Wednesday, November 23, 2011

New York State Burglar Executed

No charges will be filed in the fatal shooting of a western New York man who officials believe was burglarizing a fire-damaged home.

Get that? In New York, the place gun-rights fanatics continually claim has such strict gun laws that practically nobody has a gun legally and even if they did, they couldn't use it to protect themselves or their property, this poor schlep of a burglar got a summary execution for a break-in.

And no charges are being filed. I guess that makes liars out of all our friends who keep using the word "draconian."

What do you think?  Please leave a comment.


  1. I'm glad that you were able to pull so much out of the news article that you cite. To me, the article left out far too much detail to draw any conclusions. I do note that the shooter had to face a grand jury, something that might not have happened in a Castle Doctrine state.

  2. New York is a Castle Doctrine state. However their castle doctrine does not include immunity from civil prosecution.

  3. This:

    "§ 35.20 Justification; use of physical force in defense of premises and
    in defense of a person in the course of burglary.
    1. Any person may use physical force upon another person when he or
    she reasonably believes such to be necessary to prevent or terminate
    what he or she reasonably believes to be the commission or attempted
    commission by such other person of a crime involving damage to premises.
    Such person may use any degree of physical force, other than deadly
    physical force, which he or she reasonably believes to be necessary for
    such purpose, and may use deadly physical force if he or she reasonably
    believes such to be necessary to prevent or terminate the commission or
    attempted commission of arson."

    Is from the NY Castle Law.

    It does not appear that just stopping a burglary allows for use of deadly force. I'll see if I can find out what the circumstances were.

  4. Ah, that sounds like a Sand Castle Doctrine to me.

  5. And you sound like a bloodthirsty moron.

  6. Actually, I believe there are two states that allow you to use deadly force to protect property and, ironically, that pair is Texas and New York. Who would have thunk it?

  7. FatWhiteMan:

    My brief reading of the piece that I quoted allows deadly force to prevent arson. While arson is generally a property crime it is also responsible for innocents' deaths.

    Other than the arson exception, property crime does not appear to require summary execution.

  8. Democommie,
    You must be really high on those narcotics they're giving you. If a man violently invades your home you shoot him in the face. Period.

  9. Anonymous, in this story the guy "invaded" a burnt out house to pilfer whatever he could. Some vigilante asshole decided he deserved death.

    Is that what you support?

  10. It sends the right message to his friends.

  11. Mikeb302000:

    That was rhetorical question, yes? You know guyz like annoyingmutt live for the day when they can shoot someone in the face and be a REAL MAN!


    Not in NY, asshole. You want to say stupid shit, that's your privilege. You will be called stupid for doing so, moron.

  12. Depends on totality of circumstances. Every situation is different.

  13. Anonymous said...
    Depends on totality of circumstances. Every situation is different.

    November 24, 2011 7:53 PM

    Read the statute, the statute is clear. Circumstances that allow for deadly force in a dwelling place are limited to protecting human life and preventing arson. Theft doesn't fall under those two categories.

  14. Some of our gun-rights friends get so upset at the hint that cops are more valuable than civilian gun owners, but when it comes to criminals, kill 'em all and let god sort 'em out.