The case that you posted was a little different than what I had been thinking…although I don’t know all of the facts, I would say that based on what I know, I probably wouldn’t have shot him. If he’s already halfway over the fence trying to get away from me, I don’t know. Then again, who’s to say that he won’t come back another time or that he won’t seek revenge on me later on? [/quote]
Had this discussion with my husband a month ago.
I was discussing rape in PWI and I did bring up to my husband the revenge issue ( also applies for revenge through opportunism where I will be paying financially to both criminals; lawyer and intruder ).
I understand your concerns as a woman completely.
Specially if you work at/from home and is the one most likely to suffer the violation in the absence of your husband.
Add a young child to that equation and yes, I am with you on the “what if he comes back and I have to go through this with a better prepared aggressor?”.
But my husband’s reaction to me and to your post was the same: “You cannot shoot somebody on the assumption of revenge.” Or, in other words: the law is not going to favor you if you shoot somebody to eliminate a possible threat to life in the future.
It makes sense for both, I think: Our fears of revenge and the legal argument that this does not constitute a threat to life.
My husband understood our feelings and only spoke from a legal point of view.
If you are ever in that situation, would this be possible alternative if your conscience and personality permit:
The way to legally eliminate the threat completely is to stand your ground ( literally ) behind the door he is trying to break in ( say 20 feet away from it? ) and shoot as he breaks in?
If you have what it takes to do this, this is the only way I can see the law not incriminating you for wanting to eliminate ( future ) threat to your life in the present, or whatever they legally call it.
Remember also it helps if you are the first to call 911. It will help your case.
It is sad to say but I am now more concerned about the judicial system than the physical threat to my life.
And how ironic we have to guard ourselves against both threats to our freedom and security, from our protectors and from our attackers.
When the sheep becomes a wolf in sheep’s clothing who can you trust but yourself, right?
We had two different, yet similar cases here recently:
Very sad to see the focus of citizen security become an issue of Republican x Democrat.
Want to share this with you as a trivia on this fact :
When researching the Stand Your Ground Law, I read that it used to be just common sense here in Florida that one was allowed to defend one’s self against threat to life without having to retreat.
It was only after people started migrating here form the North and bringing their lawyers with them, that it had to be made into a “law”, to protect the regional customs and way of life.
So it may boil down to one group of people moving into an area and believing their ways are superior ( even if it flies in the face of common sense in the presence of evidence to the contrary ) to the local beliefs and way of life.
By all means write to Sky Walker and hope that the force will be strong with him on this one - because you are going to need it.
The current “civilized” trend is to go softer on and more rights to protect criminals: I have already lived through this in England.
The system is a joke; even police officers have little authority over criminals.
As far as the stranger in the backyard goes, I would call 911 a.s.a.p. then have shotgun, pistol and spear ready. I would not go outside to shoot somebody, specially in the dark and more importantly with an infant in the home that is completely dependent on my surviving and coming back for him/her.