Stand Your Ground Law's Latest Victim

[blacken700]

yup b/c thats exactly what happend here right libtard....

yep pretty much shake the door handle and you have it,so if anyone wants to kill someone invite them over your house shoot them in the yard and when the armed guards come throw in he shook the door handle  

[OzmO]

sorry Oz idiocy needs to be called out and the idea that he went and shot him just b/c he was on his land is about as fucking idiotic as it gets.

I agree.   Just noting that's it's been a good debate overall. 

[OzmO]

you have been KINDA doing this yes I agree.

The issue is you want to say that b/c he went outside it shows a reasonable man wouldnt fear for bodily harm.

Here you left that nonsense out as it doesnt play into the actual shooting.

I still think it does.  I think if they charge him they will cite it as part of their reasoning.   

[240 is Back]

with the logic going on here it's pretty much ok to shoot anybody anytime if their on your land,just say you were scared

Also, they disobeyed orders which is seems private citizens are allowed to issue to one another.

[blacken700]

Also, they disobeyed orders which is seems private citizens are allowed to issue to one another.

oh yeah I forgot that ,you have to give orders 

[tonymctones]

oh yeah I forgot that ,you have to give orders 

Also, they disobeyed orders which is seems private citizens are allowed to issue to one another.

you see what happens when this idiocy goes unchecked Oz.....

[blacken700]

yep pretty much shake the door handle and you have it,so if anyone wants to kill someone invite them over your house shoot them in the yard and when the armed guards come throw in he shook the door handle  

so your saying in your world this wouldn't work

[Dos Equis]

or walking towards after being told identify themselves with a gun pointed at them.

Correct.

[Dos Equis]

There is a huge difference between forcing entry and knocking othe door and jiggling the handle.  That's why the article I posted talking about the Georgia law is relevant.   

And it wast his property.  He was visitor. 

No, there is really no difference between someone knocking on your door and trying to open the door, twice, at 4 a.m. and forced entry.  I think a reasonable person would believe someone is trying to forcibly enter their home if they're turning the door knob at 4 a.m.

Yes, it was his property, because he was staying with his fiancé.  A visitor would have been a friend who lives someplace else wasn't getting married to her.  I haven't heard anyone from law enforcement make an issue of this.   

[Dos Equis]

with the logic going on here it's pretty much ok to shoot anybody anytime if their on your land,just say you were scared

Nobody in this thread said that.  Except you.

[240 is Back]

the forced entry part of things had ended. 

Once a person attempts to "jiggle" door handle - then exits porch and walks into yard, he's no longer entering the home.

Sure, you can "suppose" what he would have done next, but that's not something to do.

[Jack T. Cross]

If the threat is at night, and you cannot tell what the person has, but they're on you're property, then it doesn't matter whether you think they have a gun, knife, bat, etc. or just their fists.    

So here we discuss Hendrix, and what he, as a healthy, reasonable person should have processed, regarding what fears were reality-based: gun, knife, fists, bat.

Obviously, if he chooses to shoot someone (to death, no less) he is obligated to process this information, or at least appear as though he did so, and with reason, in order for it to be acceptable.

Would you disagree with anything, so far?

(Going to call it a day..will see you later, BB)

[OzmO]

No, there is really no difference between someone knocking on your door and trying to open the door, twice, at 4 a.m. and forced entry.  I think a reasonable person would believe someone is trying to forcibly enter their home if they're turning the door knob at 4 a.m.

Yes, it was his property, because he was staying with his fiancé.  A visitor would have been a friend who lives someplace else wasn't getting married to her.  I haven't heard anyone from law enforcement make an issue of this.   

Yes there is, don't be ridiculous.  A reasonable person would think someone is trying to get in the house yes, but forcing entry is a completely different thing, which includes picking the lock, prying the door open, breaking a window.  It shows intent and is a clear cut action of breaking and entering.

It was not his property in ANY sense of the word.  He was a visitor on someone else's property.  Period.  Just as ridiculous as saying jiggling the door and knocking is forced entry.  lol

Quit the act lol.  You assumed it was his property in the beginning and was wrong and used it to support your argument.  Then after finding out it wasn't your are trying to make a argument that it was symbolically his property.  He didn't own it, he's NOT on the lease,  he's IS a VISITOR!

[24KT]

For those occasions when you might encounter an elderly Alzheimer's victim in your yard,
...or a 19 year old woman having car trouble and seeking assistance...

[Dos Equis]

So here we discuss Hendrix, and what he, as a healthy, reasonable person should have processed, regarding what fears were reality-based: gun, knife, fists, bat.

Obviously, if he chooses to shoot someone (to death, no less) he is obligated to process this information, or at least appear as though he did so, and with reason, in order for it to be acceptable.

Would you disagree with anything, so far?

(Going to call it a day..will see you later, BB)

If you're asking me, again, whether he needed to try and determine what kind of weapon the person had, the answer,  again, is no. 

[Dos Equis]

Yes there is, don't be ridiculous.  A reasonable person would think someone is trying to get in the house yes, but forcing entry is a completely different thing, which includes picking the lock, prying the door open, breaking a window.  It shows intent and is a clear cut action of breaking and entering.

