Good Guys - 2, Criminals - 0

[propertymanager]

For the second time in less than a week, a criminal in Columbus has been shot by a law abiding citizen with a concealed carry license.  The first case was a 71 year old woman that killed a robber with just one shot.  The second case occurred today at Wendy's:

http://www2.nbc4i.com/cmh/news/crime/article/victim_shoots_suspect_after_robbery_outside_wendys/25536/

Honest people in this country are no longer willing to be victimized by criminals!

[Bluemoon06]

That is a great story.  I love the part about the scumbag “friend” that tried to hide the thug’s clothes in his house.  These guys prey on everybody. 

One thing that they teach you in concealed carry class is hat no matter if you are right or wrong once you shoot someone expect to spend $100,000 (legal fees, judgments, etc).  These scumbags will sue you for shooting them while they were trying to rob you.

[christopher w]

That is like when a burglar was injured during a burglary and sued the homeowner and won. Absolutely ludicrous.

[Bluemoon06]

I agree.  The instructors just want you to think before you shoot.  This one should be ok because the criminal produced a gun first.  In Texas the state legislature made a change to the law.  Originally you had a duty to retreat.  This meant that if you had not retreated to your “castle” (house, car, business, etc.) and he pursued you there you could not shoot them.  The second one was on proportional force.  Originally you had to use proportion force.  That was if he had fists you could not use more that fists, if he had a knife you could go no more than a knife.  Now all he has to do is have the advantage of you.  For example a small woman versus an unarmed large man could go straight to the gun.  Since I am not a small man (6’2” 200 pounds) If a person came at me with any weapon I can go to my gun.  I don’t have to duke it out unless the person is unarmed.

But you still never know what a jury is going to do.

[propertymanager]

This won't get past the grand jury here in Ohio.  There would be an absolute outcry if an honest citizen was indicted for killing some scumbag who was trying to rob them.  I understand that isn't true in the land of socialism, but it is in Ohio.

[d_sbrown]

I was taught if you shot someone, when you are being questioned you use these six words" I was afraid for my life".  over and over.  Make sure that it is in the police report everywhere.

[greenlime]

One thing that they teach you in concealed carry class is hat no matter if you are right or wrong once you shoot someone expect to spend $100,000 (legal fees, judgments, etc).  These scumbags will sue you for shooting them while they were trying to rob you.

Is this for real? So if you catch a burglar inside your house, it's illegal to shoot at them? I read something about this, about a thief who got injured while escaping through a window, but it was a long time ago. I don't know if the thief won his case against the homeowner or not.

[Bluemoon06]

If you legally shoot somone, they will almost certainly sue you.  You will have to pay a lawyer to defend you.  If you kill him his family will sue you.  It will cost you.

His lawyer will will be free and be paid out of any winnings.  Yo9 uwill have to pay for your lawyer.

[propertymanager]

More and more states are passing laws that give law abiding citizens immunity from civil suits when shooting someone in the commission of a crime.  That is especially true when the criminal is breaking into your home or attacking you in your car.  These laws are sometimes called castle laws, depending on the specifics of the law.

[John_in_NC]

yes, the castle laws here have just changed. We no longer have to retreat to the rearward most room of your home to shoot the deadbeats. Heck, if there is a "preconceived threat" you can shoot them through the door.

[propertymanager]

The legislature in Ohio is finally looking at allowing concealed carry in restaurants that serve alcohol.  It's amazing that we can have a constitutional right that ends at the door to Applebees!  We're a little behind here in Ohio, but we're getting there.

[justin0419]

In MS, you can't carry into a place whose primary business is serving alcohol.  for somewhere like Applebee's, you can go into the restaurant but not in the bar area.  Also can't carry into schools, churches, gov't buildings/meetings, etc.

[Hikuntry]

Haven't seen this on the news.  Guess they would want to down play it.
We will be hearing more of these stories in the future.  Folks are tired
of "low lifes" stealing, mugging and injuring them.  Folks are fed up with
a government, that is not willing to protect our borders, our citizen's
Constitution, Bill of Rights and way of life.  Honest hard working folks
are standing up, speaking out and demanding inforcement of our laws
or they will inforce the law, by protecting themselves, their property and
their families. 

If you haven't been to a gun show lately, it's worth your time to go and
see what's taking place.  Folks are arming themselves in record numbers.

The "Tea Parties" are another example of folks taking a stand, speaking out
and reminding our elected, we put them in office and we can take them out.  I was
stunned at the turnout, in Washington on 9/12/09  The media can down play
it, by report false attendence of 50000 to 70000 attendence.  I was there and
there was a million plus.  As per one on the local police officers.

[Bluemoon06]

In Texas the way you determine if a place (Like Chili’s or Applebees) is a bar is there is a sign at the door.  Most people have no idea what it is it has a watermark in huge letters 51%. What the sign says is that more than 51% of the revenue from this establishment is derive from alcohol sales.  If it has that sign you treat it as a bar.  If not it is a restaurant. 

Who needs a gun when you have a knife. 

http://www.click2houston.com/news/21478893/detail.html

[tgauchsin]

My favorite two statues in the California Penal Code are 198 & 198.5:

IANAL, but in laymen's terms:

Section 198 - In order for a civilian to use deadly force they must reasonably be in fear for their life.  Reasonably is defined as the same fear a reasonable person would feel in the same circumstances. 

Section 198.5 - Any reasonble person would be in fear of their life if someone breakes into their house.

Now if the law makers would change the CCW from "may issue" to "shall issue" I'd be really happy.

=================

198.  A bare fear of the commission of any of the offenses mentioned in subdivisions 2 and 3 of Section 197, to prevent which homicide may be lawfully committed, is not sufficient to justify it. But the circumstances must be sufficient to excite the fears of a reasonable person, and the party killing must have acted under the influence of such fears alone.

198.5.  Any person using force intended or likely to cause death or great bodily injury within his or her residence shall be presumed to have held a reasonable fear of imminent peril of death or great bodily injury to self, family, or a member of the household when that force is used against another person, not a member of the family or household, who unlawfully and forcibly enters or has unlawfully and forcibly entered the residence and the person using the force knew or had reason to believe that an unlawful and forcible entry occurred.   As used in this section, great bodily injury means a significant or substantial physical injury.