Facebook
Fark
Digg
Reddit
Stumble
Metro Police said a resident fatally shot an intruder in his backyard Tuesday, March 20, 2012. The incident happened at 9:25 a.m. in the 2100 block of Spurs Court, a residential neighborhood near Hualapai Way and Sahara Avenue.
By Jackie Valley (contact) 
Published Tuesday, March 20, 2012 | 10:23 a.m.
Updated Tuesday, March 20, 2012 | 2:56 p.m.
Backyard intruder killed
Gunfire erupted Tuesday morning in a normally quiet Summerlin neighborhood as a homeowner fatally shot an intruder in his backyard, Metro Police said.
Metro spokesman Bill Cassell said the male homeowner called 911 at 9:25 a.m. to report the incident in the 2100 block of Spurs Court, near Hualapai Way and Sahara Avenue.
The homeowner told detectives he fired shots at the male, who he believed was trying to break into his home through the backyard, Cassell said.
Gunfire struck the intruder in the backyard, where he died, Cassell said. Police have not determined how many shots were fired from the homeowner's handgun.
Detectives were interviewing the homeowner about the circumstances and the perceived threat, Cassell said. It's unclear whether the intruder was armed.
At this point, police believe the intruder had no right to be in the yard and did not know the homeowner, Cassell said. The homeowner, whom police did not identify, was not injured.
The Clark County Coroner’s Office will release the intruder’s identity pending notification of his family.
Homicide detectives are investigating and will forward their report to the District Attorney’s Office to decide whether to pursue charges against the homeowner, Cassell said. The homeowner has not been arrested.
Metro spokesman Jay Rivera said use of force is considered reasonable — both for citizens and police — when a person feels an action must be taken to protect his life or others’ from serious injury or death.
"We're still in the very early stages of what is obviously going to be an active investigation for a while," Cassell said.
Officers who patrol the neighborhood said there have not been noticeable crime increases in the area, he said.
The commotion caught neighbor Stacy Hawkins off guard as she arrived home from dropping her son off at school.
"It sounded like Harleys, but it was gunshots," she said. "By the time I got over there to talk to a neighbor, there was crime scene tape."
Hawkins, who lives on a street parallel to Spurs Court, said she had not heard about any burglaries in the neighborhood, which she described as having a normally safe atmosphere.
"We never have any issues," said Stacey Boreta, another neighbor. "It makes me more aware. You can't get too comfortable."
Boreta, a single mother, said the incident was eye-opening.
"It makes me want to have a gun in the house because I would do the same thing," she said. "When I have my son in the house, I'm not playing games."
Watch the family of the dead robber sue the shooter.
It's the American way.
Someone in your backyard is not a threat. Its clear the homeowner is not trained on firearm use and safety. I hope there is something more than I was scared because someone was in my backyard, the homeowner should of just locked all doors and windows, dialed 911 and get a good description of the individual. I view it as manslaughter, just as the story is written.
Comment removed by moderator. Inappropriate
I am going to side with the homeowner on this one. If someone is on your property without your consent you have every right to take their life.
Nevada has a solid "stand your ground" law in place
I would have waited for him to break a window or pry a door open. I hope the homeowner wins his upcoming legal battle.
Without more details it's all speculation at this point.
But enter my backyard and you also will be staring down the barrel of a gun.
Check the crime stats- plenty of burglaries in the area, despite what "officers who patrol the area" say. Didn't know that running radar is considered "patrolling the area". A little more objectivity on the actual crime stats would be welcomed, singular homeowner comments notwithstanding.
Nevada is one of the states that adopted a Castle Doctrine. This homeowner should be alright. he had No duty to retreat, regardless of where attack takes place.
Copy of the law. http://www.leg.state.nv.us/74th/Bills/AB...
I agree, we don't know all of the details yet but if it's as simple as it's stated good for the home owner. I too protect my property with a firearm.
Yes, if they are dumb enough to come on your property anywhere but up the sidewalk to your front door they are trying to steal,and should be shot on sight. Yes, sounds tough punishment for the crime, but it won't stop until the thieves are very afraid of getting shot at.