It was not his property in ANY sense of the word.  He was a visitor on someone else's property.  Period.  Just as ridiculous as saying jiggling the door and knocking is forced entry.  lol

Quit the act lol.  You assumed it was his property in the beginning and was wrong and used it to support your argument.  Then after finding out it wasn't your are trying to make a argument that it was symbolically his property.  He didn't own it, he's NOT on the lease,  he's IS a VISITOR!

So a reasonable person thinks someone is trying to get into the house at 4 a.m., but it's not a forced entry in that person's mind until the intruder breaks a window, picks a lock, etc.  That's not reasonable.  In real time, a reasonable person being awaken from a dead sleep at 4 a.m. in their home isn't going to go through some sophisticated analysis of whether an intruder who is actually trying to open their front, repeatedly, is also trying to pick the lock, preparing to break the door down, etc.  They're more likely to think the person trying to get into their home has bad intentions.   

To say it isn't his property in any sense of the word is a pretty big overstatement.  And to call him a visitor is absurd.  I think the most you could say is he wasn't the "legal" owner of the property if his name wasn't on the lease (if rented) or deed (if owned).  But that doesn't determine whether it was still "his" property.  If he was splitting his time there, or living there, had his stuff there, and was getting married to the woman who lives there, then of course it was his place too.  And why would he keep a gun at her house if he was just visitor?  That really makes no sense.  The facts that we know so far don't support your claim that he was just a visitor.

Let me ask you this:  have you ever heard of a situation where a visitor keeps a loaded gun at someone else's place, especially if the gun was purchased for protection?       

[240 is Back]

"Let me ask you this:  have you ever heard of a situation where a visitor keeps a loaded gun at someone else's place, especially if the gun was purchased for protection?     "

 Many people take a gun with them everywhere they go.  Even without a permit (in GA), it's legal in vehicles, any house you live in or visit (as long as cool with people that live there) and where you work as well.  

Makes sense the dude would carry a pistol with him, and have it there.

[OzmO]

So a reasonable person thinks someone is trying to get into the house at 4 a.m., but it's not a forced entry in that person's mind until the intruder breaks a window, picks a lock, etc.  That's not reasonable.  In real time, a reasonable person being awaken from a dead sleep at 4 a.m. in their home isn't going to go through some sophisticated analysis of whether an intruder who is actually trying to open their front, repeatedly, is also trying to pick the lock, preparing to break the door down, etc.  They're more likely to think the person trying to get into their home has bad intentions.   

To say it isn't his property in any sense of the word is a pretty big overstatement.  And to call him a visitor is absurd.  I think the most you could say is he wasn't the "legal" owner of the property if his name wasn't on the lease (if rented) or deed (if owned).  But that doesn't determine whether it was still "his" property.  If he was splitting his time there, or living there, had his stuff there, and was getting married to the woman who lives there, then of course it was his place too.  And why would he keep a gun at her house if he was just visitor?  That really makes no sense.  The facts that we know so far don't support your claim that he was just a visitor.

Let me ask you this:  have you ever heard of a situation where a visitor keeps a loaded gun at someone else's place, especially if the gun was purchased for protection?       

Calling it "his" property is incorrect both legally and logically.  Not much more to say on it.  You are just reaching here.  

If knocking on the door and jiggling the handled is forced entry Then it would be illegal.   If the door was open and he walked in, it would be illegal entry or make trespassing. It's not until an act of forced entry is taken that it becomes forced entry and the resident of the home can defend themselves with deadly force that's what the Georgia law says.  In this case, calling jiggling a door handle and knocking on the door forced entry is another way you are reaching.  

[Dos Equis]

Calling it "his" property is incorrect both legally and logically.  Not much more to say on it.  You are just reaching here.  

If knocking on the door and jiggling the handled is forced entry Then it would be illegal.   If the door was open and he walked in, it would be illegal entry or make trespassing. It's not until an act of forced entry is taken that it becomes forced entry and the resident of the home can defend themselves with deadly force that's what the Georgia law says.  In this case, calling jiggling a door handle and knocking on the door forced entry is another way you are reaching.  

Actually, calling him a visitor is reaching.  It makes no sense that he bought a gun to protect her, leaves the gun at her place, but he doest actually reside there.  But we're just going circles.  Let's wait and see if law enforcement or the prosecutors believe he was a visitor.  I haven't read any mention of that.   

What you're missing is what is going on in the mind of the reasonable homeowner as things are happening.  I think it's really unrealistic to think someone is going to make a distinction between an intruder trying to open the door an intruder trying to pick a lock, etc.  What I see in this situation is fear and confusion, both of which were reasonable. 

[OzmO]

Actually, calling him a visitor is reaching.  It makes no sense that he bought a gun to protect her, leaves the gun at her place, but he doest actually reside there.  But we're just going circles.  Let's wait and see if law enforcement or the prosecutors believe he was a visitor.  I haven't read any mention of that.   

What you're missing is what is going on in the mind of the reasonable homeowner as things are happening.  I think it's really unrealistic to think someone is going to make a distinction between an intruder trying to open the door an intruder trying to pick a lock, etc.  What I see in this situation is fear and confusion, both of which were reasonable. 

