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.
Homeowner shoots would-be robber, justified
wartiger
Member Posts: 3,861
Ledger-Enquirer (Columbus, GA)
2012-01-18
Aside from a 9 mm pistol and 16 years of military experience, Sgt. 1st Class Eddie Waiters was on his own in the wee hours of Tuesday morning when an intruder shattered his window and tried to open the front door of his house. But when Waiters opened fire and shot the would-be burglar in the groin, state law was also on his side, authorities determined after an investigation of the shooting.
"If I didn't have my weapon, I could have been dead," Waiters said several hours after the 2 a.m. encounter. "The police weren't there and they wouldn't have gotten there quick enough to stop anybody from harming me, even when I called 911."
In the heat of the moment, Georgia's defense of habitation statute seemed a less pressing consideration than guarding his Woodland Drive home and ensuring his safety. But when the smoke had cleared and authorities informed him he'd acted within his rights, Waiters seemed relieved at the latitude afforded to homeowners who are faced with such dangers.
The suspect in the case, Melvin J. Jones, 47, was believed to be unarmed. Still, Waiters' reaction seemed to be a textbook example of a justified, self-defense shooting protected by statutes in Georgia and Alabama, according to law enforcement officials and attorneys.
Georgia law says a person is justified in using deadly force to defend a habitation if he or she "reasonably believes" that a break-in is "made or attempted for the purpose of committing a felony," such as burglary or murder."The way we understand the law is, if somebody is trying to break in on you, you don't have to wait and see and ask what they are doing," said Sgt. Matt Blackstock of the Columbus Police Department. "You can use deadly force to stop the intruder."
The person who fires in self defense must believe he or she is endangered, but it's not relevant whether an intruder is armed, said Frank K. Martin, a veteran Columbus criminal defense attorney.
"You don't know until you have the benefit of hindsight that he's not armed," Martin said. "You have to act on what you're presented with at the time you shoot. If someone takes out your window, it's obviously their intent is to invade your home."
Lawmakers in Georgia and Alabama in recent years have granted more leeway to homeowners and other would-be victims such as Waiters who open fire to protect themselves. The Georgia General Assembly in 2006 passed a law that says people acting in self defense have no "duty to retreat" and may stand their ground and use deadly force in threatening situations.Persons who use justifiable deadly force under the law are immune from prosecution, so long as their possession of the weapon also proves to be lawful.
"Once the law was changed, it did give greater latitude to the homeowner," said Stacey S. Jackson, a Columbus defense attorney and former prosecutor who has handled self-defense cases.
The 2006 law provided new clarity for law enforcement officers trying to piece together self-defense shootings, Blackstock said.
"A lot of the guesswork has been taken away from us in a roundabout way," he said. "It specifically goes into saying you do not have to retreat anymore."
Waiters would find himself on solid legal ground on the other side of the Chattahoochee River as well. Alabama law provides a wide range of scenarios in which homeowners are justified in using potentially lethal force, including to prevent any burglary, said Buster Landreau, an assistant district attorney in Russell County.
The law is fairly clear on self-defense shootings, but determining the facts of each case as they apply to it can be a time-consuming and difficult task. Blackstock said investigators weigh a number of factors before determining whether to file charges.
"They have to give us a good explanation as to why they used deadly force -- we just don't arbitrarily clear everybody for using deadly force to protect their property," Blackstock said. "There has to be a justification as to why. That's what we investigate." Investigators check to see whether the firearm was legally possessed and whether the person who fired it has any felony convictions.
Waiters' case, however, appeared to be rather cut and dried. Investigators determined he serves in the Army and has a clean record.
It also was clear to police that nobody should have been coming or going from his house at that early hour. Waiters had just moved into the house, hadn't met his neighbors before Tuesday's shooting and wasn't expecting any midnight visitors.
Waiters later learned that Jones had been on parole for burglary and was listed as living just a few houses down from Waiters on Woodland, according to online parole records.
Waiters, for his part, said he took measures to warn Jones he was breaking into an occupied dwelling, such as turning on the lights after he heard the first "bang" at the front door.
"Once I saw he was getting into my home, that's when I had to give him that shot. It was to let him know there's somebody on the other side of the door," Waiters said. "I could have kept shooting, but I just shot him one time to let him know you don't want to come in here."
Waiters said he hasn't thought twice about staying in his new neighborhood.
"I'm not going to let nobody run me off," he said.
Chalk another one up for the good guys.
