“Make-My-Day” Shooting in Denver
[Guest post by DRJ]
The Denver Post reports what it describes as a “Make-My-Day” shooting. The article doesn’t provide many details, other than suggesting that the deceased was burglarizing the home. Google indicates the Colorado “Make-My-Day” law is the Castle Doctrine with a twist:
“The Colorado law differs from the traditional legal notion of self-defense in several ways. A person need not feel threatened to invoke force. In fact, the law provides that property crimes, not just violent crimes, are grounds for use of force.”
There’s a reason property crimes were death penalty offenses in the West. Taking someone’s horse or property was often the equivalent of a death penalty for that person or his family. But in this case, it was the middle of the night and the homeowner was outnumbered and apparently threatened with a weapon. That sounds like self-defense in almost every State.
– DRJ
“…multiple gunshot wounds to the head….”
Nice shooting, for 2:20 am, huh? Hope I could be that cool under pressure.
Comment by Virtual Insanity — 6/18/2010 @ 3:46 pm
I wish we were that smart in Illinois.
Comment by BT — 6/18/2010 @ 3:55 pm
So nk was correct?
Comment by Old Coot — 6/18/2010 @ 4:01 pm
Where can I donate ammo?
Comment by jim2 — 6/18/2010 @ 4:02 pm
I wonder if the homeowner had previously told this misguided miscreant to “Get off my lawn”?
In CO, and TX, Yes! In IL, NO!
Comment by AD - RtR/OS! — 6/18/2010 @ 4:03 pm
good for him for defending himself, and for saving the taxpayers a boat load of money.
i hope they prosecuted his partners for the death.
Comment by redc1c4 — 6/18/2010 @ 4:17 pm
In North Carolina, anyone forcibly entering your home is fair game. No other evidence is required. Law was passed after an increase in door breaking assaults against elderly folks by young thugs. After law was passed such incidents were greatly reduced.
Comment by emil — 6/18/2010 @ 4:26 pm
just this morning I heard a news report over the radio about a home invasion in colorado springs, 5 guys broke into a womans home one armed with a shotgun, stole her laptop and left.
Comment by rumcrook¾ — 6/18/2010 @ 4:30 pm
3.A person need not feel threatened to invoke force.
So nk was correct?
Nice one Old Coot, nice. Heh!
Comment by Gazzer — 6/18/2010 @ 4:31 pm
The fastest growing crime in England is daytime burglary, also called breaking and entering. The young punks have no fear of finding an armed homeowner and homeowners have been prosecuted for defending themselves with wooden clubs. The punks laugh.
This is the “broken windows” theory of policing that someone referred to the other day here. Allowing petty crime to go unpunished quickly leads to more serious crime.
Comment by Mike K — 6/18/2010 @ 4:32 pm
Mike K, stabbing has also become de rigeur due to the absence of guns in the UK.
Comment by Gazzer — 6/18/2010 @ 4:53 pm
Denver has an 11pm curfew law for those under 18. That was Duran’s first mistake.
Comment by TimesDisliker — 6/18/2010 @ 4:55 pm
A person need not feel threatened to invoke force.
So nk was correct?
Comment by Old Coot — 6/18/2010 @ 4:01 pm
Well, yes. I did that for a living.
Comment by nk — 6/18/2010 @ 5:00 pm
Old Coot – nk was totally incorrect. There is no comparison between an unlawful invasion of someones residence in the middle of the night with multiple armed intruders and a college student speaking to a Congressman on the street.
/But you knew that.
Comment by Have Blue — 6/18/2010 @ 5:05 pm
You gotta a right to walk down a public street unbothered. You say that ain’t so, show me the law.
Comment by nk — 6/18/2010 @ 5:09 pm
Show us where it is the law (…a right to walk down a public street unbothered…)!
You made the assertion, back it up, Counselor!
Comment by AD - RtR/OS! — 6/18/2010 @ 5:13 pm
You do not have the right to assault and batter a person who merely speaks to you, or a lot of NY squeegee bandits would have gotten black eyes.
Comment by Have Blue — 6/18/2010 @ 5:15 pm
Go do something pleasurable to yourself, AD.
That’s not the topic here, anyway. You break into my house, I don’t question, I don’t warn, I don’t give you a second to kill me or my family. I just shoot you in the head until I run out of ammunition.
Comment by nk — 6/18/2010 @ 5:17 pm
nk – Better not live in Chicago then. Our betters will treat you very badly.
Comment by Have Blue — 6/18/2010 @ 5:21 pm
Just as I thought…your statement about the right to proceed down a street free of confrontation was just BS.
It must get very lonely in that anti-septic bubble you reside in.
