Do you guys have a game plan for an intruder in your home?  

What I mean is,  is there a point where you will or won't shoot someone in your home that is there uninvited?

If the guy just peeks his head in the door and is trying to look around what do you do?

If the guy is just standing in the entry way of your home, what do you do??

More importantly,  is the threshold of the front door the borderline or does the criminal have to come deeper into your home before you shoot them???

I was just sitting here thinking about that,  what if some guy just walked in the house and stood in the entry way with nothing in his hands that I could see.  But he wouldn't leave when I told him to leave,  what should I do??  

The uninvited part pretty much settles it for me.

Given your scenario (front door open and someone just walks inside), they get one opportunity to get the hell out.  Then they get shot.

If I hear something go bump in the night and someone is inside the house they get shot.

If someone is trying to break into the house I will do my best to detain the person.  If they struggle with me they get shot.

I would hold a gun on him, call 911, and file tresspassing charges on him when the police arrived.  In the meantime, if he attacked me, I'd shoot him full of holes.

With me it's if they get in my home and are threatening my life.

That's the law here in the Commonwealth.

You better make sure there was not way for you to evade either, ie. you're cornered.

[rolleyes]

I think I can pretty much tell if someone has bad intent long before they get inside.  Like the other day this old lady was driving her Buick down my street and I knew she was just casing the joint thinking she looked all innocent and harmless.  Put a stop to her crap right then and there.

Seriously, they're in the wrong as soon as they cross the threshold or get in a windoow is what I'd expect a jury to decide.  If they're not armed, a whole lot bigger than you, or Michael Jackson you're still gonna have a hard time getting a "justifiable" pass.  In such a case a weapon must be found in their hand or you're likely toast.

My home will be defended without provocation.
Then I will hide the bodies.
Lebrew

And then, you will go to jail.  And spend quality time with Big Bubba.

We have a handy-dandy "make my day" law here in CO.  If they force themselves onto your property, you can shoot them without any further cause.  Not a bad law.  Now if only we could buy beer on Sunday......

If an intruder is in my threshold, he is 5 steps from my sons room.  If he isnt on the floor begging to not be shot by the time I level the gun, he's toast...

and here in Al, it would be all fine and dandy..

Here in Florida the castle doctrine applies if you are [red]attacked in your own home by an intruder or an invited guest[/red]. The castle doctrine does not apply when the attacker and the person attacked both have the same legal right to be inside the home, such as husband and wife.

yep...here, their uninvited presence is enough.  That's good enough for me.

Didnt see that part. I'd probably do as OP said, though he would be a gunpoint, with copious amounts of instruction from me in regards to him not moving, or even breathing hard, or he would be shot many, many times over (probably in a slightly, um, [b]LOUD[/b] tone of voice).

My doors stay locked all the time, even when I am home. Therefore, to get in, someone is going to have to physically break something. In that instance, ventilation begins, as soon as you are in. Florida has a very clear Castle Doctrine.

In NC I can shoot anyone in an entry point whether they are armed or not.  If they are ripping, tearing or breaking into the home I can shoot them as well.

They get one chance to get out and that's it.  If they try to take another step, they're toast, pure and simple.

However, if they manage to get well inside the home then I can only shoot if they have the means to cause my death or great bodily harm.

Well, according to the law of the land here in NH;

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;
      [red](b) Is likely to use [b]any unlawful force[/b] against a person present while committing or attempting to commit a burglary;[/red]
      (c) Is committing or about to commit kidnapping or a forcible sex offense; or
    [red](d) Is likely to use [b]any unlawful force[/b] in the commission of a felony against the actor within such actor's dwelling or its curtilage.[/red]

So if said intruder takes any course of action other than turning tail and getting the fuck out of dodge upon me encountering him, I have reason to believe he intends to do me harm, and thus his ass gets shot.

In response to the question of the subject line, at what point is it [b]not[/b] my castle.

If I detect hostility, intruders will be shot.  If I detect confusion or hesitency, intruders will be targeted and given the oportunity to leave.

Scott

Glad you brought that up RAF.
As I preach constantly. [b]KNOW YOUR AREA[/b] and how these type of things are viewed/handled. Just because here in FL we are pretty safe in proactively defending our homes, etc, DOES NOT mean that it will be the same in your area!

Here in MA, the law states that the bad guy has to be in your house, not on your property, not on your front steps. Fortunately, a while back, they eliminated the rule that you had to try to get away from the danger, e.g., run out the back door. Also, this law extends to any living space, including a camper or a motel room.

You poor easterners.  Always with the lawsuits...

The law notwithstanding, if I ever awoke to an intruder already inside, it would take very little provocation for me to shoot and my decision to fire would be quick and irrevocable.

