[HotTubDave]

Not sure what happened here. It looks okay until the last paragraph. Then I can't decide if the newspaper is slanting the story to protect the shooter or the shootee.

Doesn't pass the sniff test.

[Red Badger]

Title does not match the facts in the story. He was not arrested for "shooting the home invader".......

[wastedyears]

They're not going to charge the intruders with breaking and entering?

[Brilliant]

Mr. Charles was charged with illegal possession of a firearm, possession of marijuana and possession with intent to deliver the pot.

Doesn't sound like they believed the "home invader" story, does it?

[SengirV]

Doesn't sound to me that he was arrested for shooting the perp.

[pabianice]

Pittsburgh just voted Democratic 78 - 22.

[Oberon]

I wonder how it was determined that the defendant was in possession of pot with intent to distribute. This arrest wasn't in connection with an investigation, as far as we can tell, but stemmed from the police response to the shooting.

Unless you're a copper-riveted idiot, it would seem appropriate to not have any "evidence" in evidence when the police arrive. So how did illegal drugs turn up in the homeowner's possession?

[7thOF7th]

Looks to me like they both were "dirty".

[subterfuge]

As usual, the bad guy is protected and the defender of his own property is labeled a criminal for doing so. Oh wait, I guess pot made him shoot someone threatening his family with a gun--so thats okay.

[E Rocc]

It could be that the guy has a felony record and isn't allowed to have a gun.

-Eric

[claudiustg]

Much like NYC. You just arrest whoever survives.

[Fighting Irish]

Homeowner should get locked in the pokey for being stupid.

Note to bad guys - if you shoot a perp in your home, get rid of all illegal substances before cops show up.

[RGSpincich]

I'm trying to figure out how the wife/mother went from 19 years old in the posted article to 17 years old in the linked article.

[VRWCmember]

Mr. Charles was charged with illegal possession of a firearm, possession of marijuana and possession with intent to deliver the pot.

Sounds to me like he was arrested for drug charges and illegal possession of a weapon, but not for shooting the home invader. The headline writer/editor apparently has either extremely poor reading skills or an agenda against citizens' rights to defend themselves.

[VRWCmember]

Dave, did you change the title, or did the newspaper's website change the title after you posted it?

The link goes to a story with the following title: Home invader shot in head in Knoxville

You might want to be proactive and ask the mods to change the title to the correct one. I was going to send the newspaper an email about the completely inaccurate and misleading headline. Glad I checked the link first.

[Leftism is Mentally Deranged]

The likeliest explanation is a drug deal gone bad and the leftist
newspaper trying to take full advantage of the situation
and use the headline to trash one's right to defend self at home.

[metmom]

ping

[Centurion2000]

Sounds more like a drug deal that went bad more than anything else.

[Tenacious 1]

[Not sure what happened here. It looks okay until the last paragraph. Then I can't decide if the newspaper is slanting the story to protect the shooter or the shootee.]

I suspect that the owner invited his guests in to sell them drugs. The deal went south and a man was shot during the commission of a felony. I am no lawyer but self defense may be a stretch while in the act of committing a felony. Hard to tell.

[CountryBumpkin]

Agreed. Perhaps the home owner was a convicted felon, hence the illegal weapon possession charge. There is no mention of the home owner being charged with the shooting, which makes since if he was arrested on incidental or unrelated charges.

[Gondring]

Did the site change the mother's age and the headline after you posted?