UPDATE: Cannizarro Refuses to Charge; A friend was involved in a shooting

[JWG223]

what would they think? you mean of the literal thousands of shootings in the last 200 years by people defending themselves? i guess not a lot.

About the same as they think of someone with training, it would seem. Unless you mean to tell me that LE/Mil (current and former) are automatically disadvantaged?

 

[JWG223]

They sure tried with GZ

Do, or do not, you must. There is no try.

 

[Jack]

I see what you're getting at cat, I don't think that is the case here, but I do get what you're saying.

 

[SpeedRacer]

the lines start to blur on burglary vs theft (misdemeanor vs felony) on location.

shooting a guy in a 10x12 shed in the backyard is different than a garage.

But none of the above satisfy the statutes, which has been my point all along.

Also of note...my friend, the homeowner, had trained at Gunsite several times prior to the incident.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk 2

 

[Leonidas]

I guess man, I'd much rather have more training than needed vs less. Considering how much training you can have before it begins to effect a jury ruling seems like an exercise in futility to me.

Simple solution: Take your training under an alias.

 

[mcinfantry]

About the same as they think of someone with training, it would seem. Unless you mean to tell me that LE/Mil (current and former) are automatically disadvantaged?

Military, or at least when i was in 100 years ago, had the deadly force justifications beat into our head over and over and over. Same as police.

They focused on use and application. I never saw combat. And dont know how the training is different today.

What i do know is as a cop you qualify annually with your gun, but have far more critical thinking training and on the job conflict resolution training and additional in-service training than shooting.

 

[Jack]

Do, or do not, you must. There is no try.

I honestly believe that if If he had a "coon hunter" tattoo on his chest, he would be in jail right now. Juries don't always go with the direct application of the law.

 

[mcinfantry]

But none of the above satisfy the statutes, which has been my point all along.

Also of note...my friend, the homeowner, had trained at Gunsite several times prior to the incident.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk 2

the detached garage was considered part of the residence for the shooting, so he was cleared. or did i read it wrong? the guy was an unarmed burglar standing by the garage not doing anything?

There is no pdf to read, but i would love to get the reports, not NOLA.com reporting he 'defended his property'

 

[Jack]

Simple solution: Take you training under an alias.

I already do, I go by "Carlos Danger"

 

[oleheat]

I already do, I go by "Carlos Danger"

Just watch what pics you post on here, please.

 

[Jack]

the detached garage was considered part of the residence for the shooting, so he was cleared. or did i read it wrong? the guy was an unarmed burglar standing by the garage?

Complicated legalese, it requires a dwelling. So, is a detached garage considered a dwelling? It's not part of the house and unless your wife is REALLY pissed, nobody should be sleeping out there.

 

[Jack]

Just watch what pics you post on here, please.

I was hoping someone would catch that

 

[JWG223]

Simple solution: Take your training under an alias.

I don't have a spare social security # and "double-life" just sitting around to do that with.

 

[mcinfantry]

But none of the above satisfy the statutes, which has been my point all along.

Also of note...my friend, the homeowner, had trained at Gunsite several times prior to the incident.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk 2

(3) When committed against a person whom one reasonably believes to be likely to use any unlawful force against a person present in a dwelling or a place of business, or when committed against a person whom one reasonably believes is attempting to use any unlawful force against a person present in a motor vehicle as defined in R.S. 32:1(40), while committing or attempting to commit a burglary or robbery of such dwelling, business, or motor vehicle.

armed with burglary tools and in the dwelling?

-or-

(4)(a) When committed by a person lawfully inside a dwelling, a place of business, or a motor vehicle as defined in R.S. 32:1(40), against a person who is attempting to make an unlawful entry into the dwelling, place of business, or motor vehicle, or who has made an unlawful entry into the dwelling, place of business, or motor vehicle, and the person committing the homicide reasonably believes that the use of deadly force is necessary to prevent the entry or to compel the intruder to leave the premises or motor vehicle.

i bet its one of those two. probably the latter.

 

[JWG223]

Whether this guy goes to jail or not, and whether or not he feels bad about it, or whether or not, whatever, I don't know if I buy that he feared for his life or limb, and I promise whatever car he had would have been cheaper to re-build from the ground up than the legal fees he's about to pay.

Let me put this in perspective.

A nurse I work with just got a DWI. She's going to spend $3500 to make it go away. She never blew, and there is no bloodwork, she just refused to blow.

I wonder what shooting someone is going to cost?

Setting right/wrong/good/bad aside for a minute.

 

[Jack]

Whether this guy goes to jail or not, and whether or not he feels bad about it, or whether or not, whatever, I don't know if I buy that he feared for his life or limb, and I promise whatever car he had would have been cheaper to re-build from the ground up than the legal fees he's about to pay.

Let me put this in perspective.

A nurse I work with just got a DWI. She's going to spend $3500 to make it go away. She never blew, and there is no bloodwork, she just refused to blow.

I wonder what shooting someone is going to cost?

Setting right/wrong/good/bad aside for a minute.

A ****ton, that's why I'm of the opinion my car insurance deductable is worth less than the legal troubles

 

[JWG223]

In my CCW course, I was taught:

-Main Roof Structure
-Vehicle that you are inside of at the time
-Common-sense fear for your life. For a guy like me, that may mean someone coming at me with a bat or knife or something. For some 80 year-old with a heart condition, it might mean verbal threats/balled fists/posturing and advancing.

I don't see any of that here other than "thought he reached for something" and "witnesses say something different happened."

 

[JWG223]

A ****ton, that's why I'm of the opinion my car insurance deductable is worth less than the legal troubles

My CCW course taught that an open/closed iron-clad "good shoot" carries, on average, in the state of LA, an $8K price tag.

This situation?

I hope it was an F40 or something.

 

[Cat]

I see what you're getting at cat, I don't think that is the case here, but I do get what you're saying.

Not a problem.

My husband and I were discussing this in bed last night.

He saw my logic too but said certain statements carried great weight. In many cases my logic applied but in this case, "castle doctrine" is a great statement that doesn't need clarifiers.

And I suppose he is correct. But if I see some stranger inside my home and I have never laid eyes upon him, I will be afraid. I will most definitely be in fear of my life. I can't see someone who kills another person as not being fearful. To say/argue that it was a simple right, not fear, sort of flabbergasts me.

 

[Emperor]

Just watch what pics you post on here, please.

I was hoping someone would catch that

I was going to post this:

Tweet me!

But, Heat beat me to it.