In order to participate in the GunBroker Member forums, you must be logged in with your GunBroker.com account. Click the sign-in button at the top right of the forums page to get connected.
Home defense, 1 shot 1 kill. Justified.
mauser_central
Member Posts: 733 ✭✭✭✭
http://www.pantagraph.com/stories/102704/new_20041027030.shtml
Fatal shooting deemed justified
Intruder shot in Toluca home
By Greg Stanmar
gregstanmar@insightbb.com
TOLUCA -- No charges will be filed in connection with the death of a Lacon man who burst into a home in the middle of the night and was shot by the homeowner.
Douglas Sullivan, 37, was shot once in the chest with a 9-mm handgun and died almost instantly, authorities said.
Marshall County State's Attorney Paul Bauer said homeowner Brad Burns was justified in shooting Sullivan with his registered handgun.
Bauer said there was no clear reason why Sullivan would have targeted the family, but initial reports said he had been drinking at a party near the Burnses' home.
Burns, his wife and 2-year-old son were in the house when Sullivan pounded on the door about 2 a.m. and then threw a child's slide through a kitchen window. Then "all hell broke loose," Bauer said.
Burns loaded his gun and found Sullivan in the main bedroom, Bauer said.
The commotion was loud enough to wake "all the neighbors" in this middle-class neighborhood of ranch-style homes across the street from Fieldcrest West Elementary School, Bauer said. Toluca is about 20 miles north of Minonk.
Bauer and Toluca Police Chief Mark Johnson said Sullivan did not know Burns.
"It's the kind of thing (the Burnses) are never going to forget," Johnson said.
The family is staying with relatives as deputies, prosecutors and investigators continue to look into the shooting.
At the time of his death, Bauer said, Sullivan faced pending charges of drunken driving and domestic battery.
"When a strong man, fully armed, guards his own house, his possessions are safe
~ Jesus Christ [Luke 11:21.6]
Mauser Central
MidwayUSA, if your not signed up for the Eblast alerts you are missing some great deals !
Fatal shooting deemed justified
Intruder shot in Toluca home
By Greg Stanmar
gregstanmar@insightbb.com
TOLUCA -- No charges will be filed in connection with the death of a Lacon man who burst into a home in the middle of the night and was shot by the homeowner.
Douglas Sullivan, 37, was shot once in the chest with a 9-mm handgun and died almost instantly, authorities said.
Marshall County State's Attorney Paul Bauer said homeowner Brad Burns was justified in shooting Sullivan with his registered handgun.
Bauer said there was no clear reason why Sullivan would have targeted the family, but initial reports said he had been drinking at a party near the Burnses' home.
Burns, his wife and 2-year-old son were in the house when Sullivan pounded on the door about 2 a.m. and then threw a child's slide through a kitchen window. Then "all hell broke loose," Bauer said.
Burns loaded his gun and found Sullivan in the main bedroom, Bauer said.
The commotion was loud enough to wake "all the neighbors" in this middle-class neighborhood of ranch-style homes across the street from Fieldcrest West Elementary School, Bauer said. Toluca is about 20 miles north of Minonk.
Bauer and Toluca Police Chief Mark Johnson said Sullivan did not know Burns.
"It's the kind of thing (the Burnses) are never going to forget," Johnson said.
The family is staying with relatives as deputies, prosecutors and investigators continue to look into the shooting.
At the time of his death, Bauer said, Sullivan faced pending charges of drunken driving and domestic battery.
"When a strong man, fully armed, guards his own house, his possessions are safe
~ Jesus Christ [Luke 11:21.6]
Mauser Central
MidwayUSA, if your not signed up for the Eblast alerts you are missing some great deals !
Comments
Too bad it had to happen, but bad people are around us.
Hope I never have to do it, but I'm ready.
I do, however, have just 2 small problems with this article, the 1st one: "Marshall County State's Attorney Paul Bauer said homeowner Brad Burns was justified in shooting Sullivan with his registered handgun."
I'm sure if the gun wasn't registered, but otherwise a legal firearm his * would be in jail and probably charged with using a firearm in a crime.