No it isn't.  There are different degrees of being a visitor, but no matter what your are still a visitor.  It was her house, not his.  He frequents the place, because it's his girlfriend. Legally he is not the owner hence it is NOT his property. 

We are not going in circles, you are creating something that doesn't exist in the world:  people who don't live together, who  are not married, who aren't on the lease or the deed, becomin owners of property lol. Hilarious.

Oh yeah, BIG distinction:

 someone knocked not he door and jiggled the handle......he stopped

Versus....Someone picking the lock, using a crow bar, breaking a window.

Are you seriously trying to tell there is no difference?  Wait!  You are!  Lol

The dumb ass was confused, and he irresponsibly used his gun and accidentally killed someone.

The dumb ass, knew the cops were on thier way and nothing indicated there was forced entry. 

Hendrix is a stupid person.  Hendrix should do prison time for being such a dumb ass and irresponsibly killing someone.   He should also pay some sort of financial restitution to the man's wife.   

Also the wife should sue his ass.

[240 is Back]

"someone knocked not he door and jiggled the handle......he stopped
Versus....Someone picking the lock, using a crow bar, breaking a window."

Great point, ozmo.   Big difference there. 

More importantly - He had LEFT THE PORCH.   He was in the side yard already.

[OzmO]

"someone knocked not he door and jiggled the handle......he stopped
Versus....Someone picking the lock, using a crow bar, breaking a window."

Great point, ozmo.   Big difference there. 

More importantly - He had LEFT THE PORCH.   He was in the side yard already.

A few months ago someone knocked on my door at about 11pm on a weekday.  I was a little freaked and asked who it was and it was someone visiting my neighbor who mistakenly knock omy door.   I thought about that today and wondered how scared I would be if it was like what Hendrix went trough.  I would have been pretty scared and called the police.   I don't own a gun.  Got a couple of kbars though.  Never would I have left the house.

But, maybe tony is right, maybe him going outside doesn't factor into this charge, we still have Hendrix shooting a unarmed man with no forced entry, only walking towards him.   No way reasonable men feel so threatened they shoot 4 times chest.   

[240 is Back]

No way reasonable men feel so threatened they shoot 4 times chest.  

The fact the word "tresspassing" was used... that made me instantly think this was a case of Hendrix thinking the shoot was legal because they were trespassing in his chick's yard.  

Maybe the police are letting him walk into that defense.  Maybe they're letting him just keep right on saying he fired because the dude was trespassing.  Maybe he thinks in GA, you're allowed to shoot someone for trespassing.

[Jack T. Cross]

If you're asking me, again, whether he needed to try and determine what kind of weapon the person had, the answer,  again, is no. 

No, BB, that's not what I'm asking. I've stated my belief that Hendrix was appropriately fearful, so not sure why you'd say that.

Obviously, if the subject's hands are unseen, Hendrix (or any person in the same situation), wouldn't necessarily be able to determine that information before making a decision to shoot.

The person must, however, find himself appropriately fearful through sound reason. And in this case, healthy reasoning would call any or all of those things: gun, knife, bat, fists.

Are we together on this point?

[24KT]

So a reasonable person thinks someone is trying to get into the house at 4 a.m., but it's not a forced entry in that person's mind until the intruder breaks a window, picks a lock, etc.  That's not reasonable.  In real time, a reasonable person being awaken from a dead sleep at 4 a.m. in their home isn't going to go through some sophisticated analysis of whether an intruder who is actually trying to open their front, repeatedly, is also trying to pick the lock, preparing to break the door down, etc.  They're more likely to think the person trying to get into their home has bad intentions.   

To say it isn't his property in any sense of the word is a pretty big overstatement.  And to call him a visitor is absurd.  I think the most you could say is he wasn't the "legal" owner of the property if his name wasn't on the lease (if rented) or deed (if owned).  But that doesn't determine whether it was still "his" property.  If he was splitting his time there, or living there, had his stuff there, and was getting married to the woman who lives there, then of course it was his place too.  And why would he keep a gun at her house if he was just visitor?  That really makes no sense.  The facts that we know so far don't support your claim that he was just a visitor.

It is NOT a big overstatement at all. It was NOT his property, in EVERY sense of the word.

He did NOT own it. His girlfriend rented it, while he maintained a separate apartment elsewhere.

His status that night was no more than a GUEST.

Let me ask you this:  have you ever heard of a situation where a visitor keeps a loaded gun at someone else's place, especially if the gun was purchased for protection?       

It has not been established why the gun was purchased, or if it was even purchased.
What has been established according to the AP wire release that you yourself posted, is that he kept his gun at his residence, which was a separate apartment from the home she rented.

And no, it is not unusual for a guest to bring a weapon into a home they were just visiting.
My ex brought his gun into my apartment all the time. mind you... I always made him unload it.
The gun went on the top shelf in the cupboard, while the bullets went elsewhere... this way, if he ever pissed me off bad enough, he'd have the time to get out the door and down the stairwell before I'd be able to get it loaded.