, other than deadly physical force, which he or she reasonably believes to be necessary for such purpose, and may use deadly physical force if he or she reasonably believes such to be necessary to prevent or terminate the commission or attempted commission of arson. 2. A person in possession or control of any premises, or a person licensed or privileged to be thereon or therein, may use physical force upon another person when he or she reasonably believes such to be necessary to prevent or terminate what he or she reasonably believes to be the commission or attempted commission by such other person of a criminal trespass upon such premises. Such person may use any degree of physical force, other than deadly physical force, which he or she reasonably believes to be necessary for such purpose, and may use deadly physical force in order to prevent or terminate the commission or attempted commission of arson, as prescribed in subdivision one, or in the course of a burglary or attempted burglary, as prescribed in subdivision three. 3. A person in possession or control of, or licensed or privileged to be in, a dwelling or an occupied building, who reasonably believes that another person is committing or attempting to commit a burglary of such dwelling or building, may use deadly physical force upon such other person when he or she reasonably believes such to be necessary to prevent or terminate the commission or attempted commission of such burglary.
dbl post
Shoot him in the back of the leg. When he turns around to see who shot him, finish the job.
In my opinion, anyone who breaks into a house, should not be able to leave that house alive.
Castle law dictates, in most states, that you must make an attempt to exit your house, if you can’t, then deadly force is justified.
I agree completely with the Castle law but New York is not a Castle law state unfortunately.
True but the NYS Justification Statute that I posted allows pretty much the same thing.
Actually most Castle Doctrines do not require retreat when you are in your own house.
The caveat is that you are in your own house. If you are not in your dwelling there is the obligation to retreat if it can be done safely. If you are in your house it’s shoot to kill.
NY’s Justification Statue is nearly identical to most Castle Doctrines
I think I found my long term goals.
Live in NY and break into houses. Sue for cutting my hand on the broken class, falling down the steps, and getting shot. When I make millions of dollars off the lawsuit, I will move to Texas where I then can shoot at intruders to protect my property and not worry about getting sued.
NYS law is all about who and how its interpreted. If a male my size broke into where I live and I shot him, I would be in court. If a woman broke in, I shot her I would be in jail.
If I broke into some fat bitches house to steal her twinkies because she paid for them on welfare. I would get my ass sued and jail time.