My other problem is this line: "The family is staying with relatives as deputies, prosecutors and investigators continue to look into the shooting."
If it was labeled as justified by the States Attorney as "justifiable" then why are they still investigating?
Sorry....I'm a pessimist.[:D]
As to the registration status of the gun, I agree that that word needs to be censored on this site so my heart rate doesn't go up when I come across it in context like this.
I think that the family would feel better if it were completely investigated rather than if life just continued on as if nothing had happened. If you had to shoot someone in front of your wife and kids, you know that they wouldn't feel completely safe the next day. And the community would heckle you a lot less if a thorough investigation exonerated you.
As to the registration status of the gun, I agree that that word needs to be censored on this site so my heart rate doesn't go up when I come across it in context like this.
I'm sure if a full investigation exhonorated them, yea, great, but I always have the feeling that they are just looking for dirt. LOL, I just don't trust prosecutors and attorneys.[:D]
1. He had to load his gun???????? [:0]
2. One shot from a 9mm. took a guy out that fast?????? [:o)]
"Anyone who can describe themself in one word or less is a tool." EMM
That's why mine is always loaded, one in the tube, hammer back and safety on...that's why I love my 1911's.
John
The original point and click interface was made by Smith & Wesson
rldowns, I agree with your assessment. I have 2 other problems.
1. He had to load his gun???????? [:0]
2. One shot from a 9mm. took a guy out that fast?????? [:o)]
Yea, the whole "keep the firearm and ammo seperate" thing kinda sucks in my opinion. And he got lucky with a 1 shot stop, but it is possible. Probably ripped through his heart and embedded itself in his spine.
This statement caught my attention too. Just goes to show the nine is as deadly as the big bore, if the ammo type and shot placement are correct.
I wonder if he was using the more deadlyer "cop killer" black talon type ammo.
We can program our brains to survive or we can program our brains to completely shut our bodies down and DIE if we are of a weaker state of mind.
P.S. All of my handguns had to be registered when I lived in NY. It took 6 months after application before I was allowed to own/purchase handguns and all were listed by make/model/ser# on my permit and a copy of that permit was retained at the County Sheriff's Office.
"Save the Whalers, they need jobs too."
rldowns, I agree with your assessment. I have 2 other problems.
1. He had to load his gun???????? [:0]
2. One shot from a 9mm. took a guy out that fast?????? [:o)]
1. Probably just racked the slide. [;)] How long does that take. . .two seconds? Condition 3 is not at all an unreasonable way to keep a gun if there isn't an immediate threat.
What isn't at all clear to me is why this guy with a loaded gun in his hand had to shoot an (apparently) unarmed man. It almost certainly was justified, but we just don't have the whole story here.
By the way, cynicism aside, prosecutors deal all the time with bad criminals and whackos. A lot of them become prosecutors in response to personal or family experience with violent crime. Yes, there are a few who might try to make a name for themselves by persecuting a home-shooter, but I think many of them would secretely applaud this guy for taking a creep out of circulation and saving THEM the trouble of nailing him later.
2. Its all about shot placement.
On your mark-get set- go away!!
20+ years ago. Difference being, the guy I shot didn't die.
That .45 sure did put him on the floor in a hurry though. He was still on the floor when the EMT and cops arrived about 10 minutes later.
Mudge the defender
I can't come to work today. The voices said, STAY HOME AND CLEAN THE GUNS!<BR>
quote:Originally posted by beantownshootah
except in Cook County. This incident happened in central Illinois where there is no requirement to register firearms. I am guessing the writer of this report is not familar with Illinois law.
Guns only have two enemies: Rust and Liberals....
What isn't at all clear to me is why this guy with a loaded gun in his hand had to shoot an (apparently) unarmed man. It almost certainly was justified, but we just don't have the whole story here.
quote:...that doesn't mean there that couldn't have been another outcome where nobody got hurt. Did he HAVE to shoot? Probably he did. . . but based on the limited story, we just don't know.
Ah yes...beantown is completely right. The homeowner was obviously at fault here for not exploring all of his options. I mean, he didn't even try TALKING to the guy first!