Comment by AD - RtR/OS! — 6/18/2010 @ 5:23 pm
Jackie Chiles is back I see with his latest version of “had to shoot someone in my own kitchen on accoubnt of how tough I’ve always been even when a toddler.” Over-compenstae much?
Comment by Gazzer — 6/18/2010 @ 5:23 pm
OK, I just gotta say it…
Now that (the shooting by the homeowner) was gun control I could support.
Sorry. Kind of like “squirrel!”
Comment by iconoclast — 6/18/2010 @ 5:25 pm
There’s an Illinois law that says that if you use a prohibited weapon to defend yourself in your own home, or own land, or own fixed place of business, you cannot be prosecuted under a local ordinance for its unlawful possession. Give me a couple of minutes to find it online — I’m a hard copy statutebook person.
Comment by nk — 6/18/2010 @ 5:30 pm
(720 ILCS 5/24‑10)
Sec. 24‑10. Municipal ordinance regulating firearms; affirmative defense to a violation. It is an affirmative defense to a violation of a municipal ordinance that prohibits, regulates, or restricts the private ownership of firearms if the individual who is charged with the violation used the firearm in an act of self‑defense or defense of another as defined in Sections 7‑1 and 7‑2 of this Code when on his or her land or in his or her abode or fixed place of business.
(Source: P.A. 93‑1048, eff. 11‑16‑04.)
Comment by nk — 6/18/2010 @ 5:36 pm
Sigh.
Comment by nk — 6/18/2010 @ 5:37 pm
Sigh is right. Complete non sequitir.
Comment by Gazzer — 6/18/2010 @ 5:42 pm
Non sequitor to what?
Make your question clearer.
Comment by nk — 6/18/2010 @ 5:47 pm
they want nk gun
haiku say must pry out his
cold and dead rat paws
Comment by ColonelHaiku — 6/18/2010 @ 5:47 pm
That sounds like self-defense in almost every State.
Dunno about California…
Comment by Blacque Jacques Shellacque — 6/18/2010 @ 5:50 pm
Colonel Haiku,
I am a poet. You’re an idiot.
Comment by nk — 6/18/2010 @ 5:51 pm
haiku snuck up from
behind and say to last Greek
“hey… want see my watch?”
Comment by ColonelHaiku — 6/18/2010 @ 5:55 pm
I wasn’t asking a question, I was merely commenting that the law you cited has nothing to do with the question being asked in comment #20. The other evening you actually conceded that you were wrong and then moments later went back to digging the hole you had created for yourself, before announcing that you would no longer discuss the law with us uneducated rubes. It’s like you have a kind of Tort Tourettes.
Comment by Gazzer — 6/18/2010 @ 5:57 pm
nk suffer much
separation disorder
when rat mother leave
Comment by ColonelHaiku — 6/18/2010 @ 6:02 pm
Tort Tourettes – I like that. I’m stealing that Gazzer.
Comment by Have Blue — 6/18/2010 @ 6:02 pm
I can shoot MOA all day with my keyboard, too. But I have a life.
Comment by nk — 6/18/2010 @ 6:07 pm
You’re welcome HB.
Comment by Gazzer — 6/18/2010 @ 6:09 pm
nk have a life
“life” exist in Illinois?
haiku learn something
Comment by ColonelHaiku — 6/18/2010 @ 6:11 pm
Righteous self defense and home protection, but I think this will stay with the homeowner for many, many years.
Comment by GeneralMalaise — 6/18/2010 @ 6:19 pm
“…You break into my house, I don’t question, I don’t warn, I don’t give you a second to kill me or my family. I just shoot you in the head until I run out of ammunition.
Comment by nk — 6/18/2010 @ 5:17 pm ”
The last time you spoke of someone coming into your house you said you would offer them refreshments. The topic of discussion then was someone breaking in through the front door.
Comment by Machinist — 6/18/2010 @ 6:21 pm
BJS…In CA, if someone breaks into your home while you are present, you shoot them, and when the cops arrive, you just state that “You were in fear for your life, or the lives of others (if present)”. The intrusion itself is considered a hostile act, and assumes that the perp wishes to do harm to any and all present.
End of story.
Comment by AD - RtR/OS! — 6/18/2010 @ 6:23 pm
The distinction between property crimes and violent crimes is meaningless. Even when you are not in proximity to the criminal, it is inherently violent to be the victim of a property crime. The stress it creates is violent. Steal a car from a family trying to make ends meet and you have hurt them physically.
Comment by Kevin Stafford — 6/18/2010 @ 6:31 pm
Comment by Machinist — 6/18/2010 @ 6:21 pm
Since I believe that remark was directed at me, let me be clear:
I would not enter nk’s home even if invited.
