Accused Burglar Shot by Homeowner

[ileus]

http://wreg.com/2013/06/02/accused-attempted-burglar-shot-while-breaking-in-home/

Deputies say 20-year-old Rashawn Calvin tried to break into a house Saturday night on Jonesy in Southeast Shelby County.
Once inside, the homeowner shot him several times, including once in the head.
The homeowner, who was inside with his son, will not face any charges.
“The homeowner does not face any charges because he was protecting himself, his family and his home,” said Washington

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

A minimum living wage may have prevented this. At least the home owner had a life saving device when he needed it most...

[AnotherMcIntosh]

1. Economic reform would reduce home invasions and burglaries, and reduce some shootings.

[bluedigger]

2. "Deputies say Calvin was not armed when he entered the house"

I think you meant to say a "material possessions saving/life taking device". The homeowner made a judgement call based on no attempt at bodily harm.

[hack89]

3. If you break into my house in the middle of the night, we will not be having a long conversation

I am going to assumed you are armed unless I can instantly see you are unarmed. I will not risk giving you the first shot.

[bluedigger]

4. And you would be within your legal rights.

As an argument for gun ownership, however, this news story is inadequate. A five iron may have done the job just as well. The shooter will have to live with his decision, in any case. For all we know, the burglar could have raised his arms and surrendered. Everything is based on the homeowner's say so. The cops didn't even charge the person waiting in the car as an accomplice.

[RGR375]

15. You keep your 5 iron

I will keep my AR.

[Travis_0004]

20. If the burgler was putting his arms in the air, he probably wouldn't have been shot.

The fact is only 2 people know what really happened, and one of them won't be talking.

If the robber would have stayed home that night, he probably would not have been shot, that I do know.

[ileus]

7. even if you can see they're unarmed how long/close

do you allow someone that just broke into your home to get before assuming bad intentions?

Someone's that close you may never have a second chance to second guess.

[hack89]

8. I will give them one chance to get on the ground. nt

[Jenoch]

5. The problem with stories like this is they

provide such little detail, all kinds of assu
Ptions are made. You seem to be assuming the perp had his hands up and was pleading for his life. Others might assume he rushed to tackle the homeowner and that's why he got shot. Based on the linked article, the only thing we know for sure is that the 20 year old was in somebody else's house.

[bluedigger]

6. I'm not assuming anything.

Just pointing out other possibilities. As a piece of evidence justifying the use of guns in home defense it is very poor. You are completely right in everything else you said. We just don't know what went down, or whether the use of deadly force was appropriate. Only that it was legal.

[Jenoch]

9. "The homeowner made a judgement call based on no attempt at bodily harm."

Where did you get this piece of information?

[bluedigger]

23. You're right, that was an assumption on my part.

I should have said the story as reported gave no evidence of an attempted physical attack.

[Jenoch]

27. That's the reason I posted this:

"The problem with stories like this is they
provide such little detail, all kinds of assumptions are made." 

[RGR375]

13. Not collecting for the red cross

Anybody that breaks into my house is a dead man. If i can roll over and place my hand on my girlfriend then walk past my sons room and he is there, anybody to my front is getting two to the chest and one to the head. You want my car? fine, that is what insurance is for. The stuff i have in my garage? take it. Step into my actual house? I will kill you. Why my loved one can not be replaced and you do not get the benefit of the doubt.

[ileus]

14. I have a camera in the garage....

someone in the garage is best suited staying on that side of the door.


The door to the garage is the last door I lock at night after putting the kids down to bed.

[RGR375]

17. As long as they stay there

I would never harm anybody over my property. That is why i pay state farm a kings ransom every month. Things can be replaced people can not.

[RGR375]

12. should not have been there

depending on the state all you have to do is break in and the homeowner is cleared to shoot.

[Jenoch]

16. I think most states have self-defense laws like that.

If I were in a situation where I found someone in my home the first thing I would do is ask them why they are there (which may be a mistake) and then tell them to get on the floor with their hands on their head. I would do everything I could do to not shoot them.

Of course that might be becausein I live in a neighborhood where these kinds of things have never happened. If I lived in an area with a lot of burglaries or break-ins I might not be so generous.

[RGR375]

18. I understand your view

I do i think your are wrong or naive. But i would cation you to remember that somebody that would enter your house usually does not do it alone,so watch your six. I will not take the chance.

[AnotherMcIntosh]

51. His buddy was waiting outside in a car.

[premium]

10. Just breaking into an occupied home

is evidence of an attempt at bodily harm and the home owner had every legal and moral right to shoot him.

[ExCop-LawStudent]

37. I'm not taking a chance

I've put too many in prison to rely on their "good faith" - if they come into my house, I'll defend my family. I'm not inclined to wait and find out what they had in mind, and I'm surely not going to give them the first shot.

[premium]

40. Retired Federal Law Enforcement Officer here,

and I agree with you, someone comes into my home without my permission, I'm not going to wait and see if they're armed, I will shoot to to stop them, if they die in the process, too fucking bad, that's on them.