Good evening, sir! I can't help but notice that you've smashed my front window and are now rampaging through my house in the direction of my family in what appears to be a drunken rage.
Could you please provide some sort of reasonable explanation as to your behavior here this evening? Because quite honestly, sir, I am having serious doubts as to the nature of your intentions! Perhaps we could sit down over coffee and muffins and discuss the matter further?
Sir? SIR! Please put down that fireplace poker! SIR!! I'm not joking here, I mean it! I really mean it! I am SO counting to three!
"Our finest tribute to our fallen dead would be to convince their sons that we were not Rambo and neither are they. -Gus Hasford
that sounded exactly like somthing you would hear the leftest character carlton banks on fp of b say.
thanks for the belly roll i needed that [:D][:D][:D]
"When a strong man, fully armed, guards his own house, his possessions are safe
~ Jesus Christ [Luke 11:21.6]
Mauser Central
MidwayUSA, if your not signed up for the Eblast alerts you are missing some great deals !
Ah yes...beantown is completely right. The homeowner was obviously at fault here for not exploring all of his options. I mean, he didn't even try TALKING to the guy first!
Good evening, sir! I can't help but notice that you've smashed my front window and are now rampaging through my house in the direction of my family in what appears to be a drunken rage.
Could you please provide some sort of reasonable explanation as to your behavior here this evening? Because quite honestly, sir, I am having serious doubts as to the nature of your intentions! Perhaps we could sit down over coffee and muffins and discuss the matter further?
Sir? SIR! Please put down that fireplace poker! SIR!! I'm not joking here, I mean it! I really mean it! I am SO counting to three!
Funny. . .particularly the obsession with "pokers". . .(I won't ask).
Though your story bears no resemblance to my post, interestingly, it does contain tons more detail than the original news article. . .which was my point to begin with.
To the one who asked why NOT shoot somebody who breaks into your home at 3am, my answer is:
1. So you don't face criminal charges for homicide.
2. So you don't face civil charges over wrongful death (or wounding).
3. So you don't face trumped-up weapons (or other) charges levelled at you by a prosecutor trying to make a name for himself.
4. So you don't lose your ability to legally own guns.
Even if you ultimately beat these charges, it may take years and bankrupt you.
5. Because you'd rather not be on the receiving end of a grilling at the police station.
6. Because the dead guy might have evil vengeful friends or relatives.
7. Because you might seriously traumatize your family or yourself.
8. Because the press could easily twist things to make you look like a monster, ruining your personal and/or professional reputation.
9. Because your hearing is precious.
10. Do you really want to have the rug dry cleaned?
11. There is always the risk (however small) of hitting something (or someone) unintended.
My point is, just because you might be legally justified in killing an intruder, that doesnt necessarily make it the best thing to do. It depends on the exact situation. If someone really is running amok on drugs, then you probably should shoot them. But we've all heard of cases where a homeowner gets the drop on an intruder, and the intruder either surrenders or runs away. In fact, I think that happens a lot more often than the homeowner killing the intruder. So *IF* you can get there safely, isn't that better than shooting?
One detrimental member of society gone due to one prepared citizen who was willing to put up with all the bullsnot laws in his state, and ended up doing his state a favor.
personally i think the seprate weapon and ammo may be a good idea as most home roberies will probably be one person sneaking around, trying to steal possesions and get away withou notice, you will probably have time to load and ambush the intruder, especially if you have a big 2 story house.
Might as well investigate the shooting, what happens if you invite someone over, have a night of cards or drinking or something, then shoot them at 1:00am as a planned murder, and claim they broke into your house at 1:00am. anytime someone dies due to the action of another, you should investigate, firearm related or not.
Maybe they just mentioned it was registered to show the guy was a law abiding citizen.
-drunken post
Take my post number, divide it by 2, and thats how many sober posts I've made.
California's laws really suck.