This is how I would determine if there was a problem or not. Look at their records. If the shooter is a felon, go after him with the full force of law, including the felon in possession statute. Prosecute the hell out of him even if it is a weak case. If the shooter is a non-felon and the dead man had a felony then that is a pass for him, non-felons should never be investigated for shooting felons regardless of the circumstances. If both the shooter and dead man are non-felons, then investigate.
@Dipstick: so your solution is , Gee Mr. trespasser, are you here to steal something from me or just passing through?
Dennis you really are something. Typical post by you though.
@vegaslee - I'm pretty sure your link points to a proposed bill, not one that was actually enacted... The reason I think that is, at this time, I don't see your link's wording in the current state maintained database for NRS 200.120.
Being an open carry kind of guy (and having a CCW also), I seem to recall our hand-gun instructor pointing out this law... and it would seem that you can't just shoot someone in your yard... that's just trespassing -not an offense to be shot over. Someone has to actually be trying to break your door down or trying to hurt you at the very moment you pull the trigger.
Even if you caught someone in your house, knocked you over the head with a bat, and then they ran out the door into your yard, you can't chase them down and shoot them. If they are running away, you can't claim you are in a position to be hurt. Gotta be careful when/if you pull that trigger.
I'm not an attorney, but I'm pretty sure that's the way the law reads.
Here's the link to the current law:
http://www.leg.state.nv.us/nrs/NRS-200.h...
I know of a person robbed at gunpoint and five auto thefts in the last month within two miles of towne center and sahara...the crime has absolutely spiked in this area lately.
Comment removed by moderator. - -
We had a similar situation. We also live in Summerlin. The intruder broke in through a window only accessible from our backyard. I will never forget walking into the house with my two babies. It was scary. Fortunately, the intruder had already left. I felt so violated and could not sleep for months.
Looks like Mr. Intruder will not be hanging out in strangers back yards anymore! Good shot sir.
There is a new service in Henderson called Alert ID which sends you an email or a text of crime happening in your neighborhood. http://alertid.com/
I am SHOCKED at the amount of crime near my home in a very nice, quiet area of Green Valley. The number of crimes is amazing and unless you are a signed up to receive these alerts, you would never know what you might wander into out there.
AlertID shows you your house and then pinpoints the place of the crime on a street map...most lately have been within 3/10s of a mile from my home! I certainly would not be afraid to shoot to kill if I felt myself or family was in danger.
If this homeowner is prosecuted for using the "Metro Method" then something is seriously wrong with the laws.
10 to 1 he has a lengthy arrest record. Can't go into people's back yards without permission.
I have cameras, critters, fences and GUNS.
Can we get the schools to explain this to the students? You know, how in the commission of a crime that results in injury / death, you can be charged even if your accomplice did it. And point out that the homeowners and other victims are within their rights to hurt you.
i thought an intruder actuslly hsd to be in the house before you could shoot him.
"Gunfire struck the intruder in the backyard, ..."
So where on the body is the backyard, and just how did the use of a gun strike the body? ;0)
BTW: Hope the intruder didn't have a history of mental illness, or it could be trouble for the homeowner.
Sometimes kids would sneek into my backyard and go in my hot tub. God forbid i shoot a kid for that. Too many untrained yahoos out there.
It is very clear that this individual was trespassing (no, not lost folks or wanting to borrow a cup of sugar .....Was he (the homeowner) supposed to wait until the scum shot and injured his family and property before taking action to protect his family? ) Kudos again to this homeowner who put hot lead on a target and prevented this trash from committing yet another crime. Crime is rampant in this city and this hopefully will send a message to the gangster scum that "all bets are off" once you break into someone's house and property.
standard answer is always.. "I was in fear of my life".. self-defense.
Should of dragged the perp inside and then hosed down the landscaping out back before calling 911.
I'm interested in seeing what the investigation yields. Simply trespassing and burglary itself is not grounds for killing an intruder. But if the homeowner was threatened, especially with a gun or weapon of some sort, then the homeowner may have been justified. I only hope that pulling the trigger was a last resort, e.g. I hope the homeowner's felt his life was truly in jeopardy.
I hope the burglar doesn't wind up being some punk kid who just made a bad decision and wound up paying the ultimate price.
