[goldstategop]

Prosecutors know the difference between murder and self-defense. I shouldn't have to retreat from my home or my car to protect myself.

"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus

[x1stcav]

This is well and fine, but some people just need shooting.

[Edgerunner]

Wonder what they would do if it was their house? Let the the burglar/home invaders have their way?

[Abathar]

"The bill, introduced by Rep. Todd Porter, R-Mandan, also gives the shooter immunity from a civil lawsuit filed in connection with a justified shooting. The carjacker or burglar, or his family, cannot collect damages from the shooter. "

In today's sue crazy world this is so important now. You win in a court of law but a hand picked jury of idiots gives everything you own to some scumbag or his/her family helped by a money grubbing lawyer for revenge.

[kerryusama04]

"We have a current policy in North Dakota that the use of deadly force is not justified if it can be avoided," said Ladd Erickson, the McLean County state's attorney. "We shouldn't shoot people if we can avoid shooting people."

Loosely translated - "stop trying to put us prosecuters out of business."

[alex]

To prosecutors: shut up and sing, it is legislature's job to write the law, your job is to enforce it.

[grjr21]

Prosecutors say a bill that offers strong liability protection for homeowners who shoot intruders is unnecessary, and may block criminal charges in situations where they may be warranted.


Prosecutors prefer the present system where they can make criminal charges in situations where they are  unwarranted.

[From One - Many]

More lawyers wanting their cut from the taxpayers. Lawyers, especially prosecutors, are useless.
Now don't you go defending yourself because if you do, you may put me out of a job. scream the lawyers.

[NonValueAdded]

Why doesn't Erickson concentrate on locking up the criminals so that such a provision need not be utilized? Hmmm. "A burglary gone wrong and a homeowner who used a firearm for self defense. I, the prosecutor, sees two crimes but I'll bet the FBI stats say only one. So, if I prosecute the homeowner I will have cleared one case against the one case added to my requirement. Seems a lot easier than prosecuting a criminal and I'll have a 100% closure rate. Works for me." Erickson's thought process?

[Ancesthntr]

"We shouldn't shoot people if we can avoid shooting people."

Well no shiite, Sherlock. However, if someone enters my home at night without my permission (i.e. when all of the doors and windows are locked, and the later at night the worse), I'd be insane and unbelievably irresponsible to not think that that person presented a mortal threat to me and my family, and to act accordingly (i.e. shoot first, ask questions later). After all, perps are usually somewhat resistant to the idea of completing a questionairre detailing their intentions, listing any and all weapons on their person, checking their references, etc.

Instead of placing the moral/legal burden on innocent homeowners, why don't the idiot prosecutors place the responsibility and risk for illegally entering someone's home on the perps?

[Disambiguator]

This guy is just another politically ambitious prosecutor.

The old saying, "when you have a hammer, the whole world looks like a nail" applies here.

When you're a prosecutor, everything looks like a crime.

[GoldCountryRedneck]

"We have a current policy... that the use of deadly force is not justified..." said Ladd Erickson.

Having thus advertised his vulnerability, some thug someplace is probably planning a visit....

[Joe 6-pack]

Pure politics...most DAs are more interested in padding their resumes with easy convictions instead of doing the work to try the hard cases against professional criminals.

[Jim Noble]

"We shouldn't shoot people if we can avoid shooting people."

A common sentiment, and the source of much confusion.

If the prosecutor means the State of North Dakota (i.e., "we") should not shoot people for burglary, he is quite correct.

However, if he means that CITIZENS enforcing social norms on their own property should conform to the rules and procedures which bind the STATE, he's entirely wrong.

Someone who breaks into an occupied home is risking death by so doing, and burglary is much reduced where this is a common understanding.

The state is rightly bound by rules which should not bind a homeowner defending his family.

[archy]

"We have a current policy in North Dakota that the use of deadly force is not justified if it can be avoided," said Ladd Erickson, the McLean County state's attorney. "We shouldn't shoot people if we can avoid shooting people."

Somebody out to do something about all these folks Ladd Erickson, the McLean County state's attorney, has been helping to shoot.

[BJClinton]

"We shouldn't shoot people criminals if we can avoid shooting people criminals."

Corrected.

And I disagree.

[3niner]

Maybe it should be renamed "shoot the home invader who broke in to murder people". After all, "burglars" normally break into empty homes.