Bear Hunter won't be charged with killing property owner

[RamboLiberal]

I posted this story earlier before there was a clearer explanation of what happened. Posting this for the follow-up. Sounds like justifiable self-defense. BTW, Shaffer earlier had his CCW revoked by county sheriff (later restored by court) over a road rage incident with a trucker where Shaffer pulled a gun.

State police say they won't charge a bear hunter who shot and killed a property owner who first shot him during an argument about trespassing in rural northern Pennsylvania.

State police in Punxsutawney say the Nov. 24 shooting of 63-year-old Frank Shaffer, of Red Lion, was justified.

Police said today that Mr. Shaffer confronted five hunters on property he owns in Summerville and ordered them off his land.

They left, but a short time later, he confronted three of them again in another area and shot 23-year-old Paul Plyler, of Summerville, in the hand.

Mr. Shaffer shot three more times, striking Mr. Plyler in the back. Mr. Plyler then fired back, hitting Mr. Shaffer once.


Read more: http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/09344/1020000-455.stm#ixzz0ZJwBQ1TL

[Deep13]

1. Jesus Christ! We do not, NOT, have the right to shoot trespassers.

Lethal force is justified if there is a reasonable fear of immediate death or severe bodily injury. One cannot pull the trigger just because a trespasser is walking on his land.

[OttavaKarhu]

7. So we have the right to shoot people whose land we're trespassing on?

After they ask us to leave?

Wow. Good luck enforcing the wildlife protection laws in YOUR community.

You obviously don't have to deal with poachers where you live.

[Deep13]

9. What are you talking about?

Are you seriously suggesting you have a right to shoot poachers? Well, let's lay that one to rest right now. You do not. If you shoot someone in THIS jurisdiction without being in reasonable fear of lethal force, I will prosecute the shit out of you.

In this case the land owner shot a hunter who may or may not have been a trespasser. Regardless, fearing for his life --because a guy was shooting at hit and actually hit him--he resorted to shooting back resulting in a justifiable homicide. Whatever misdemeanor the hunter may have committed did not justify lethal force. That's the law.

[lepus]

16. good luck on that one,,,

If the situation had turned out the other way, with the property owner surviving, it would have been unlikely he would have been prosecuted either.

He initially tells multiple armed trespassers to leave. They come back, still armed and create a confrontation with the property owner. Fearing for his life the property owner defends himself,,,

I am still wondering why the trespassers aren't being charged with murder. They were told once they were trespassing, they were hunting on another persons land after being told to leave which IIRC is a felony in these parts, and shot the landowner in the commission of that felony.

[RamboLiberal]

20. I don't think it's clear they were still on his property lines

Trooper Jamie LeVier could not say if Plyler's group was mistakenly on Shaffer's land when he first ordered them to leave. The second encounter took place near his property line.

"From the first encounter to the second encounter, they were definitely moving in a direction that appeared they were leaving his property," LeVier said.

LeVier also could not say whether Plyler's group was still hunting during the second encounter, or specifically how much time passed between encounters.

The second time Shaffer confronted the hunters, there was a "verbal altercation," and Shaffer "fired the first shot in the confrontation, striking the victim (Plyler) in the wrist," according to the news release.

Plyler retreated, and Shaffer fired at least three more rounds at him, with one of the rounds hitting Plyler in the back, police said. Plyler then returned fire, hitting Shaffer once, killing him, police said.

http://ydr.inyork.com/ci_13970140?source=most_viewed

[Euromutt]

21. I'm not so sure

If the situation had turned out the other way, with the property owner surviving, it would have been unlikely he would have been prosecuted either.

I don't know; if I were the local sheriff, and one guy claimed to have fatally shot five people in self-defense, I'd be taking a long, hard look at the forensic evidence. Certainly, if none of the hunters had got a shot off, I wouldn't be buying the property owner's story. Evne if they had, I'd be skeptical that one guy could successfully defend himself against five aggressors without getting a scratch.