Let's hear all of the story, however if the Homeowner was under imminent threat he had every right to protect himself. No one has any right to enter a private fenced back yard without permission - but let's just not go wild and shoot first, most of us live feet from our neighbors and I don't know of any bullet proof walls in these paper and glue houses.
Lots of things to consider, but what does Chunky think? lol oh geez.
Also, It's easy to talk behind a computer screen. If this was a single mom with a baby in the home and trespasser had a record you'd all be praising her up and down.
No one knows the story, so no need to speculate. Wait till the facts come out.
@Test_Guy yeah I would leave it up to the attorney's as well. Since in reality each case is unique. Including how the homeowner responded and recounted the story for officers if he did.
NRS seems to indicate the ability to defend your property based on "against one who manifestly intends or endeavors, by violence or surprise, to commit a felony".
So if this burglar surprised the homeowner and was committing a felony by trespassing then seems reasonable but again best left to the attorney's lol.
"It sounded like Harleys, but it was gunshots," she said. "By the time I got over there to talk to a neighbor, there was crime scene tape."
I don't understand the above statement.
It seems to me the homeowner had time to get his firearm so why didn't he call 911 first and retrieve his gun from it's location locking the door behind himself while waiting for the police.
The reason I say this is because most people carry their phones on there person and there guns are put up somewhere else. Just saying
I can see that a person may not have had their phone on them but still close the door where your gun is being stowed and then if he enters then sure open fire.
casinokid,
If I might paraphrase: don't bring a phone to a gunfight.
If the homeowner heard something that gave him pause it is perfectly reasonable for him to have gotten his gun *first* before checking it out (if he doesn't carry it when at home.)
In any event, we still need more details, but I hope this was righteous.
"Despite uninformed comments from a police officer and homeowner, coupled with lazy reporting in simply accepting their comments at face value, a simple search reveals that there have been approximately 15 burglaries in a 0.5 mile radius of the incident in the past 60 days."
Feel free to use my copy, Sun.
I think the above is far more accurate than the rosy picture painted in the article. Crime in this neighborhood has exploded.
Wow, I hope none of you ever have your dog get away and run into the neighbor's yard or your kid never accidentally throws his football there. Retrieving either one is just an invitation to get killed.
"It seems to me the homeowner had time to get his firearm so why didn't he call 911 first and retrieve his gun from it's location locking the door behind himself while waiting for the police."
casinokid -- I can tell you from personal experience your concern is reasonable, but a home intruder is not a situation for reason. Everything primal rushes to the surface of youR mind, particularly the need to defend your home and family from the intruder. Nothing else matters. I didn't have a weapon at the time and thankfully the cops were fast responding. If I had been armed he would have been dead for beating in the door with a sledge hammer and coming in with obvious intent to do harm. Which he did. Going on 14 years later a loaded shotgun still sits next to my front door.
"If I might paraphrase: don't bring a phone to a gunfight."
boftx -- excellent point
"Section. 1. Inalienable rights. All men are by Nature free and equal and have certain inalienable rights among which are those of enjoying and defending life and liberty; Acquiring, Possessing and PROTECTING property and pursuing and OBTAINING SAFETY and happiness[.]" -- Nevada Constitution, 1. - Declaration of Rights
@boftx... There is nothing righteous about having to shoot and/or kill someone. Justifed or not. Ever.
It may have been necessary, but surely it can never be righteous.
BTW .. how is it that so many posters here can hide their real names behind a screen name? I mean the so-called registered users. I see no setting what-so-ever to hide a real identity and show only a screen name.
Test_Guy,
Sorry for the slang term "righteous." I'll rephrase and say I hope the homeowner's actions were within the law.
Get something straight people - You cannot! shoot someone b/c they are trespassing on your property alone. Don't fight this - this is the law.
Now, if you try to say "what if he was in my House - Good Lord you liberals would allow invaders in my home!"
Typical Right-wing idea. Not well thought out. What do you think a reasonable person would say if you told them an intruder was INSIDE your home? Any reasonable person would easily deduce that such a circumstance would undoubtedly create fear of imminent harm/danger to yourself and your family - deadly force would very likely be justified.
Remember - you can't go around shooting people (don't think this is a good idea either - you'll get shot one day or another if you follow that foolish idea) for any made up reason.