2012-01-18
Aside from a 9 mm pistol and 16 years of military experience, Sgt. 1st Class Eddie Waiters was on his own in the wee hours of Tuesday morning when an intruder shattered his window and tried to open the front door of his house. But when Waiters opened fire and shot the would-be burglar in the groin, state law was also on his side, authorities determined after an investigation of the shooting.
"If I didn't have my weapon, I could have been dead," Waiters said several hours after the 2 a.m. encounter. "The police weren't there and they wouldn't have gotten there quick enough to stop anybody from harming me, even when I called 911."
In the heat of the moment, Georgia's defense of habitation statute seemed a less pressing consideration than guarding his Woodland Drive home and ensuring his safety. But when the smoke had cleared and authorities informed him he'd acted within his rights, Waiters seemed relieved at the latitude afforded to homeowners who are faced with such dangers.
The suspect in the case, Melvin J. Jones, 47, was believed to be unarmed. Still, Waiters' reaction seemed to be a textbook example of a justified, self-defense shooting protected by statutes in Georgia and Alabama, according to law enforcement officials and attorneys.
Georgia law says a person is justified in using deadly force to defend a habitation if he or she "reasonably believes" that a break-in is "made or attempted for the purpose of committing a felony," such as burglary or murder."The way we understand the law is, if somebody is trying to break in on you, you don't have to wait and see and ask what they are doing," said Sgt. Matt Blackstock of the Columbus Police Department. "You can use deadly force to stop the intruder."
The person who fires in self defense must believe he or she is endangered, but it's not relevant whether an intruder is armed, said Frank K. Martin, a veteran Columbus criminal defense attorney.
"You don't know until you have the benefit of hindsight that he's not armed," Martin said. "You have to act on what you're presented with at the time you shoot. If someone takes out your window, it's obviously their intent is to invade your home."
Lawmakers in Georgia and Alabama in recent years have granted more leeway to homeowners and other would-be victims such as Waiters who open fire to protect themselves. The Georgia General Assembly in 2006 passed a law that says people acting in self defense have no "duty to retreat" and may stand their ground and use deadly force in threatening situations.Persons who use justifiable deadly force under the law are immune from prosecution, so long as their possession of the weapon also proves to be lawful.
"Once the law was changed, it did give greater latitude to the homeowner," said Stacey S. Jackson, a Columbus defense attorney and former prosecutor who has handled self-defense cases.
The 2006 law provided new clarity for law enforcement officers trying to piece together self-defense shootings, Blackstock said.
"A lot of the guesswork has been taken away from us in a roundabout way," he said. "It specifically goes into saying you do not have to retreat anymore."
Waiters would find himself on solid legal ground on the other side of the Chattahoochee River as well. Alabama law provides a wide range of scenarios in which homeowners are justified in using potentially lethal force, including to prevent any burglary, said Buster Landreau, an assistant district attorney in Russell County.
The law is fairly clear on self-defense shootings, but determining the facts of each case as they apply to it can be a time-consuming and difficult task. Blackstock said investigators weigh a number of factors before determining whether to file charges.
"They have to give us a good explanation as to why they used deadly force -- we just don't arbitrarily clear everybody for using deadly force to protect their property," Blackstock said. "There has to be a justification as to why. That's what we investigate." Investigators check to see whether the firearm was legally possessed and whether the person who fired it has any felony convictions.
Waiters' case, however, appeared to be rather cut and dried. Investigators determined he serves in the Army and has a clean record.
It also was clear to police that nobody should have been coming or going from his house at that early hour. Waiters had just moved into the house, hadn't met his neighbors before Tuesday's shooting and wasn't expecting any midnight visitors.
Waiters later learned that Jones had been on parole for burglary and was listed as living just a few houses down from Waiters on Woodland, according to online parole records.
Waiters, for his part, said he took measures to warn Jones he was breaking into an occupied dwelling, such as turning on the lights after he heard the first "bang" at the front door.
"Once I saw he was getting into my home, that's when I had to give him that shot. It was to let him know there's somebody on the other side of the door," Waiters said. "I could have kept shooting, but I just shot him one time to let him know you don't want to come in here."
Waiters said he hasn't thought twice about staying in his new neighborhood.
"I'm not going to let nobody run me off," he said.
Chalk another one up for the good guys.
Comments
I am confident that it will pass and Gov McDonnell with sign them.
Because, otherwise, it would be self-defense.
The 2006 law provided new clarity for law enforcement officers trying to piece together self-defense shootings, Blackstock said.
"A lot of the guesswork has been taken away from us in a roundabout way," he said.