If I awoke or if awake, became aware of an intrusion attempt, I would do what I could to gather up the little ones and attempt a retreat to a "citadel", or the best area in the house for both self-protection and for best field of fire for me.  In that case, a 911 call would go out with the receiver left off the hook and vocal warnings aplenty would be yelled at the intruder[s].  Should they, in spite of my warnings, continue their clearly reckless behavior, at some point, and upon MY determination alone, I would engage the threat with my Mossy and then my ready pistol.  I would NOT fire at a retreating perp, nor any perp that I did not think was a threat to us.  Carrying our personal goods out the back door is not cause to kill in my mind.  On the other hand...as I said, if I thought there was the slightest chance of our lives being in danger, I'm killing the perp.

[b]Better to be judged by twelve than carried by six.[/b]

Last year my neighbor awoke (2am) to an intruder in his bedroom. He held him at gunpoint until the police arrived. While he was holding him, the perp said he had been in the house for 2 hours! The cops came took him away, and later let him go. "lack of evidence" was what the LEO's told him. WTF?
AB

everyone needs a 'throw-away' knife [peep]

What most state and local laws indicate is that there needs to be a reasonable determination that the home-occupant feels in fear for their life or the lives of their family. Some states extend the 'home' to mean any personal property including vehicles, stores, or rental properties. A few states have a clause indicating that the occupant needs to make attempts to retreat from the threat before justifiable self-defense can occur.

I have heard, repeatedly and from many sources (LEO's, lawyers, and others in the jurisprudence business) that they absolute key is to repeatedly state that you were in fear for your life and that is the only reason you put 27 rds of 5.56mm into 'used-to-be-assailant' who is now assuming room temperature and staining the carpet.

On a related topic, many of us here are current or former EMT's. So if we are involved in a shooting where we did the shooting in fear for our lives and adequately ended the threat. Are there Good Samaritan laws in effect that suggest that we then are bound to treat 'Mr.-former-BG' that 30 seconds ago was trying to prematurely end my life or harm my family?

Castle Doctrine applies in VA

[i]
The use of deadly force to prevent threatened harm to property is never justified except in defense of habitation. . . .[the remainder of this quote comes from a footnote to the preceding
sentence] The use of deadly force, in defense of "property" can also be justifiable, but the classic formulation lists only arson or burglary as crimes against property which can justify the use
of deadly force. . . . Even then the use of deadly force must have been necessary. Defense of habitation and justifiable self-defense overlap in the "castle doctrine" which states that one
may, without retreating, use force, to include deadly force if necessary, to keep aggressors out of his own house. This part of the castle doctrine is one aspect of defense of habitation. . . .
[T]he justification exists in the curtilage as well as the castle. Roger D. Groot, Criminal Offenses and Defenses in Virginia 114 (3rd ed. 1994). The defense of habitation and the castle
doctrine have not been raised in this case. Alexander v. Commonwealth, 28 Va. App. 771, 780, 508 S.E.2d 912, ___ (1999).[/i]

Knowing your humor, I doubt you mean this.

But to make sure any newbies don't misunderstand...

Never "plant" evidence.  Regardless of what some on this forum believe, the police aren't that stupid.

And, even if you are totally justified in the shooting, if you "plant" evidence, you will be thought to be in the wrong.  

Ayhoob (Sp?)has written books about this issue.  Never consider dragging the body more inside, or planting a knife or gun, or changing anything about the scene.

Make sure you are right before commencing fire.  Do what you must to protect yourself and your family.  Tell the Police, "I want to speak with my lawyer".

If they say, "You're not in any trouble", say, "Thanks.  I want to speak with my lawyer."

And do so.

Bump.

Alarm.

Barking.

Lights.

Lock & Load.

"I've got a gun, I've called the cops, get the fuck out of my house"

Call the cops.

Anyone advancing into the house at that point meets with 158 grains of hollow point resistance twice to the center of mass as they're not there to borrow a cup of sugar.

Who leaves their front door unlocked? I live in a really good neighborhood full of cops, military, and corrections officers and only leave the back door unlocked during day light hours (dog).

Except in Texas where you can kill 6 year old girls for walking over the purple spray painted line after dark you never want to kill someone unless you are in fear of your life or the life of another.

As an example if someone is stealing my cherry 1976 Porsche 911 out of my garage unless I fear for my life I can not murder him for property theft for fear of criminial but more likely civil suits to follow. There are lawyers everywhere which are willing to sue you for anything. It will costs tens of thousands of dollars to defend yourself reguardless of what the jury sayes.

If the said thief raises a wrench as if to hit me then I kill him dead where he stands.

I love Texas.  In this state if, at night, you so much as catch someone stealing property from you and you believe that you have no other way to recover that property, DEADLY FORCE is justified.  

So if a guy tries to jump out the window with your VCR?  Fair game.