If you shoot someone without proper self-defense - then you become nothing more than the typical criminal/law breaking person on which you premise your gun advocacy.
Here, the circumstances seem very sketchy. Without more to the story - the shooting does not appear justified.
In fact - you have people saying - this is actually a quiet neighborhood - so this person's subjective belief was probably unreasonable - ceteris paribus.
Nice job homeowner. Time for metro to be stand up guys and not try to pursue charges against the homeowner. More of these punks need a real deterrent to trying to enter someone elses home. Like Hunter S Thompson once said "you bought the ticket, now take the ride."
If someone is in the process of breaking into your home you don't have a lot of time. We have had a number of home invasions. The guy could have had a partner waiting. Who knows at this point. From the account the homeowner says the guy was breaking in. You have to take that for what it is. The homeowner felt threatened. You have to figure in what the age and physical status of the intruder and homeowner are.
Also as an adult how many times do you wander into someone elses backyard unbidden? Zero is the answer for squares. Squares don't go into peoples backyards. I seriously doubt that the homeowner will be charged unless something counter indicates the story.
A few things:
Several posters indicated that you can not legally use force on someone who is simply trespassing on your property. They are correct.
The term righteous was bandied about and someone ranted about deadly force not being righteous ever. I suppose that's emotionally correct. the terms usually used are justifiable homicide and reasonable force.
Others have had trouble locating the correct statute that was put on the books in the 1989 Nevada legislative session (see below). It was referred to in the media at the time as the 'Make My Day Law' in reference to the Dirty Harry line from the movie 'Sudden Impact'.
Essentially, NRS 41.095 absolves a homeowner of civil liability for shooting someone who is invading their home.
For those people that think that you can't shoot someone until they make it INTO your home, you are mistaken. Hypothetically, someone is kicking in yourd door or breaking your window and still fidgeting with the latch or attempting entry (as opposed to simply looking through the window) the crime has now escalated to home invasion (the essential issue in NRS is damage to the structure, what is referred to in other states as B&E or breaking and entering) Once any piece of their body passes that threshold, it is a done deal, never mind the old wives tale about dragging the body back into the house after you shoot them. That's why this homeowner will not and has not been booked. He answered questions, didn't lawyer up and the DA will take a look at it and move on.
NRS 41.095 Presumption that person using deadly force against intruder in person's residence has reasonable fear of death or bodily injury; "residence" defined.
1. For the purposes of NRS 41.085 and 41.130, any person who uses, while lawfully in his or her residence or in transient lodging, force which is intended or likely to cause death or bodily injury is presumed to have had a reasonable fear of imminent death or bodily injury to himself or herself or another person lawfully in the residence or transient lodging if the force is used against a person who is committing burglary or invasion of the home and the person using the force knew or had reason to believe that burglary or invasion of the home was being committed. An action to recover damages for personal injuries to or the wrongful death of the person who committed burglary or invasion of the home may not be maintained against the person who used such force unless the presumption is overcome by clear and convincing evidence to the contrary.
2. As used in this section, "residence" means any house, room, apartment, tenement or other building, vehicle, vehicle trailer, semitrailer, house trailer or boat designed or intended for occupancy as a residence.
Reading the article, the homeowner said he "believed" the intruder was trying to break into his home thru the backyard.
Notice he didn't say the intruder "was" breaking in??
Believed implies to me that it's possible this intruder was quite possibly not in the act of breaking in but rather the homeowner possibly "assumed" this or "believed" this.
I'll be interested to see how this plays out. If the "intruder" was in the backyard, let's say wandering near the pool...can you shoot him?
@boftx, no problem. And I really hope the homeowner was within the law too.
Tom..read the NRS just above your post for clarification.
I'm getting suspicious here. The article makes no mention of the intruder actually breaking in or trying to break in....broken screen, jiggling door knob, etc.
Just that the homeowner "believed" this...sounds ambiguous.
I tell you what Metro's Mr. Bill Cassell, I've lived in this neighborhood for over 9 years and never seen a squad car patrolling my neighborhood. He says "Officers who patrol the neighborhood said there have not been noticeable crime increases in the area, he said".
