Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire Milwaukee Man Arrested For Holding Shotgun In His Home While BLM Threatens Him Outside

you will be cuffed and jailed for that

Depends on where you live and if this bullschit is happening everywhere.

Unfortunately, Texas stands alone in the right to shoot trespassers in the dark.
BLM, and a local had an issue a few weeks ago.
Shots fired both ways around midnight.
One trespassers caught some shot in the face.
It's still under investigation, I think charges were filed on the local.
A 9mm and cases found at the scene, cops aren't saying who it came
from or who fired. Multiple cars, 30-50 people in the dark, I figure the shooter
just left when they ran.

Justice would find the trespassers.
Who knows what the legal system will do.

Not where I live.

We can legally shoot them at night.

I’ll tell what! If that happens where I live I’ll have two shot guns by every door and plenty of ammo!

The 2019 Florida Statutes

Title XLVI
CRIMES

Chapter 776
JUSTIFIABLE USE OF FORCE

View Entire Chapter
776.013 Home protection; use or threatened use of deadly force; presumption of fear of death or great bodily harm.—
(1) A person who is in a dwelling or residence in which the person has a right to be has no duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground and use or threaten to use:
(a) Nondeadly force against another when and to the extent that the person reasonably believes that such conduct is necessary to defend himself or herself or another against the other’s imminent use of unlawful force; or
(b) Deadly force if he or she reasonably believes that using or threatening to use such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the imminent commission of a forcible felony.
(2) A person is presumed to have held a reasonable fear of imminent peril of death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another when using or threatening to use defensive force that is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm to another if:
(a) The person against whom the defensive force was used or threatened was in the process of unlawfully and forcefully entering, or had unlawfully and forcibly entered, a dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle, or if that person had removed or was attempting to remove another against that person’s will from the dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle; and
(b) The person who uses or threatens to use defensive force knew or had reason to believe that an unlawful and forcible entry or unlawful and forcible act was occurring or had occurred.
(3) The presumption set forth in subsection (2) does not apply if:
(a) The person against whom the defensive force is used or threatened has the right to be in or is a lawful resident of the dwelling, residence, or vehicle, such as an owner, lessee, or titleholder, and there is not an injunction for protection from domestic violence or a written pretrial supervision order of no contact against that person; or
(b) The person or persons sought to be removed is a child or grandchild, or is otherwise in the lawful custody or under the lawful guardianship of, the person against whom the defensive force is used or threatened; or
(c) The person who uses or threatens to use defensive force is engaged in a criminal activity or is using the dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle to further a criminal activity; or
(d) The person against whom the defensive force is used or threatened is a law enforcement officer, as defined in s. 943.10(14), who enters or attempts to enter a dwelling, residence, or vehicle in the performance of his or her official duties and the officer identified himself or herself in accordance with any applicable law or the person using or threatening to use force knew or reasonably should have known that the person entering or attempting to enter was a law enforcement officer.
(4) A person who unlawfully and by force enters or attempts to enter a person’s dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle is presumed to be doing so with the intent to commit an unlawful act involving force or violence.
(5) As used in this section, the term:
(a) “Dwelling” means a building or conveyance of any kind, including any attached porch, whether the building or conveyance is temporary or permanent, mobile or immobile, which has a roof over it, including a tent, and is designed to be occupied by people lodging therein at night.
(b) “Residence” means a dwelling in which a person resides either temporarily or permanently or is visiting as an invited guest.
(c) “Vehicle” means a conveyance of any kind, whether or not motorized, which is designed to transport people or property.

Yeah, on paper, we Floridians live in a good state for self-defense, but if the mob is black and you are White, they are likely going to do what they can to ruin your life if you make it known to the mob that you are armed and ready to repel boarders. At least in many areas in Florida. That sort of insanity has spread to many area of the country in the last few years.

Prefaced to say I'm not being a smartass but am genuinely interested.

What about during the day? I've always heard you could use deadly force in defense of property in Texas and maybe a couple of other states, but thought that applied to stealing stuff. Didn't realize you could shoot trespassers. So seriously, is there a difference between night and day where this is concerned?

I think that at this late date, parsing all this out is a wasted effort, but I'll do it anyway.

The police should have showed up and dispersed the mob. The people have a right to protest, but they don't have the right to harass and threaten somebody in their own home. He had the right to respond to their threats and demonstrate that he could defend himself, thus possibly saving some of their lives. The cops are totally in the wrong. Where are the cop apologizers?

This guy shouldn't have to give up his own right to free speech in order to live peaceably in his own domicile. I'm putting up a Trump sign in my yard as soon as I can manage it.

There are public servants (?) that may spin it as you suggest, but the law is the law. Let the idiots push it as they wish, win the Sandmann Lottery.

I don’t try to screw other people and will not tolerate others screwing with me or mine.

Laws vary widely from state to state, but as a general rule it's best to keep them out of sight until it's time to use them. "Brandishing" is a serious offense in even some places with pretty good self-defense laws. I doubt very much that the current crop of azzholes running around is going to be intimidated much by racking an 870 inside your house.

Is brandishing even possible inside your own home? I think not when this get settled.

I'm thinking the homeowner will come into some money, but the city of Milwaukee, if this is where it happened, is lieberal Demon heaven.

MM

The City Coppers are beholden to the mayor of said city, it should come as no surprise to anyone.

The Shootist?

Texas does not stand alone.
Period.