In Oklahoma, we have the [b]Make My Day Law[/b] that basically says that if they are in your house uninvited, they are fair game. I have been in a situation as described; I got my 7 year old son from his bedroom across the hall into my room with my wife. She called 911 while I went forward armed with "Miss Piggy", a Remington 12 gauge pump with 18" barrel. The intruder bailed out of the back door as soon as they heard the slide racked. When Miss Piggy talks, people listen.

We now also have a new addition to the family, my 122 lb German Shepherd K9 partner and he thinks my kid is God. They have to get passed the dog first, then they have to deal with me.

I would say you have no duty to do so at all, let the fucker bleed out. People are amazed when I tell them I have no duty to stop a crime in progress right in front of me (I'm LEO)

The common law is no duty is owed by anyone to anyone else, it would subject us to control by others. (That's one of the foundations upon which abortion was found legal)

Now if my boss found out I passed on a crime without helping, I'd be out of a job because it is part of are SOP's. - But this is administrative in nature, not a constitutional basis.

Here in Colorado, we had the first "Make My Day Law" on the books.  It is quoted below:

Colorado statute 18-1-704.5 Use of Deadly Physical Force Against an Intruder ("Make My Day Law")

1.  "The general assembly hereby recognizes that the citizens of Colorado have a right to expect absolute safety in their own homes."

2.  "Any occupant of a dwelling is justified in using any degree of physical force, including deadly physical force, against another person when that other person has made an unlawful entry into the dwelling, and when the occupant has a reasonable belief that such other person has committed a crime in the dwelling in addition to the uninvited entry, or is committing or intends to commit a crime against a person or property in addition to the uninvited entry, and when the occupant reasonably believes that such other person might use any physical force, no matter how slight, against any occupant."

3.  "Any occupant of a dwelling using physical force, including deadly physical force, in accordance with the provisions of subsection (2) of this section shall be immune from criminal prosecution for the use of such force."

4.  "Any occupant of a dwelling using physical force, including deadly physical force, in accordance with the provisions of subsection (2) of this section shall be immune from any civil liability for injuries or death resulting from the use of such force."

[b]Now that's what I'm talking about!![/b] [snoopy]

Bottom line, you come into my home and you weren't invited - you go out with a toe tag on.  No one can prosecute you and the "victim's" family can't take you to court for violation of the miscreant's civil rights!

I love this state!!

Here it presumed the intruder is entering with evil intentions. I'm not going to start shooting the minute he breaks the threshold of the door, but it would be legally justified under CPC 198.5

It depends on the law in your jurisdiction.  Learn that first, whether by a comprehensive book put out for the purpose, specific to your state, or consult with a lawyer (money spent in advance for knowledge is never a waste).

As examples to answer your basic question.  When I lived in NJ (cursed be the days), there was  (and possibly still is) no right of self defense even in your own home.  There was a duty of retreat.  I recall a case in which someone shot an intruder.  The judge sentenced him to 10 or 15 years, IIRC, saying he could have crawled out the bathroom window.

In Florida, for example, an intruder who breaks into your home (I think the "breaks" part is important)  is considered to be armed under the law, and the rounds he gets are his.  You may not shoot a fleeing suspect (speaking here to your "on the threshold"  scenario).  BUT, if he is running to the back of your house, for example, you can shoot him in the back, as he presents a continuing danger to yourself and your family.  His lack of knowledge of your home is his tough luck.  Best not to twist that one too much, though.  But, in general they are very practical here.  

So, the point of the two illustrations is that the answer to your basic question, unfortunately, is "it depends."  Here in FL there is a book put out by an attorney which talks about a gun and its use.  I would guess/hope there is such a book in other areas.  

As an aside, the laugh about the NJ story is that you can more easily use deadly force in NY or CA than in NJ.  They will be more interested in whether or not your gun is registered.  In FL, Registered?  Whut's thet?"

Also, if your jurisdiction requires a course (most do) for a CWP, take it even if you would be exempted.  In FL, one would be exempt with showing a DD214.  I couldn't find mine so I took the course (big deal of $35.).  I learned so much form the guy, especially about the FL specific stuff that I was gladd I took it and would recommend it to anyone.  The instructor was an ex-cop from Hollywood, FL , who gives the course at Suncoast Gun shows  .  Great guy.

when i am home and a burgular arrives, he is in my castle

Given the circumstances you outlined, I'd ask what he wanted. If he was uncommunicative or just frozen I'd go kick his ass.

You said he's standing there with nothing in his hands, I KNOW he's not bigger than me so I'd take an excellent chance to wipe the floor with somebody with a "Free pass".

After I was done he could thank me for not shooting him as I dragged his butt out to wait for the cops.