I think most of the residents of this city could say the same thing about their neighborhoods also. The only way Metro steps out of hiding is when someone calls with an emergency. Then every car comes out of hiding and fills the streets with three to eight squad cars. Then when the action is over they all disappear.
What a waste of tax dollars!!
Comment removed by moderator. - -
Gee, I wonder why it's wrong to illegal enter private property? Where do these people who have no respect for privacy come from? I mean really, come on folks, if you think it's o.k. to jump over a private wall, or enter any private residene without permission - well, take your chances!
I feel, first and foremost, for the majority of citizens that can not even fully relax peacefully in their homes because of the out-of-control gangs in Las Vegas - and the citizenry has every right to use appropriate force to protect themselves!
When I retired from the military I really dreamed of never owning a gun again - but, sadly, common sense tells me to keep my gun loaded and nearby at all times in Las Vegas! While we really don't have a true peace here, we can, at least, have some peace of mind being well trained and armed as Americans!
BTW: In my house I reach for my gun first, make sure a round is chambered and it's ready to fire in self-defense THEN I reach for the telephone second - that's just common sense folks!
"There is nothing righteous about having to shoot and/or kill someone. Justifed or not. Ever."
Test_guy -- your experience is too limited to be credible with that statement. Most of us never experience real violence, only the vicarious kind. When the real thing confronts you it changes everything.
"I'll rephrase and say I hope the homeowner's actions were within the law."
boftx -- you should not back off. Self-defense is a near-absolute natural right.
"If you shoot someone without proper self-defense - then you become nothing more than the typical criminal/law breaking person on which you premise your gun advocacy."
unlv702 -- see the above.
"Rightful liberty is unobstructed action according to our will within limits drawn around us by the equal rights of others. I do not add 'within the limits of the law' because law is often but the tyrant's will, and always so when it violates the rights of the individual." -- Thomas Jefferson, letter to Isaac H Tiffany (1819)
I'm sure the detectives will figure out if there was a sufficient threat level to warrant killing someone, but I'm not sure I would have been in such a hurry to get outside and confront an unknown number of people with unknown weaponry. Better to insure doors are locked and 911 called with my weapon drawn and held securely in my firing hand. Always best to determine their intentions first. Is is someone fetching a childs ball or is it an intruder? I don't believe in shoot first and ask questions later.
With the information available at this time...
This guy better have a VERY good lawyer.
Even Grannie would take a moment to ascertain that the individual was indeed a bad guy before plugging him full of buckshot.
This is similar (yet different) to another guy who needs a VERY good lawyer right about now; the 'vigilante guy' in Florida....
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/03/1...
I don't believe in shoot first and ask questions later EITHER! Of course, one must only fire in self-defense as an absolute last resort!
I had 3 young men come to my home, mistakenly thinking it was someone else's - and they were beating on the door and demanding entry! I was immediately alarmed that anyone would be banging so innappropriately - and my first thought was "There must be a FIRE?"
Then, when I realized it was just a group of young idiots, their stupidity alone scared me nearly to death! Life is hard enough, it's harder if you're stupid - and stupid can get an idiot killed, sadly!
Rightfully, I took the opportunity to explain to these idiots just how close they came to stupidly meeting their maker - a firm teaching moment! Only to be stunned to learn they were born and raised in Nevada, and were all three young Marines home on leave! INCREDIBLY STUPID!
Sorry, but someone in your back yard does not constitute an imminent threat of death or serious bodily harm and I'm not a law and order nut.
I simply realize the problems with giving the shooter a pass on this one or somehow identifying a serious threat sets a very dangerous precedent.
Next thing you know we'll be shooting each other because you parked in front of my house.
If a stranger enters your back yard while you are in the back yard and threatens your life-Shoot!
If a stranger enters your house and threatens your life-Shoot!
If you are in your house and you see a stranger in your back yard-STOP! DON'T SHOOT. Call 911!
We are not a third world country! It's not the Wild West. Think first, not shoot first!
The homeowner was not clear whether this person was actually breaking into the house. All he said was "I believed".....
What does that mean? That you are guessing his actions before they occur?
