Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire Homeowner apprehends burglar with fiream and then HE gets arrested

You pull a gun you use it, you don't talk about it, and you don't go looking for trouble where there is none, and none of your business anyway... this wasn't at his house, it wasn't his property, but he say's he was scarred of the guy enough to try to scare him into submission... when all he had to do was call law enforcement...


Phil

What's NH law concerning warning shots?

In FL they are prohibited by law. Don't mean I wouldn't let a guy walk if the circumstances warranted it. But that could come back and bite me in the azz bad if I made a mistake or the SAO had a hard on for me.

So... if someone saw your wife being raped they should walk away, ain't none of their business?

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

Per RSA 627:4

II. A person is justified in using deadly force upon another person when he reasonably believes that such other person:
(a) Is about to use unlawful, deadly force against the actor or a third person;
(b) Is likely to use any unlawful force against a person present while committing or attempting to commit a burglary;
(c) Is committing or about to commit kidnapping or a forcible sex offense; or
(d) Is likely to use any unlawful force in the commission of a felony against the actor within such actor's dwelling or its curtilage.
II-a. A person who responds to a threat which would be considered by a reasonable person as likely to cause serious bodily injury or death to the person or to another by displaying a firearm or other means of self-defense with the intent to warn away the person making the threat shall not have committed a criminal act.

It is also worth noting that there is no duty to retreat in NH.

George

Rape is a deadly force encounter in NH.

George

Yes, part of it was his property. Based on local coverage, this was a multiple residence hit.

George

If the facts hold as in the PO then it looks like (b) might be justifiable cause.

Playing Devil's Advocate :

Man comes out of window, bang....don't [bleep] move....How does "b" apply?

George

I can only imagine, hats off to you LEO's for your resolve and ability to remain calm, your a better man than me.

Gunner

Rape is a Forcible Felony, the use of deadly force is allowed to be used in the cases of such, at least in FL.

Forcible Felonies such as rape, robbery, burglary or kidnapping is covered in FL Statute.

Now, OTOH and IIRC, the victim is in his 60s and has had some work done on his heart. He states that he "didn't think he could handle him physically". Any movement in his direction.....

It's all in the wording .

George

(b) would apply as the guy coming out the window was committing a burglary. That said it would be hard to prove he knew he was committing a crime. That is why I said might.

I might have done this differently. The warning shot sounds like it might be the problem causer in this one. But I was not there and my second guessing any part of this is not needed. Facts and truth would be what is needed in this case just like all others.

b) Is likely to use any unlawful force against a person present while committing or attempting to commit a burglary;

Let's concede the burg....it's the bold that might be the kicker (again, simply playing Devil's Advocate in this case..though I hate doing so).

George

BTW....next time the headline reads "Cop Fires Warning Shot to Deter Burglar from Running" I'll expect the "usual suspects" to back him based on their comments in this thread.

RIGHT George, what have YOU been smokin' tonight!

Uh, my post agreed with Mackay that it sounded like an inappropriate use of discretion. Unfortunately, there sometimes is a disconnect between what is legal/illegal and what is appropriate under the circumstances. The law should be in harmony with right and wrong, but sometimes it is not, because the law is a "one size fits all" codification. As long as the officer is acting within the bounds of the law, the penalty for an officer applying discretion inappropriately is disciplinary and/or administrative, not through civil redress by the "victim" or criminal action against the officer. If you read my body of work on this forum, you will see that I absolutely believe that officers must act within the bounds of law, and I don't mean stepping within a millimeter of the line, and I also believe that the judicious use of discretion is the hallmark of a good police officer. But, if someone says something is "illegal" and violative of rights because discretion is used inappropriately, s/he just doesn't understand the law.

AMEN that Sir, and right on the money.

A 'warning shot' is considered 'deadly force'? I realize a gun can be but how is an intentional warning shot deadly force?

Also, most people in this thread it appears would be good to have as neighbors. A select few however, are apparently as useful as a burnt match.

This is why all 57 States need Castle Domain Law.