[flamin lib]

23. Ya' can in Texas. nt

[hedgehog]

2. What , he could't call the local game warden and/or county sheriff?

[Deep13]

10. What? and look like a wimp?!

Preserving ones machismo ego is certainly worth a murder or two.:sarcasm:

[spin]

18. That plan worked for my daughter...

She confronted some hunters who were shooting towards her house.

She heard gun shots. Her two children who were 2 and 3 years old were playing in her backyard. She immediately got them inside and went to investigate the situation.

She found three hunters were in a field two hundred feet from her house. She drove down the street and confronted them. She politely explained that her house was in the line of fire and several other houses were located nearby.

She explained that while they were not on her property, if they refused to leave, she would contact the Wild Life and Game officer.

They told her to "Fuck off, bitch".

One hunter decided to approach her in an aggressive manner. She pulled her shirt aside just enough to reveal that she had her favorite revolver, a .45 cal S&W Model 25-2 stuck in the front of her pants.

The hunters left.

Half an hour later, she noticed they were back. She dialed 911 and told the operator of the situation. She mentioned that they were aggressive and that she had exposed her firearm when she was approached. She also explained that she had noticed that they had baited the field to attract deer.

She was amazed at the response. Several sheriffs and the game warden arrived almost instantly.

The hunters ended up in BIG trouble. Their vehicle and firearms were confiscated.

All's well that ends well.

(Note: my daughter has no problem with responsible hunters or gun owners. Assholes are in a different category.)

[Scout]

3. but i thought CCW holders were MORE law-abiding than the average person

how can this be?

[rd_kent]

4. Ahhh. thanks scout, we can always count on you to prop up a nice strawman.

[Scout]

8. rofl! 'cuz no gun nuts have EVER claimed that CCW holders are more law-abiding, and

more responsible, and that we are "safe" when they are around....

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

[rd_kent]

12. wow, two more strawmmen. Is this a record?

Who said that? Please point out where I can read that. I don't know if anyone is SAFER when a CCW holder is around, but according to the DOJ website, CCW holders DO commit LESS crime than non-CCW holders. I am not saying that they are more law abiding, but the facts certainly don't show thay they are LESS law abiding.


But anyway, you have your agenda to push, so go right ahead.

[eqfan592]

14. Intellectually dishonest much?

The reality is that you're more likely to be killed by lightning than by a CCW permit holder. Is that to say that a CCW permit holder will NEVER commit a crime? No, and to suggest so would be idiotic. But you're attempting to frame the debate around a single person and setting that person up as an example of the group as a whole, and that's intellectually dishonest at best.

[OregonBlue]

5. Good one Scout. My sentiments exactly!!!

[dairydog91]

6. Please don't tell me you actually go for straw men like this.

"CCW holders are less likely to commit crimes than the general population" does not equal "CCW holders do not commit crimes"

Compare it to "In Detroit, you are far more likely to be mugged by a black criminal than a white criminal." Probably true (Last time I checked the stats), but that doesn't mean that there aren't white muggers.

[rd_kent]

13. What, your sentiments are ignorance and hyperbole?

Because if you agree with that statement, then I guess they are.

[eqfan592]

15. Who's worse...

...a person that sets up a strawman or a person that buys into the strawman wholesale?

[Deep13]

11. 1. It was revoked.

2. They are because the background check excludes anyone with a felony record.

3. That is a generality that does not predict the behavior of all CCW permit holders.

[gorfle]

22. Statistically, they are.

For example, according to Florida's CCW data, CCW permit holders are 8 times less likely to be involved in firearm crime than your average citizen.

[Historic NY]

17. No where does it even mention if the property was posted....

interesting. I posted over 200 acres only to have signs torn down, posted a couple of newspaper ads. finally had florescent orange metal signs made. The state game wardens & DEC. would patrol the area for hunters. Mind you this was town park property. It became necessary when hunters were confronting hikers. Its best to leave legal enforcement to the local law enforcement.

[safeinOhio]

19. At one time I had trouble with trespassers.

There was only one place they could park their cars. I go there and take the valves out of a couple of tires and call the sheriff. They couldn't leave until a deputy got there and I could return the valves and pump up their tires. Much more fun than confronting them, that was always dangerous.