[theamazingkort]

Originally Posted by PatriceIs60 ↗

Well the burglars never entered the house. People are getting too gun crazy and it's because a conman, a rapist and pedophile is making it ok to murder people, especially Black and Hispanics. Well I hope that the homeowner goes to prison for what he did. Just don't be shocked when that conman declares A national emergency (Martial Law) and takes everyone's weapons. Murder IS NOT OK

Yeah, good luck with that.

"Invading mainland United States is impossible as there would be a gun behind every blade of grass."

[thetenor]

These peeps that are telling us to F off, have zero idea what the Law is when it comes to home invasions, and when you can, or can’t shoot someone…. This was a definite Cannot shoot!!

[thetenor]

Doesn’t have anything to do with defending criminals!! It has everything to do with the Law, and what’s right within the Law….

[Faust]

Originally Posted by stanmarsh ↗

I'm reluctant to wade into this one because so many people have become so strongly influenced by their own cultural, ideological, and political biases that "fitting the narrative" becomes more important than critically analyzing what actually took place and having a rational discussion.

When I first watched this video, my initial impression was that it was a marginally justifiable case of self-defense. After watching it a few more times, however, I have serious doubts.

First off, keep in mind that the camera provided an excellent view of what the perps were up to. It's reasonable to assume that whoever was in the house had been watching the same thing in real time.

While I don't doubt that the perps were trying to make entry, it's not at all clear that they were actually successful. To me, it looks like they had only gotten as far as checking the door to see if it was unlocked. It's difficult to know if it was--a very important question in this specific case.

What struck me as odd was that even though the perp reacted very quickly, he went down before he could even take a step and a half. Furthermore, it wasn't entirely clear what he was reacting to. What is clear is that things went south very quickly and that even cat-like reflexes couldn't save him.

Then, there is his partner. He appears to be reacting more to him rather than anything he sees. Ironically, the slower, larger, easier target is the one who gets away.

While it's difficult to tell for certain whether the perps opened the door, it is a fairly safe bet to assume that the shot was fired through a partially opened door. There is no indication of the round passing through the door (e.g. splinters or broken glass).

Say what you will, but it's my contention that the homeowner's actions raise significant doubts about whether this is a case of justifiable self defense or if lesser degree homicide or manslaughter charges are warranted.

Before anyone trolls me, hear me out.

Assume that the person inside the home knew what was happening because of the camera. Acting on that "intelligence", they make the conscious decision that the best course of action is to quietly take up a position against the wall immediately next to the door. Once in position, they would be out of sight, can lie in wait, and have the element of surprise the instant the door was breached.

Legally-speaking, this probably fallls into a grey area in most states. Law is not my background, so I cannot say for certain. I do suspect that there are a significant number of people who would believe that this might still a justifiable shoot.

But what if it's not the perp, but the the shooter, who actually opened the door? What if the perp never opened the door, let alone made entry into the residence? What if it could be proved that the perp was definitely fleeing and posed no imminent threat to the homeowner when they were shot.

Based on what I see in the video, it's my contention that this is exactly what happened. This isn't based on my personal bias, it's simply the facts.

The reason the perp reacted so quickly was because he felt the knob being turned from the inside (possibly being unlocked?). It's the only explanation that aligns with what I see. Neither of the perps ever saw the shooter because the door remained closed the entire time.

We will never know for sure how much further the perps would have gone because the shooter decided to take the initiative and determined the outcome.

If I am correct, while remaining in position, the shooter opened the door with his left hand, then fired the gun with the right once he had the opening. It was at that point that the perp, who had already turned to flee, stepped directly into the line of fire and was shot point blank.

This is the only theory I can think of that aligns with what is seen in the video. If anyone can explain how someone could react so quickly and still go down before they can take their second step, I'm all ears.

If this is indeed the case, I'm not so sure that the vast majority of people would be willing to simply give this person a pass. This should be true regardless of where one lives or their party affiliation.

In addition to whether the door needed to be unlocked before it could be opened, I would think that the exact time that the homeowner notified the police and the perps criminal history would be major considerations into the extent of the charges and any prosecution would be successful.

In any event, the only thing that should be black and white about this case is the law and the multitude of facts that we simply do not know.

There should be no reason to tell me to f*ck off because of this post. This isn't pro anything, and if you can't see that, then you're the one who issues.

Good analysis! Interesting to read

[ultraviolentwrath]

Originally Posted by thetenor ↗

Sad thing is that the homeowner, (shooter) will probably be charged in this crime…. Different story if they had entered the home!! He was running away!!!! Bad shoot….

Bad shoot according to the stupid fucking laws. Seemed a fine shoot to me.

[ultraviolentwrath]

Originally Posted by REVZZYBAN ↗

Ever heard of a warning shot? Would the desired effect be a quick retreat by the attempted intruders? Just asking. I know for sure that I never want to make that decision.

I feel that a warning shot is a mercy which the defensive party has the right to withhold.

[overcusser]

Originally Posted by thetenor ↗

Sad thing is that the homeowner, (shooter) will probably be charged in this crime…. Different story if they had entered the home!! He was running away!!!! Bad shoot….

Nah. Feeling threatened is subjective. Looks like they were using something that could be considered a weapon. And one and a half steps isnt really running away, wouldn't justify not shooting - the homeowner made up his mind to shoot less than a second after the guy turned away. It's not like he chased him thru the yard & then shot. He won't be charged.

[Lmississippi123]

Where is the "Location" guy? I'd like to know some background to this story.

[tarvin890]

Shooters in trouble..have to wait till tgey cross the plane into your home..stupid rule but they have to be in the home

[tarvin890]

Originally Posted by Faust ↗

Good analysis! Interesting to read

When's your next book coming out?