Man Shoots Intruder, Gets Jail Time

dart

我highlihgt了他被认为是“reprehensile”的原因。

A man in Indiana is being sent to jail after he shot a home intruder in April. David McLaughlin, 32, was found guilty of criminal recklessness resulting in serious bodily injury by a Jay Superior Court jury on Sept. 4.

Yesterday, Judge Max Ludy Jr. agreed to reduce the charges from a felony to a misdemeanor. The Judge sentenced McLaughlin to 60 days in jail followed by four months of home detention.

The man who broke into the home, 29-year-old David A. Bailey, was shot once in the left arm by McLaughlin.

So why was McLaughlin charged with a crime in the first place?

Testimony indicated he fired three gunshots April 21 at a man he said had broken into his garage, at least two after the intruder had left his property and was running down an alley.

Moreover, the first shot fired was in the direction of a neighbor’s home, and the judge called the actions of McLaughlin “reprehensible”. I don’t know the layout of the property or it’s relationship to the neighbor’s house, so it wouldn’t be fair for me to comment.

It should be a well-known fact, however, that you don’t shoot at something without knowing what’s behind it. In other words; always be aware of what’s beyond your intended target.

It should also be a well-known fact for gun owners that once a threat is gone, you do not pursue. McLaughlin also mentioned that when he was firing, he “prayed to God” that his bullets didn’t hit their intended target.

While I commend McLaughlin for taking his safety into his own hands after a person had broken into his home, I find it irresponsible that he would fire a gun with the hopes of not hitting his intended target. You never fire to scare a threat, you fire to stop a threat.

And, there’s also this:

“I never want to hold a firearm again,” [McLaughlin] said. “I never will.”

While he now realizes that firearms aren’t for him, it should have been something that he thought about before owning one and firing it at an

intruder. If you’re going to own a firearm for self-defense, you need to be able to take a life if necessary.

I don’t mean to tear this guy apart, but it’s incredibly important to be prepared and aware of these things before a need arises.

What do you think of the Judges’ decision in this case?

DirectGG

Indiana是红州啊！

cjw065

判得正确， 此人缺少持枪教育，还是不要持枪的好。

maxsterling

看点在这里“Testimony indicated he fired three gunshots April 21 at a man he said had broken into his garage, at least two after the intruder had left his property and was running down an alley..."

akak47

maxsterling 发表于 2014-11-6 16:10
看点在这里“Testimony indicated he fired three gunshots April 21 at a man he said had broken into hi ...

我觉得这点是重点， 既然threat消除， 就不能再开枪了。但文中说的法官判第一枪的方向是邻居家reprehensible感觉有点牵强。一般的single family house都是四周都是邻居家。如何保证开枪的方向上不是邻居？

7.62

所有说拿枪吓阻暴力犯属于非法的法律，老子我要问一句：用枪吓阻威胁，算不算stop the threat?

Laou168

关键是:要么不开枪,要么就发发中要害,绝不追杀.

双筒

他自己的证词有点self incriminating，什么希望不要打中等等。 不过同一个故事不同人来说，可以有两种感觉：
--
Outrageous! Man Sentenced to Jail for Shooting in Self Defense

Yes, you read that correctly.

In an unusual (and angering) story, an Indiana man was sentenced to jail on a count of “criminal recklessness resulting in serious bodily injury” when he shot a home invader.

So what exactly happened?

David McLaughlin was awoken early in the morning on April 21st when he heard loud noises emanating from his attached garage. Unaware of whether or not the threat he would be dealing with was armed or not, McLaughlin entered his garage to find David Bailey in the act of committing a robbery.

That’s when Bailey bolted and headed down an alley behind the house. McLaughlin took aim and shot him.

McLaughlin’s attorney, Jill Gonzalez, told a jury that her client was alarmed at the early morning break in and only had seconds to act.

“This happened in a matter of seconds,” she said. “My client told him to freeze. … He didn’t shoot to kill. You have to stop somewhere,” she said. “People are tired of having their stuff taken.”

McLaughlin said he had been victimized several times earlier by break-ins and, like many people who are victimized by crime, was was concerned for his safety when he shot Bailey.

Now here’s where things get really irritating…

When Bailey broke in and was subsequently shot, he eventually needed to go to the doctor for the wound sustained by the gunshot.

Bailey lied to police about how he obtained the wound and about the crime he committed at the house.

And yet despite the inconsistencies in his story and the clearly criminal nature of Bailey’s presence on McLaughlin’s property, a jury still convicted him of a class D misdemeanor, which could send McLaughlin to jail for a period of 18 months or more.

What stories like this illustrate is how morally bankrupt laws are in the United States. In many states, it’s not enough to be be the victim of a crime, the circumstances have to be absolutely perfect in order to discharge a weapon in the act of self defense.

Sometimes it begs the question, “is it even worth it to own a gun?”

While the answer is an obvious “Yes,” you can be sure that David McLaughlin is probably thinking things could have worked out more in his favor if he’d left his gun inside.

It’s sad to live in a country where criminals are afforded more rights than citizens.

Worse yet is the steady elimination of gun rights across the nation.

http://therighttobear.com/outrag ... ng-in-self-defense/

alex

哪里顾得了那么多。。。

dart

我记得有一个家防的视频讲过选择safe house的一些注意事项。有一点，就是如何选择躲的地方。要考虑到射击的方向，防止子弹escape。推荐朝着壁炉。

这些都可以事先演练，如果我们知道自己的防守位置。一旦get into pursuit, 就非常复杂了。

还有一点，法律是一回事。实际如何解释又是另外一回事情。

Laou168

DirectGG 发表于 2014-11-6 15:57
Indiana是红州啊！

法律好象是无色的.

doublepar

自卫四大要素：mind set，tactical，skill，gear，in that order
这老兄除了最后一样，要什么没什么啊。

DirectGG

Laou168 发表于 2014-11-6 18:55
法律好象是无色的.

最高法院的9名大法官都分红蓝。

Laou168

DirectGG 发表于 2014-11-6 23:21
最高法院的9名大法官都分红蓝。

大法官们给无色的法律上色。