I'm interested to know more facts. Was he actually breaking in? Where was he shot? If this guy was wandering around the backyard and took a bullet to the back...this could be a problem for Mr. citizen.
Hey KillerB ... I see, as always it is with your ilk, you assume first, then try to justify yourself later by quoting people who would be simply appalled to read your drivel ...
You said "your experience is too limited to be credible with that statement. Most of us never experience real violence, only the vicarious kind. When the real thing confronts you it changes everything."
Listen up a moment fella.... I have been in the unfortunate position to having to remove an 12" chef knife from the hands of an insane man who, at the time, was trying to take my future wife away at knife-point. The only thing that saved me (and her) was the fact that I'm an instructor in Tae Kwon Do. Still, I ended up within literally an inch of my life, because that guy still got in some good stabs (it's not like the movies ya know), one lunge which missed my jugular by less than an inch.. and I have the scar on my head to prove it. Actually, i have five on my head, two on my arm, one on each leg...
And, after I rendered that guy unconscious, I removed the knife from his possession. Let me tell you, I wanted nothing more than to bury that knife in that guy's stomach, but, I can think clearly in the heat of battle and still know what is right and what is wrong... it is never righteous to take a life, sometimes as necessary as it might be.
You sir, are wrong in all of your assumptions about me. On that day violence did change me.
So.. and I say this with all sincerity kindly STUFF your opinions about me where the sun don't shine until you have facts, ok?
Let me clarify my problem with what Mr. KillerB had to say :
First, Mr. KillerB: rather than defend your position with civil and intelligent statements, you chose to attack me personally and to plainly state that my personal background was a bit too "namby-pamby" for you. How could you know anything of my background concerning the subject matter at hand? You don't and you can't. And that is the ignorance you would have folks believe is genius; that and lots of quotes from cross-dressing, slave-owning men who pooped in holes.
Second, Mr. KillerB: I did not attack Mr. Boftx and Mr. Boftx (nor UNLV702) was not in need of your divine wisdom. I didn't see eye-to-eye with Mr. Boftx's choice of words. I don't always agree with Mr. Boftx, but I have about a million times more respect for him and his responses to me than I can ever have for you.
Third, Mr. KillerB: I don't see this forum as a place to attack people with whom you don't agree with. Expressing a difference of opinion is welcome. Presenting facts is welcome. But lay off the personal attacks on me and others and don't make up facts about my personal life and personal background.
I'd wait up for the apology, but I know you'll never find a hole-pooper quote that can convey one.
I'm sorry, but as a woman, if there was an intruder in my backyard and I was by myself, yes, I would call the police first. But I would also have my gun in hand to protect myself. There is a reason why we have our gate locked and there is no other way onto the property in the back. I see a person in my backyard, they are an intruder, nothing more...nothing less..
My XL dog would be on him as he landed in my yard. Maybe even before his foot touched down. Then I would save on dog food that day...except for the treat afterward.
The 'Stand Your Ground' law in Florida becomes "Stop or I'll reload" in practice. I wonder if this applies to the front yards or parking strips as well?
'Stand Your Ground' is also the Title of a book by Dean Hardy (see Amazon) as an 'Introductory Text for Apologetics (Christian) Students'. The book tells how to confront 'intellectual attacks on Christian college students face on university campuses'. Poor babies!! Remember the Inquisitions?
'Stand Your Ground' has mutated from religious connotation to laws supported by the NRA to provide a free shot to those who are too busy multitasking with their broker or banker to say 'stop or I'll shoot'. That is a bygone phrase that religious organizations has been successfully trying to eliminate.
<< The homeowner told detectives he fired shots at the male, who he believed was trying to break into his home through the backyard>>
Other than this sentence, not much else is said on HOW the homeowner figured out this man was breaking into his home. Was he trying to get in at the patio door? The garage door? A window? For the homeowner's sake, this man he shot better had been actually trying to break in and not checking the gas meter or electric meter.
<<Being an open carry kind of guy (and having a CCW also), I seem to recall our hand-gun instructor pointing out this law... and it would seem that you can't just shoot someone in your yard... that's just trespassing -not an offense to be shot over. Someone has to actually be trying to break your door down or trying to hurt you at the very moment you pull the trigger>>
THis is how it is in most States (except maybe Texas!!) If the alleged perpetrator puts even a hand inside your house, you have the right to shoot them or at least at them.
