Deadly Force-TOO MUCH, TOO LITTLE..or JUST RIGHT?

Question

http://www.nptelegraph.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=18111616&BRD=377&PAG=461&dept_id=601696&rfi=6

"Howell was holding a Ruger Mini-14 .223 semi-automatic rifle when Allen entered the house. Ryan said Allen became rude to Howell and refused to leave, so Howell aimed the weapon at him and told him to get out of the house."

“He refused to leave the house and he went after her, at which time she fired several shots,” Ryan said.

Did she use the appropriate amount of force? Should all 19 Y.O. chicks be trained in the use of the Ruger Mini-14 rifle?

_/*|*\_,

You have to read the article, but it is mainly her word against ..... uh?

Answer 1

Question: What was the deceased doing calling at 02:30 in the morning? The shooter was justified in 'arming herself to answer the door.'

Question: Why didn't the deceased leave when told the party he was looking for was not home?

Question: Why didn't the deceased leave when faced with deadly force?

If the news report is accurate, then the shooter had the right to defend herself when the deceased 'went after her.'

Although it would be tough for him to justify his choice of visitation hours, reluctance to leave when asked, and failure to leave when threatened with deadly force, its a pity, a crying shame, that the deceased didn't survive to give his account of the events. I would have loved to hear it.

I don't know if every female needs to learn to use a Mini-14, but I taught my two (youngest) daughters to handle a handgun. Certainly, every person should be able to defend themselves.

H

Answer 2

A 19 year old girl against a 37 year old man running at her? Sounds pretty justified to me, a .223 does not have a lot of stopping power so multiple shots would be necessary to take down a full grown man. Besides a, what I am assuming, untrained, scared, 19 year old isn't exactly going to make every shot count.

When I was 16 (home alone) something similar happened to me. I had a burglar break into my house with a handgun but luckily the guy smartened up and surrendered, so I was fortunate enough to not have to use my AR-15 that night.

Answer 3

Not being familliar with the laws of North Platte, or the state, I can only go by those of my own. If she had the legal right to be in the home, i.e. living with boyfriend, owns the house, etc, she has no duty to retreat from her own dwelling, the fact that she did after she shot the intruder is only good common sense, neutralize the threat and get to safety. By neutralize I don't mean kill intentionally, I mean even wounding him will take him down and he no longer presents a threat.

the questions that will need to be answered are, did she have the gun out knowing that he was coming and expecting trouble, bad choice, thats what law enforecment is for, OR di he get there start banging on the door, to which she armed herself then he busted in and she shot him? In any shooting looking at the "number of shots fired" is VERY misleading, to say, x number of shots is acceptable but y number isn't is way to subjective, most people luckily will never have to shoot anyone, but for those that do it is a whole other world from TV and movies, picture yourself sitting at home and a big dude starts banging on your door yelling and screaming, next thing you know he's busted in, be great to say that anyone else would have shot him once, he'd fall, she'd administer aid till police and rescue got there, but thats not realistic, especially with a 19yr old girl, scared, shoot till he stops, period, get to safety. general rules for self-defensive shooting. Again not knowing ALL the details or the state/local laws, I can only give a broad take on it.

Answer 4

Things like this really depend on each specific situation. This case seems perfectly legal to me. and about having the firearm, where I come from rifles are stored behind doors for that very reason (but I'm a country boy) Several shots, easy to explain. she got scared and didnt stop pulling the trigger until the assailant stopped. I'm a Sergeant in the Army and I have shot insurgents with more than one bullet, big deal. In my opinion she deserves accomodation for bravery, not to be questioned by the courts (or anyone else)

Answer 5

In California a man is always considered to be armed with lethal force when he confronts a woman, so she would have been justified to shoot him here. I expect the laws may be different in other states.

Ah, he broke in, anyone would have been justified in shooting him. Home invasion is very bad.

At short range the 223 is ineffective, the round doesn't tumble and tends to just pass straight through unless it hits bone. It's also very easy to pump out three or four shots in a second when you are all fired up.

What's hard about using a mini 14? It's not like training someone to fly a plane or something, it's a very simple task.

Answer 6

I don't know where these other folks got this "must retreat" crap from but Nebraska's deadly force law contains the line "when the force is used, without retreating, surrendering possession...."

Put bluntly, if you're in your home or in the home of someone else with expressed permission to be there, and someone comes in and threatens you, deadly force is justified.

The amount of times she shot the guy makes no difference under the law. When "deadly force" is justified, you have the right, under the law, to kill the person. Plain and simple. As long as a reasonable expectation of impending harm exists, you can shoot til your weapon is empty.

Please keep up with the story and when it settles, come back and post the outcome. I for one am interested.

Answer 7

Doesn't matter if she did or not. He was in her house, she asked him to leave, he didn't, she pointed a gun and him ....he's dead.

Yes, I believe that all citizens of the United States should be well trained in firearms and should also own at least one firearm. It is our constitutional right. Considering the seriousness of the weapon, I believe that anyone that owns one should be trained in firearm safety... but that is probably the only legislation that I believe still needs to be passed concerning firearms. Everything else has been covered and unless laws in place are enforced nothing new will matter.

Guns don't kill...people do.

Answer 8

If she felt threatd she did the correct thing ,what bothers me is she had the gun in hand when he came in the house so she knew he was coming and should have locked the door and called the cops and only shot him if he broke in .You must always TRY to avoid a bad sitchuation.

Answer 9

she's screwed. in this bs liberal society if she was the only person in the house, and she had a means of escape she has to take it. if she had a young child in the house she probably would get off with self defense. but mark my word she'll get screwed because she had another means of escape, ohh and the poor criminal was picked on in school

i tell my wife to fire until the gun is empty and before you do anything else reload, a dead man can tell no lies is my motto. so if that was my wife 17 shot would of been fired, and to me that is just about right.

Answer 10

define he went after her and also several shots is too many. all you need is one good shot