Expectant mother shoots, kills intruder

in Eureka Springs, a township in Cumberland County, near Fayetteville, NC.

I say: "Darn good shot."

Strickland, whose two children, ages 3 and 1, were in the home at the time, warned McMillian that she had a gun. He replied that he also had a gun, officials said.
Authorities say the two exchanged gunfire and McMillian was shot in the chest

[jesus marion joseph]

You know what they say: gun control means hitting what you aim at.

[Enforcer]

Better him than her.

[jesus marion joseph]

The Mass. SJC issued an opinion yesterday in a case that sounds similar to this one. They decided that the right to use deadly force against an intruder in your home does not extend to a porch attached to the house. Here's an excerpt:
_____________________
The defendant argues that the castle law should be expanded to encompass the outside stairs and open porch of the house. We reject these arguments. General Laws c. 278, § 8A, expressly grants a castle law defense to a defendant charged with killing or injuring another person, if that person was in the defendant's dwelling, and the defendant acted in the reasonable belief that the person was about to inflict great bodily injury or death. See Commonwealth v. Peloquin, 437 Mass. 204, 208-209 n.3 (2002) (holding castle law statute "expressly limited to cases of an occupant's self-defense against someone 'unlawfully in [a] dwelling'"). Neither party here claims that Morey, or either of the boys, was in the Sullivans' house.

Even assuming that Morey or one of his sons was on the steps of the porch, as the defendant asserts the evidence shows, the defendant is still not entitled to a castle law instruction. We do not agree with the defendant that the term "dwelling" should extend to the outside stairs of the house. As discussed, the plain language of G. L. c. 278, § 8A, limits the defense to an occupant who injures someone unlawfully in the dwelling. Open areas are not given the same legal exemptions as the residence or dwelling itself. See Commonwealth v. Peloquin, supra; Commonwealth v. Bennett, 41 Mass. App. Ct. 920, 921 (1996).

We also reject the defendant's arguments that on the facts here the porch functioned as "an extension of the living room" and that, because the porch provided direct access to the house, it was a part of the "dwelling." We first note that there was no evidence that the Moreys were on the porch. Moreover, it is of no consequence how near or far the porch is in relation to the "dwelling." Commonwealth v. Fortini, 44 Mass. App. Ct. 562, 568 (1998) (where victim climbed stairs of front porch of defendant's residence, castle law did not apply because defendant left his second-floor apartment and went to front porch on first floor of house, where he shot the victim). "Dwelling" implies an enclosed area. See Commonwealth v. Bennett, supra.
____________________________

Prety narrow reading of the term "in a dwelling", if you aske me; especially in the context of an intruder, BWTFDIK?

[Gary Sisco]

Absolutely, Larry. She warned him. His response more than justifies shooting him.

Originally Posted by jesus marion joseph

The Mass. SJC issued an opinion yesterday in a case that sounds similar to this one. They decided that the right to use deadly force against an intruder in your home does not extend to a porch attached to the house. Here's an excerpt:
_____________________
The defendant argues that the castle law should be expanded to encompass the outside stairs and open porch of the house. We reject these arguments. General Laws c. 278, § 8A, expressly grants a castle law defense.........etc.

Those wascally, whacky law makers... You just can't be too keerful these days..

[Gary Sisco]

House invasions, thanks to the heroin and meth scourge, have become a common thing where I live. A friend -- the burglar clearly didn't have a clue who he was dealing with -- cat has a federal carry license and was recently offered $100 large to do security work in Iraq for eight months -- some time back got the drop on a guy inside his house, in the dark. The guy never knew he was there until he felt the barrel of Roger's .357 against his temple. Roger told him, "Move at all and your head comes off." Guy pissed and shat himself right there.

The cop who came to cuff the guy got a charge out of it but told Roger, privately, that when he does take someone's head off in one of these things, to at least pull out some of his own pubic hairs or something to produce a tear because he knows Roger has no remorse.

[Gary Sisco]

PS -- When Roger asked what I thought about the Iraq order, I told him, Hell, Roger, the Domino's delivery kid probably gets paid that much in Iraq.