We guess at the law, and somehow Justice arrives, in a roundabout way.
"It specifically goes into saying you do not have to retreat anymore."
Waiters would find himself on solid legal ground on the other side of the Chattahoochee River as well. Alabama law provides a wide range of scenarios in which homeowners are justified in using potentially lethal force, including to prevent any burglary, said Buster Landreau, an assistant district attorney in Russell County.
The law is fairly clear on self-defense shootings, but determining the facts of each case as they apply to it can be a time-consuming and difficult task. Blackstock said investigators weigh a number of factors before determining whether to file charges.
The number is two.
"They have to give us a good explanation as to why they used deadly force -- we just don't arbitrarily clear everybody for using deadly force to protect their property," Blackstock said. "There has to be a justification as to why. That's what we investigate."
Stay tuned for an explanation of what it is, exactly that they "investigate".
Investigators check to see whether the firearm was legally possessed and whether the person who fired it has any felony convictions.
There ya go! you may have saved your own life, or the lives of others, but if you didn't jump through all of the hoops; you're going to jail!
I find it odd that we are still debating "if" we have the right to defend ourselves. Sad
I totally agree! Long before Castle Doctrine was law in Montana, SSS is king ... and it remains that way! [:p]
Too old to live...too young to die...
I was shocked to learn that Arkansas law requires a home owner to flee his own home when faced with deadly threat. The "Castle Doctrine" was introduced in the state legislature last year but died in committee. I wrote to my representative and told him I hope nobody in this state is ever attacked in his own home by criminals again but if it does happen I hope it happens to him. I also told him where to stick his law requiring me to flee my own home. I do not run from violent criminals. Criminals should be killed on the spot. Period.
Stuff like that is kept a very long time and comes back to bite you in the *.
Let's keep an eye on this when it goes to civil court for wrongful death.I'd expect that since the guy didn't die a wrongful death suit wouldn't get too far.
I was shocked to learn that Arkansas law requires a home owner to flee his own home when faced with deadly threat. The "Castle Doctrine" was introduced in the state legislature last year but died in committee. I wrote to my representative and told him I hope nobody in this state is ever attacked in his own home by criminals again but if it does happen I hope it happens to him. I also told him where to stick his law requiring me to flee my own home. I do not run from violent criminals. Criminals should be killed on the spot. Period.
I thought we could shoot someone after they got in the house here in Arkansas legally
Because, otherwise, it would be self-defense."
So what happens if there is a break in and the bad guys drop their illegal weapon and, of course, the homeowner is not the owner?
BS. Criminals should be confronted and killed. I will not abandon my home.
Too old to live...too young to die...
AR law requires the victim to retreat and use deadly force only if retreat is impossible.
BS. Criminals should be confronted and killed. I will not abandon my home.
I am with you
I thought we could shoot someone after they got in the house here in Arkansas legally No offense, but when it comes to using a gun against someone it's not enough to think you know what your laws state.
quote:Originally posted by danielgage
I thought we could shoot someone after they got in the house here in Arkansas legally No offense, but when it comes to using a gun against someone it's not enough to think you know what your laws state.
I don't reckon I care what the law says once they come in my house I reckon I'll find out after the shootout
I don't reckon I care what the law says once they come in my house I reckon I'll find out after the shootout
I's a good idea for anyone to do in this situation, but especially if someone doesn't take the time to at least gain a working knowledge of their laws they need two very important things:
1. A good attorney's number programmed into their cell phone.
2. The ability to not speak with, text, etc. anyone other than their attorney about what just occurred.
Whether you agree with how things work or not, it's our current reality. Life will go on and how well things go on down the road can depend heavily upon how you manage the immediate aftermath.
Better Judged By Twelve Than Carried By Six
that is what I was trying to say
thank you[^]
In TN, the Castle Doctrine applies to homes and vehicles. What I hate to hear is when a law abiding citizen is said to have committed "Justifiable Homicide." Homicide means murder. If it is a justified shooting, then it is not homicide. Law enforcement's use of the phrase "Justifiable Homicide" seems to imply the citizen did something wrong.
yea reminds me of what Bubba said in the country song Bubba shot the jukebox they charged him with the reckless discharge of a firearm Bubba said reckless Hell I hit just where I was aiming[:D]
So, if you happen to be a felon,you have no right to defend or protect yourself,your family or your belongings?
If you're a felon, you have the right to protect yourself........but you're not allowed to own a gun.
Felons have to protect themselves with something else.