I like this game :-)

for those in the great state of Georgia:

[url]http://law.gsu.edu/lawreview/peachsheets/V18/CrimesOffensesDefensestoProsecutionSB160.htm[/url]

CRIMES AND OFFENSES

Defenses to Criminal Prosecution: Change Provisions Relating to the Use of Force in the Defense of Habitations or Residences; Provide for Related Matters

                                          Code Sections:        O.C.G.A. '' 16-3-21, -23 (amended)

Bill Number:                SB 160

Act Number:                385

Georgia Laws:            2001 Ga. Laws 1247

Summary:                      The Act changes the Georgia Code in regard to the justification a person must have in defending his or her home with force that is likely to cause death or great bodily harm. The Act adds to the Georgia Code that a person is justified in use of such force when it is asserted against a person who is not a member of the defender=s family or household, that person unlawfully and forcibly enters or has entered the residence, and the defender knew or had reason to believe that an unlawful and forcible entry occurred.

Effective Date:          July 1, 2001

History



           The Make My Day Bill,@ as SB 160 has been called, allows homeowners to use deadly force in protecting their home from an illegal intruder. [1] Essentially, homeowners can shoot first and ask questions later. [2] A rash of home invasions in Macon, Georgia, contributed to efforts by legislators to make it easier for people to defend their home with deadly force. [3] Before this bill, to be justified in using deadly force, home defenders had to reasonably believe (1) that an intruder made a violent and tumultuous entry for the purpose of assaulting or inflicting forcible violence upon any person in the dwelling or (2) that such entry was made in pursuit of a felony. [4] SB 160 was proposed to add a third justification defense that would allow people to defend their home without having to stop and think whether deadly force toward an intruder would meet the prior two reasonableness requirements. Such force would be justified so long as it was not used against a member of the family or household. [5] Due to the speed at which home invasion events transpire, legislators wanted to make it easier for people to defend their homes with deadly force. [6] Representative Curtis Jenkins said, A[p]assing legislation is always a balancing act and these home invasions have become so violent and frequent that the homeowner has been placed at a greater risk in recent years and we needed to give them more protection.@ [7]

According to Senator Eric Johnson, who introduced the bill in the Senate, it is unlikely under current law that people using deadly force to protect their home and inhabitants would be prosecuted for a crime, but legislators proposed the bill=s amendments to clarify situations justifying deadly force. [8]



While writing this bill, legislators added language stating that the defense of self or habitation could not be used by a homeowner in circumstances where deadly force was applied to members of the family or household. [9] This inclusion was suggested by legislative counsel so that such a defense would not be available, for example, when an estranged husband enters the home and is shot by his spouse. [10] Senator Johnson said, Awe [did not] want this defense to be used by defense attorneys for situations where [one] family member shoots another. This was not [the bill=s purpose; it is] to allow homeowners to protect themselves and their property when they know or reasonably know that someone has trespassed into their home.@ [11]

Another focus of the bill was to address potential civil liability under current law. [12] Although the bill would not prevent a civil suit, legislators believed that adding this defense to the criminal code would aid homeowners in defense of civil suits because the bill supports homeowners in applying force, which can help homeowners Ain the eyes of the jury.@ [13]

A similar bill was introduced during the 1995 legislative session by then Representative Bart Ladd. [14] The bill passed in the House but failed in the Senate because then Senate Special Judiciary Chairman Mike Egan disapproved of the bill. [15]

Afamily@ included and whether it extended to first and second cousins or just to immediate family. [19] Representative Day responded that he was not sure as to the legal meaning of family but assumed that it meant immediate family Aand you would know who they are.@ [20] The House accepted Representative Day=s response and unanimously passed the bill. [21] Governor Roy Barnes signed the bill into law on April 28, 2001. [22]

           The Act amends Code section 16-3-21 by adding language to subsection (a). [23] Under the Act, subsection (a), relating to the justification of force in the defense of self or others, clarifies that this defense is available to both men and women by adding female gender pronouns where appropriate. [24] The Act also adds to Code section 16-3-21 language that refers to Code section 16-3-23 for an exception to justifiable use of deadly force. [25] Code section 16-3-21 requires that a person is justified in using deadly force only if that person reasonably believes such force is necessary to prevent their own death or great bodily injury; the Act also makes an exception through Code section 16-3-23 to include prevention of death or great bodily injury to a third person or to prevent a forcible felony. [26]


Sounds like, to me anyway (of course, I don't have a law degree), you shouldn't be in someone else's castle WITHOUT AN INVITATION. Like others here, I probably would, upon reason, inform the perp that I was armed, locked, and loaded and give him opportunity to leave, if at all possible. Of course, if I wake up in the middle of the night to someone attempting to abduct, rape, kill, or otherwise harm ANYONE in my house, be it blood relative or otherwise, the cordialities go out the window.

Bottom line is it would be a bad mistake for anyone to wake me up anyday. I don't get enough sleep as it is.

[rofl]   [rofl2] [lolabove]