[Lizzie Poppet]

11. In my case, that would make little difference.

Any 20-year-old male able-bodied enough to be attempting a break-in would be able to rather easily kill me with his bare hands (I'm 5'3", 109lbs...). Without any other weapon, he'd be as "armed" as he needed to be to inflict serious harm or death on me. If someone like that, in that situation, made any sort of aggressive move, I'd shoot. If he didn't, he'd have the opportunity to surrender (or turn tail and sky his ass out of there). I have no desire to shoot anyone. But I will NOT take chances with my life in such a situation by assuming he doesn't intend physical violence.

[RGR375]

19. Just remember

God created man and Samuel Colt made them all equal. A truer statement has never been made.

[DWC]

54. Amen !!! n/t

[gejohnston]

22. not armed is a misnomer

Just because he did not have an artifact like a gun, tire chain, or knife does not mean he is not capable of inflicting bodily harm or death. Over three times as many people are murdered with bare hands and feet than with "assault weapons." Of course there is disparity of force issue.

[rdharma]

21. Note the date of the article and check out the comments to the wreg.com article!

Evidently the OP agrees with commenter "Jack Frost"!

Read "Jack Frost's" comment, folks! It gives you an idea of the type of person who favors this type of vigilante action!

[friendly_iconoclast]

25. ...said by the person with a vigilante character for an avatar.

Cognitive dissonance- It's what's for dinner!

[rdharma]

26. Wrong.

Did you read "Jack Frost's" comment! That's the type of folks who agree with this vigilante crap!

[friendly_iconoclast]

28. Ah, so it's the Guy who tried to blow up Parliament and failed...

...not the fictional dude (V) that wore a mask of his face? IOW, the fellow that took that whole
'change of government' thing into his own hands.

Protip: "Civil disobedience" does not entail the use of a large quantity of explosives...

[rdharma]

29. That's a DU Avitar. Are you complaining about DU?!!!!

[friendly_iconoclast]

31. No, just your lack of historical knowledge. If you want to have a terrorist for an avatar...

...and the management are amenable, I won't complain.

[friendly_iconoclast]

30. Take it up with "Jack Frost", then-and take the associational fallacy along with you.

Even in Massachusetts, the homeowner wouldn't have been charged with anything.

Something amiss at Chez bongbong? You're losing your touch...

[rdharma]

34. No fallacy association.

And now you're seeing things!

[oneshooter]

32. In what way do you conceder this a"vigilante action".

[CokeMachine]

33. That's funny from you -- telling others to look

at something when you fail to proivide any link to premiums challenge. When will you do it or show some integrity and admit you were wrong??

[premium]

41. Shooting a home invader is vigilante action now?

You couldn't be further from the truth, as usual.
You never did post those links did you, well, I guess the verdict is in, and it's not pretty.

[rdharma]

35. Did you guy's love the Charles Bronson "Death Wish" series?

I bet you did!

[CokeMachine]

36. I didn't.

You seem strangly familiar with it -- do tell. Got those links yet?? Until then you have absolutely no credibility. All you have to do is admit to your failure at flaming another poster -- You Can Do It.

[Common Sense Party]

38. Where is this other flaming incident?

Can you give a link? Thanks.

[CokeMachine]

39. Here's where it bagan.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1172125963#post16

[premium]

43. He's not going to come up with any links,

because they don't exist.
Hell, I was prepared to send him certified check in his name for $5000.00 if he produced just one (1) link.
I've proven my point and outed him for what he is, and every member can see him for what he is.
My work here is done.

[CokeMachine]

44. Yep -- I'll quit bringing it up with him

unless he gets all self rightous and accuses others of lying.

Take Care,

[premium]

45. Thanks for sticking up for me,

greatly appreciated.
You have a good night, still triple digits here.

[rdharma]

46. Group hugs!

[premium]

42. Never saw them, didn't like Charles Bronson as an actor. nt.

[rdharma]

47. You didn't like "Death Hunt"?

With Lee Marvin? Lots of guns......

#at=37

[premium]

48. Like I said, I didn't like him as an actor,

so it stands to reason that I didn't watch his movies. I'm more of a Denzel Washington movie type of guy, Training Day, Deja Vu, The Hurricane, Remember the Titans, Antwone Fisher, I thought his best role was as Frank Lucas in American Gangster.
I also like Val Kilmer, he did some great movies, he starred in Deja Vu with Denzel Washington.

You must be under the false impression that just because we own firearms, we only watch movies involving guns.
Ridiculous.

[oneshooter]

49. Val Kilmer was IMHO at his best

as Doc Holiday, in "Tombstone".

[premium]

50. YES!

My favorite scene is when he squares off against Johnny Ringo, when he walks up to Ringo and says "Why, Johnny Ringo, you look like somebody just walked over your grave." That will always be a classic phrase.

[ExCop-LawStudent]

52. Burt Lancaster

in Valdez is Coming.

"Or paid the hundred dollars."

[oneshooter]

53. "My hypocrisy only goes so far" as he hands back the Marshall's badge.

Unlike some here.

[NaturalHigh]

56. Definitely his best work.

[GreenStormCloud]

55. Something I noticed about the advertising for the first DW movie.

At the time, 1974, in Texas it was advertised as just another action movie. I then visited relatives in Michigan where the advertising line was, "Tonight Tom Kersey will kill three muggers. One for his wife, one for him, and one for you." From that I concluded that there must have been a much higher crime rate up North.

I did enjoy DW & DW2, but the rest of the series sucked, especially DW3.

The movie was rather different from the book.