The Brady Campaign, the Million Mom March, and Mothers Against Drunk Driving, can all go suck a big fat *cough* male chicken *cough*
Keeping guns and ammunition separate or combined represents a trade-off. If a gun is kept readily accessible and loaded, there is a minimum of time involved in the preparation for defensive actions. If guns/ammunition are kept separate or otherwise requiring more actions to become ready, there is safety factor that decreases the potential for mistaken identity shootings. Personally I keep my Python in a safe, unloaded but a speedloader w/6 HPs next to it. My decision to do this is that I want my actions to require enough time that I will be wide awake before I have the means to be making life and death decisions. The risk of being late is more than offset by the decrease in risk of wrongful shooting.
Realistically, I don't think the guns loaded/unloaded issue is a big deal in the context of home defense.
How long does it take to put a loaded mag into a pistol and rack the slide, 3 seconds? How about a speedloader or moon clip into a revolver. . .also 3 seconds? Is there anyone here who COULDN'T do these things blindfolded?
Unless you're sleeping right next to the most likely entrance AND are subject to immediate suprise attack, the few seconds necessary to arm your weapons probably won't make any difference. Of course I'm assuming the gun and ammo are relatively close to one another and quickly accessible. It probably is NOT a good idea to keep the gun in room A and the ammo in room B, or the ammo loose rather than in a pre-loaded mag or speedloader.
This is just a different scenario than getting jumped on the street or needing to engage in combat suddenly. Then you want condition 1, cocked and locked, etc. In your bedroom. . .probably won't hurt, but not strictly necessary
Your item # 6 is a joke right?
If not I hope you never get to deal with terrorist. This kind of thinking is to bow down to hostage takers. What ever they want give them. (They may have friends) Come on even YOU can't beleive what your spouting.
OldGuns55@yahoo.com
Don't go condemning this guy for having to load his handgun first. Perhaps he can't afford a quick access gun safe. Anyone with a child knows you don't dare leave a loaded handgun unsecured in the house---ever.
Also I would want investigators to do all they wanted to make sure everything pointed to a justified shooting because this poor guy will most likely go to civil court.
rldowns, I agree with your assessment. I have 2 other problems.
[:0]
2. One shot from a 9mm. took a guy out that fast?????? [:o)]
"Anyone who can describe themself in one word or less is a tool." EMM
[/quote]
Thomas Jefferson, of Virginia:
"Laws that forbid the carrying of arms. . . disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes. . . Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man."
Folks, you would be ASTOUNDED at how suddenly and quickly future victims will learn that it only takes a few heartbeats for the danger to be at your throat. Those who have lived it, please back me up on this.
Quote "Somehow government decided that the Constitutional Bill of Rights has become the Bill of "Suggested" Rights and are to be rationed to the citizens as the power elite sees fit"
Many anti-gun, anti-selfdefense left wing naive liberals think that if you must have a gun for home defense you should have it unloaded and locked up in your basement. These are the same people that actually think that on those rare occassions when innocent victims are suddenly and without provocation or warning attacked by a violent and homocidal attacker (s) that the victims would actually have time to dial-a-prayer and wait for the "authorities" to come and save your a**.
Folks, you would be ASTOUNDED at how suddenly and quickly future victims will learn that it only takes a few heartbeats for the danger to be at your throat. Those who have lived it, please back me up on this.
Quote "Somehow government decided that the Constitutional Bill of Rights has become the Bill of "Suggested" Rights and are to be rationed to the citizens as the power elite sees fit"
I am a LIBERAL. My guns are ALL loaded. Myself, and my family are well qualified to use them. Your piss-poor generalizations about liberals might get your butt shot!
Were you ever taught gun safety? Treat ALL guns as if they are loaded! I never trust anyone that says, "It ain't loaded". RIGHT....
My business was broken into a few weeks back and we think it was kids. If I had been there, I would have shot to kill without question. You simply do not enter into someone's house or business and expect otherwise. Heck, I sat out in the back with a Mauser and was later joined about midnight, by a city cop who was keeping my place under special watch. I told him what I was doing, and he simply concurred and we talked about other dark spots I could hide in.