There is more to this story but we'll never hear anything else.
<<Reading the article, the homeowner said he "believed" the intruder was trying to break into his home thru the backyard.
Notice he didn't say the intruder "was" breaking in??>>
That sums it up. He "believed" - was the trespasser actually messing with the patio door? A window? The owner says nothing like that because if he was smart, he would have told the cops the guy was actually trying to break in, not that just he "believed" he was going to break in. Big difference. Not to mention, if you were going to break in to someone's home - you going to scale those brick walls? Burglars want simplicity - hit and run, not try to attempt to deal with those brick walls if you are in a hurry.
As a final note: this is why police are not crazy about people who have weapons. They are not against it, but become educated before you pull out that gun. Police are taught that you do not draw your weapon unless you intend to use it. Know the law, know your rights. Call 911 first. In areas where there are no brick walls and yards are open, God forbid the 15 year old kid living down the block is trying to sneak home at 10:00 and cuts thru your yard. You see someone, are you going to grab your gun and shoot him? Without provocation? No threat? Owning weapons is a huge responsibility. I believe most people are smart gun owners like many here, but others are not.
Illinois is going for the "conceal carry" law. I remember hearing some woman in Walmart bragging very loudly on how she can't wait to carry her gun now to the store (our area is low crime). And believe me, she looked like someone who shouldn't be near a gun!! When this law goes into effect (if it hasn't already), I will now think twice before turning into someone's driveway to turn around because I am lost.
By escalateMarch 20, 201211:38 a.m.
"I am going to side with the homeowner on this one. If someone is on your property without your consent you have every right to take their life."
I have never granted permission to a Jehovah's Witness to be on my property, guess they better get some bulletproof vests, huh?
The article has very vague facts that can be loosely interpreted in different ways, so it is difficult to judge the incident. If I recall correctly, there was NO mention of the intruder being armed.
We have no clue if there was any kind of dialog between the homeowner and the intruder. Certainly, with any believed or perceived danger, the warning, "Stop, or I'll shoot," gives the intruder the opportunity to retreat without any further aggressive moves and flee the scene. We don't know if the subject homeowner did in fact dial 911 while in the process of confronting the intruder. There are too many questions here.
We all have a stand about what we would do in such a scenerio. The law attempts to curtail innocent citizens from taking the law into their own hands, but at times, while in crisis, the lines get pretty blurred, and people do what they feel/judge at the time is the best response.
That is where INTENT comes into play, and we have the laws, and court system to determine was the intention was leading into the event(s).
One thing is clear here: the intruder made a very poor choice that cost him his life.
Blessings and Peace,
Star
The 9:30 am timing is a little odd as well. How many people go breaking in houses through the back yard in broad daylight at a time when a lot of people are up and moving around and it is bright as day outside. It isn't like the homeowner couldn't have seen him because it was dark and therefore maybe less inclined to know what the guy was actually doing. But read the article people, it says he heard a noise, saw a guy in his backyard and shot him at about 9 am. A noise in broad daylight or even nighttime might be a reason to load up and take a look, especially for the extremely paranoid. But the simple sight of seeing someone in your backyard and believing they are there to rob your house, then shooting them dead and only then calling 911 seems to be a little bit of a rush to judgment. Again though, there are too many facts left out of the article to draw any real conclusion on if the shooter had a real reason to feel threatened.
One thing I learned a long time ago that this shooter apparently didn't. If you end up in a situation like this and rightfully or wrongfully pull the trigger and kill someone, the ONLY words that should come out of your mouth to the police are "I was in fear for my life, can I please call my attorney."
An armed society is a polite society.
I've seen toooo much media that shows DEAD victims because INTRUDERS THOUGHT NO ONE WAS HOME. I've heard of endless home invasions where one guy hits the front and another the back door. Of course the homeowner was terrified. Might be a macho guy unable to admit the extent of his terror.
Respect your right to own and carry firearms. I feel much safer knowing I've got one handy at all times. I took my training at American Shooters and was taught well. I practice there too. I'm a 46 yr old mom & grandma, and I know how to protect myself. All women should do the same.
