Geeze do any of you bother to read. He wasn't being threatend, no one was in harms way, NO ONE WAS BEING RAPED, and it wasn't his property.
Phil
Greyghost, I'm curious. Your neighbor is away from home and you see a small fire outside his home but right next to it. Do you go and put it out or call the fire department? Now keep in mind.... You are not being threatend, no one was in harms way, NO ONE WAS BEING RAPED, and it isn't your property.
Your "fire scenario" is different from the one that is the basis of this thread.
Your legal duties, and liabilities change drastically when you go from protecting you and yours with force or a weapon, to injecting yourself in something that doesn't involve you or yours.
I think you missed that part where the shooter's house had been burglarized. When you discover your house has been burglarized and you see a burglar coming out of your neighbor's window, it's a fairly safe assumption that it's the same guy...so it does involve you.
In Texas you can shoot in defense of property.
As far as the warning shot goes, it doesn't negate NH law on the subject but, by it's very definition it went in a safe direction because it harmed nobody and nothing.
I don't think it's safe to make such assumptions when the use of deadly force could result. The article doesn't tell me what other knowledge the man had. For instance, did he know the neighbor well enough to know this wasn't any family of theirs. Yes, it's pretty suspicious to find your home burglarized, then see someone crawling out of a neighbors window, but I personally am going to need more knowledge than that to pick up a gun and go inject myself in to that situation. Maybe he had enough knowledge, I don't know, and I don't have a problem with people protecting other's property. All I'm saying is, you better be sure. Tragic errors can result from assumptions.
And, for the record, I don't think the guy should have been charged for firing a warning shot.
I'll leave the debate over issue of warning shots to others.
