“Don't see it that way he was asked to leave and did not. When boyfriend came onto the porch he got more aggressive.
Apparently not as cut and dried as you think, shooter hasn't been arrested or charged”
Nothing about this will be “cut and dried”. The questions will be:
1) Did boyfriend have right to introduce a gun (it wasn’t already in his hands/on his person)and bring it outside, for “trespassing”???
2) Did boyfriend have a legitimate reason to think ex-wife feared for her life or was about to get beaten, out there??
Trespassing is not a justification of legitimate use of deadly force.
Wife didn’t look that scared.
Watch first 5 seconds. Dad arguing with boyfriend. Then, boyfriend goes inside (not prevented by Dad) then COMES BACK OUTSIDE with gun he has retrieved.
Boyfriend was already in his “castle” (indoors), and took it upon himself to go outside to confront Dad about trespassing. Does the DOOR mark the line between “castle defense” and “escalation”??
We’ll see...
You're assuming that "castle" means inside the house...
Well, boyfriend had to go INSIDE, through a door WITH A LOCK, to retrieve his gun, then came back out, through the same door.
If a drunk is beating on your door at night, in an easily accessible residential neighborhood, do you open the door, go OUTSIDE, and shoot him??
I’m not trying to make a point, I’m asking??
He has a legal right to be anywhere he want's to be on his property.
He didn’t carry the gun on his “property” (at that moment), he retrieved and carried it to a VERBAL argument. I’ve got a right to have a firearm on my property, but do I have a right to pull it out and point it at someone for only trespassing/verbal argument, especially when they were there for a legal reason?
He wasn’t standing there with the gun at the START of the argument. He went to another area (behind a closed door) to retrieve it.
Not a verbal argument at all, he told the guy to get off his property. There is no argument after that. Once you are told to leave, even for trespassing (which you seem to not understand the implication of) if you don't leave you are the aggressor. It is true that you cannot just shoot someone you see across your pasture trespassing. If you confront the intruder and he does not leave the situation has changed to the trespasser being the aggressor. Wait for the Game Warden? Suppose he starts pushing you around and grabs your gun? I agree the incident should not have happened and it would not have if the trespasser had left when asked.
Still don’t think “not leaving” gives you the right to introduce a deadly weapon (that wasn’t there, previously) to the situation, by state law. The Dad wasn’t trying to get in the house (at least, not in the video). The only LEGAL reason for introducing the gun was “fear for life/safety”. Dad hadn’t hit ex, at that point. Had he made threats of violence, or was he just pizzed they wouldn’t produce the kids?? Watch the video. The boyfriend didn’t start out with the gun in his hands. He went inside and got it.