Comment by AD - RtR/OS! — 6/18/2010 @ 6:34 pm
I can shoot MOA all day with my keyboard, too. But I have a life.
Yet you still come here constantly – take your own advice for change.
Comment by Dmac — 6/18/2010 @ 7:00 pm
If 720 ILCS 5/24‑10 stemmed from SB 2165 in 2004, Obama voted against it and it was passed by overriding the governor’s veto. It was written in response to the prosecution of Hale DeMar, a Wilmette resident, who used a handgun to defend his residence from a home invader in 2003. The Village of Wilmette prosecuted him for the illegal possession of a firearm since it banned handguns. It ultimately dropped the charges. After the 2008 Supreme Court decision on the DC gun ban, Wilmette decided to no longer enforce its gun ban, but I believe it remains on the books.
Comment by daleyrocks — 6/18/2010 @ 7:27 pm
Civility rule now applies in this thread as well.
Comment by Patterico — 6/18/2010 @ 7:28 pm
The Denver Post article quotes Tom Smith
saying property crimes are different in
the West and points out that horse thievery was a hanging offense not so long ago.
I have read that there is a coroners report in Inyo County CA dated about 1880 where the Coroner determined manner of death was suicide after he examined three or four men hanged from a tree limb after being caught.
I did not get to the examine the record before moving to the Great North Wet.
Comment by GaleH — 6/18/2010 @ 7:29 pm
Great North Wet
Very, very good!
Comment by AD - RtR/OS! — 6/18/2010 @ 7:32 pm
“Civility rule now applies in this thread as well.”
Patterico – I took a little 600 mile jaunt up above the cheese curtain today. What did I miss?
Comment by daleyrocks — 6/18/2010 @ 7:42 pm
Patterico – I took a little 600 mile jaunt up above the cheese curtain today. What did I miss?
Not really sure. I have had only time to skim.
Comment by Patterico — 6/18/2010 @ 7:48 pm
“#42
Comment by Machinist — 6/18/2010 @ 6:21 pm
Since I believe that remark was directed at me, let me be clear:
I would not enter nk’s home even if invited.
Comment by AD – RtR/OS! — 6/18/2010 @ 6:34 pm”
No Sir. I was simply pointing out to him his change of position from what he stated before.
Comment by Machinist — 6/18/2010 @ 9:26 pm
Machinist – Just wait for the next thread. You can do it again.
Comment by daleyrocks — 6/18/2010 @ 9:44 pm
The last time you spoke of someone coming into your house you said you would offer them refreshments. The topic of discussion then was someone breaking in through the front door.
Comment by Machinist — 6/18/2010 @ 6:21 pm
Hmm. I thought it was about the President giving a tour of the White House to a veteran and his family. And I thought I said “If somebody knocks on my door with friendly intentions ….”
Comment by nk — 6/18/2010 @ 11:27 pm
Is this http://patterico.com/2009/12/15/meet-the-obamas/#comment-597954 what you’re talking about?
Or this? http://patterico.com/2009/12/15/meet-the-obamas/#comment-597983
Comment by nk — 6/18/2010 @ 11:52 pm
“life” does exist in
Illinois, but stifled by
ten percent tax rate
Comment by Icy Texan — 6/19/2010 @ 12:24 am
#53, NK,
No and no. I don’t think we can discuss it here given the host’s comment at #45. Thank you.
Comment by Machinist — 6/19/2010 @ 12:46 am
Well, you can email me at njkritAThotmailDOTcom.
I did you the courtesy of linking the comment I thought you were talking about — return me the favor by linking the comment you’re talking about.
Comment by nk — 6/19/2010 @ 1:01 am
You know, I’m getting on in years and that thing I use to remember with just isn’t as good as it used to be.
As for Patterico enforcing a civility rule — his site, his rules. But DRJ did it first.
Comment by nk — 6/19/2010 @ 1:05 am
I’m afraid I don’t recall the thread. The discussion was about intruders entering the home. I mentioned that someone coming through my door would be met with gunfire. Your response was that people coming through your door were offered refreshments.
I don’t care to search for it so if you don’t recall it, forget it. I suspect you were not attempting to have a reasonable discussion, as has seemed to be the case so often of late.
I responded to AD because he thought I was addressing him.
Comment by Machinist — 6/19/2010 @ 2:25 am
Must have been this one, then. http://krites.blogspot.com/
Comment by nk — 6/19/2010 @ 4:55 am
Sorry, correct link here.http://patterico.com/2008/04/26/unexpected-houston-case-on-defense-of-property/#comment-337348
Comment by nk — 6/19/2010 @ 4:58 am
patterico not
want posters insult argue
act like laker fan
Comment by ColonelHaiku — 6/19/2010 @ 7:54 am