A) Guy could have been drunk or braindead and thinking it was his home and he forgot the key?
B) Guy could have been a window cleaner removing the screens on the window (This gets my attention all the time when neighbors house is getting cleaned)
C)Could be x-boyfriend/girlfriend trying to get in to get their stuff.
D) Drug deal
In other words we dont know. It says the intruder was unarmed, so in other words this rambo redneck probably came out, said "you messed with the wrong house punk" and capped his ass while the guy was either shocked or running. Don't forget this "thief" was just as scared as the homeowner when he realized someone was home.
The guy that shot him is going to jail for long time.
For "JustME" You have to make the judgement that if someone is in your backyard uninvited that they are not there to do you good.
mtngirl65 trains sporadically to use her weapon. How much ongoing training do police typically get to handle tragic situations and still get it wrong?
I don't understand why people think that just because someone is in your back yard, that person is obviously a thief. Were none of you kids who accidentally whacked a ball over your fence?
This is sad either way. I want to know if the gunman at least asked what was going on (having a gun pointed at someone is enough of a hint that one should leave) before firing, or if he just saw someone and started firing.
Just because you have a weapon in your hand doesn't mean you should use it.
<<The guy that shot him is going to jail for long time.>>
Doubtful. I'm still not sure of the threat and whether this homeowner did the right thing, but he's not going to jail. Still, the story lacks clarity. Was this man just on the premises or was he actually breaking in? All the article stated was that the owner believed he was trying to break in. That's much different than he was actually breaking in. I don't think you have the right to shoot someone dead if they are wandering around your backyard. We need to know more details.
XKeeper, If I shot everyone that wandered in my back yard, we'd have a bunch of dead golfers. Yelling out the window to tell them to get the hell out of the yard, it's private property, while they are looking for their golf ball usually works.
Again, how can you assume a guy at 9 am in the yard is there to rob you? No matter what the situation, since the dead guy didn't break in or apparently even attempt to break in the house, the shooter should be charged. We have a justice system to decide whether he was justified or not, not a police department. I wonder how many friends the shooter has in local politics or on metro because most people would have been arrested first and proven not guilty later.
The crime rate hasn't risen in that area and because of this homeowner it won't go up. Other criminals now know that this neighborhood is armed.
And why no names from Metro? not the victim or the shooter? something's not quite right here.
Under the "Stand your ground" law, somebody could stalk somebody they don't like. Wait till there are alone, shoot and kill them. Then call 911 and tell the cops you had to shoot and kill an attacker. Since there are no witnesses and "dead men tell no tales", the police have no choice but let you get away with murder. Nice law.
Demarcus Carter, 19. Had a history of breaking into homes. So I guess it wasn't a guy just trying to get his dog.
@Justme
1) We don't live on a golf course, we have 6 ft high concrete block walls around our property with padlocked gates. Welcome to Vegas, you may have seen this layout only about everywhere in the Valley.
2) In the neighborhood, 3 homes in a row all burglarized through the back door in the past several months
3) All our homes were hit during daylight hours
How can we assume he was there to commit a burglary? Keep opining.
Brian Dees, Perhaps you could point to any specific neighborhood in Las Vegas where there are no guns.
There is an episode of CRIMINAL MINDS where a homeowner kills a cop who was with an Agent chasing a Perp through the backyard.
IT amazes me to see that there are a lot of posts saying it was okay to KILL the intruder. Anyone who has gone through firearms training (especially a CCW class) knows that the INTENT SHOULD NEVER BE TO KILL..BUT TO STOP the action that is happening to threaten your safety and well being. And to address the shot once and see what happens..do some research. Some bad guys have been shot several times and continued the attack. That is why many course teach to deliver a controlled pair to the thoracic cavity. You don't shoot in the head...unless that is a last resort. You don't fire warning shots..who knows where they will end up. I highly recommend training if you own a gun. Front Sight has an excellent course. (and no...I do not work there) I have taken their course and I found it to be very professional.I walked away with a new found respect and higher level of education.
By the way...SLICK..stand your ground and stalking are two different things.
The law states you do not have to retreat. It does not state that you can stalk and kill.
Oh...this is for test guy...glad you are alive.