A few dimwits getting put to their death because of their own stupidity, and maybe it will deter others. I have now posted signs that read: "IF YOU GET SHOT, IT'S YOUR OWN FAULT!"
Can you imagine such, from a "liberal".[}:)]
"Get ready for a new administration in Washington. People are tired of being misled (pun intended!)"
[
I am a LIBERAL. My guns are ALL loaded. Myself, and my family are well qualified to use them. Your piss-poor generalizations about liberals might get your butt shot!
Can you imagine such, from a "liberal".[}:)]
"
If you care to calm down and read each word in my post you will notice that I did not just trash "liberals". I mentioned several other attributes the people I hold in contempt must have other than just being "liberal".
And if my choice of words is reason to "get my butt shot" as you stated, then maybe people like you shouldn't have guns, as the "liberals" so often preach to people like me.
Quote "Somehow government decided that the Constitutional Bill of Rights has become the Bill of "Suggested" Rights and are to be rationed to the citizens as the power elite sees fit"
cody
In Illinois where this occured, Handguns are not "Registered"
except in Cook County. This incident happened in central Illinois where there is no requirement to register firearms. I am guessing the writer of this report is not familar with Illinois law.
Guns only have two enemies: Rust and Liberals....
I thought handguns only had to be registered in Chicago.
And BTW, the necessary permits haven't been given out in more than 20 years, so no new handguns are allowed, for anyone who is interested.
O Lord,
grant me the Serenity
to accept the things
I cannot change
the courage to change the things I can,
and the supreme firepower to make the difference.
TO: Beantownshootah.[8]
Your item # 6 [vengeful friends or relatives] is a joke right?
If not I hope you never get to deal with terrorist. This kind of thinking is to bow down to hostage takers. What ever they want give them. (They may have friends) Come on even YOU can't beleive what your spouting.
I'm not talking about terrorist networks, or hostage takers. I'm talking about using good judgement with respect to killing someone in your home. . .presumeably a home and community that you wish to remain in afterwards.
I've given a bunch of reasons (some more serious than others) as to why you might not want to be so quick to kill someone if you can possibly avoid it. If you have to shoot, you shoot. If not, you don't. You weigh the situation, and you make your best call. That's all I'm saying. What is so hard to understand about this?
As one possible example, yes, you're absolutely not obligated to retreat into your "safe room" with your wife, but after hearing that proverbial "bump" in the night you might be better off doing that rather than going downstairs and blowing away the State Governor's drug addicted son!. . .Or finding out they hard way that there are TWO intruders and they each have guns, etc.
As to the vengeful relatives/friends/gang members, I admit that's a pretty minor consideration. Still, you might find this story interesting:
http://www.crimelibrary.com/gangsters_outlaws/mob_bosses/gotti/gotti_8.html?sect=15
Bean, first of all in my state it is legally allowed and correct (even somewhat politically correct) to use deadly force against anyone who breaks into your house. We have no children in our house. Our children are married with families of their own. When a grandchild is in our house, my weapons are in a safe and secure place, and only I can get to them. Otherwise my primary home defense weapon is loaded and available. As to the question about it bothering me to shoot an intruder please rest assured it would not. I would much rather be tried by twelve than carried by six.
In virtually every state using deadly force on home intruders is legally permissable. . .politically correct or not, my point is that just because legally you can kill an intruder, it doesn't mean you automatically have to.
You're saying you'd rather be tried by 12 than carried by 6. . .I respect that. I'm just saying that a bad guy in the house doesn't necessarily mean that those are the only two possible options!
Let's say your 3 am "intruder" is an intoxicated and scrawny 15 year old kid. Are you still going to blow his head off? Are you going to open fire automatically without even looking? Would killing one of your grandkids' miscreant classmates (even though legally jusified) make you a hero in your community? What if he weren't killed, just paralyzed, or mutilated? Do you really think you wouldn't feel the slightest twinge of guilt afterwards? What if you knew his parents?
I think you'd be responsible and make the correct choice based on your evaluation of the circumstances. If you gotta shoot, you shoot. If you don't have to, you don't. That's all.
Not so hard to understand, is it?