Posted on 01/01/2009 12:56:02 PM PST by marktwain
Related Articles
Dec 30: Pounding on the wrong door a fatal mistake in Springs
Springs homeowners kill burglary suspect Dec 29:
COLORADO SPRINGS, Colo.—Prosecutors are considering whether a Colorado law meant to protect homeowners against intruders applies in the case of a man killed outside a house he thought was his.
The parents of 22-year-old Sean Kennedy said detectives have told them their son, who had been drinking, was shot Sunday night after breaking a window to try to get in through the back door of a house a block away from where he lived.
-------------------cut-----------------------------
"It gets murky if the door is broken but not open," he said. Investigators are also likely to consider whether Kennedy was warned before being shot.
While the people at the house called police to report that they believed a burglary was occurring, police have not said how long after the call the shots were fired.
"The time frame will be key," Webster said. "It sounds like they were trying to do the right thing and get law enforcement there."
(Excerpt) Read more at denverpost.com ...
I’ve been pretty FUBAR and never tried to enter the wrong place.
Though there was one time I woke up in front of a bank that I don’t like to think about...
Hopefully you'd actually be stupid enough to try that. Then we could read about your dumb ass catching a couple of rounds.
And you'd deserve it, just like this stupid kid did.
L
If you're trying to tell me that you recognize the children of people who live two blocks away on sight, at night I'll call you a damned liar to your face.
L
That couldn't be the case here. It's an old area of town. The houses probably did look very much alike when it was first developed but over 50 years or more the landscaping and changes that people make to their houses increases the differences. Houses might look similar but there would be a lot of differences too.
Still, I can accept that he might have been too drunk to know where he was but breaking the window does make a big difference to me. He wasn't completely on the outside of the door anymore.
“I’ve been pretty FUBAR and never tried to enter the wrong place.”
I haven’t ever done that either.
He was drunk and decided he wanted in this house. His mistake.
How would a lawyer look at the people who served him the alcohol? I've never agreed with the idea that a bar, restaurant or individual is responsible for how much a person drinks and if that person drinks too much and then does some damage, the server is responsible for it, but here is a potential case for those who do agree with those laws.
It's a sad story and I honestly don't know what I would have done without knowing what actually happened. Personally, I hate drunks. I've spent way too much time around alcoholics who can be fun drunks until they have that one drink that changes them from Dr. Jekyll into Mr. Hyde. In my experience, there's no telling what a Mr. Hyde drunk will do.
Dead guys address and street view from Google.
http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&tab=wl
Shooters address and street view. http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&tab=wl
Doesn’t even look close. The drive is on the opposite side and the kid’s house has what looks to be a porch on the left side of the house. I also don’t see house numbers at either address. There are two really good sized trees at the kid’s house. How is it that you’re so drunk that you can’t tell the difference between these two houses but you can get the street address right? Something isn’t adding up.
Previously an old woman had shot a Peeping Tom outside her window here in Colorado and was not prosecuted under our Make My Day law.
If someone smashes a window breaking into your home you have no responsibility to insure it isn't some drunk kid before defending yourself.
What, are you going to claim that if burglers splash a little booze on and slur a bit you have to let them get close enough to seize your firearm?
Are you nuts?
Well put.
I can't think of anything in my post that led you to the conclusion that you had to question whether or not I'm nuts. Of course it's not up to the homeowner to determine the mindset of someone breaking in. And I reread my post and saw nothing to the contrary.
I actaully had a similiar thing happen to me. Some drunk tried crawling into my sons window. He thought it was the window of the high school girl two doors down. He could hardly stand but was smart enough to back away upon seeing a 45 pointed at him.
The guy then went to neighbors and was going to urinate in the driveway. Changed his mind and drove away.
How about your assertion that the inebriation of the person breaking in somehow justified examining the residents right to defend themselves in the home invasion?
Sometimes, things are really murky. If this kid had been sober and intent on home invasion, we’d not be having this conversation.
When someone breaks in you don't determine if they are drunk. and their breaking in over rules any assertion they might be making that they mean no harm. I stand by my assessment of your post. There never should have been any assertion by anyone that the residents did anything wrong.
“If the kid had been blind, would you feel the same?”
He was blind, blind drunk.
Unless he’s using his cane to knock on the door then how would the homeowners know? Do drunk blind people usually drive?
What if he had a gun of his own, made it into the home and killed both of the people living there?
Is there any difference between a drunk person or a sober person robbing you and raping your wife?
That he was drunk matters nothing.
Ah, the fickle of fate. [refering to the kid going to the wrong house] Sometimes, things are really murky.[refering to the debate, not the act] If this kid had been sober and intent on home invasion, we’d not be having this conversation.[this was directed at those folks defending the kid when the story first came out] Of course, the homeowner probably couldn’t have known either way.[not his responsibility to know]
MrEdd,
While I apologise for poor wordsmithing, I think you went over the line with your question as to whether I was nuts. Seems a little kneejerk to me. Even given you disagreed with my reply, there was nothing in it offensive to you or anybody else.
In Colorado they have the older standard (before "retreat") which was "shoot 'em INSIDE.
Different places have different standards. It's part of federalism. You don't like federalism go somewhere they don't have it.
If you want to change Colorado law then try to change it.
Regarding the most ancient law, revenge, once you kill somebody's kid it's arrogant and stupid to hang around waiting for it ~ hoping you're a better shot ~ 'cause you're not.
So, why don't you come on over and I'll ask around if any of these people noticed you ~ and they will.
They could have shot just the “inside part”. So far I haven’t seen any information provided by the newsmedia that indicates this kid was guilty of a capital offense.
He’d only lived there 2 months ~
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.