Patterico's Pontifications

6/18/2010

“Make-My-Day” Shooting in Denver

Filed under: Crime — DRJ @ 3:33 pm



[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

61 Responses to ““Make-My-Day” Shooting in Denver”

  1. “…multiple gunshot wounds to the head….”

    Nice shooting, for 2:20 am, huh? Hope I could be that cool under pressure.

    Virtual Insanity (d93c26)

  2. I wish we were that smart in Illinois.

    BT (74cbec)

  3. A person need not feel threatened to invoke force.

    So nk was correct?

    Old Coot (f722a6)

  4. Where can I donate ammo?

    jim2 (fc7836)

  5. I wonder if the homeowner had previously told this misguided miscreant to “Get off my lawn”?

    In CO, and TX, Yes! In IL, NO!

    AD - RtR/OS! (3b92f0)

  6. 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.

    redc1c4 (fb8750)

  7. 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.

    emil (746a98)

  8. 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.

    rumcrook¾ (4a9bee)

  9. 3.A person need not feel threatened to invoke force.

    So nk was correct?

    Nice one Old Coot, nice. Heh!

    Gazzer (d79016)

  10. 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.

    Mike K (8df289)

  11. Mike K, stabbing has also become de rigeur due to the absence of guns in the UK.

    Gazzer (d79016)

  12. Denver has an 11pm curfew law for those under 18. That was Duran’s first mistake.

    TimesDisliker (fbe777)

  13. 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.

    nk (db4a41)

  14. 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. 😉

    Have Blue (854a6e)

  15. You gotta a right to walk down a public street unbothered. You say that ain’t so, show me the law.

    nk (db4a41)

  16. Show us where it is the law (…a right to walk down a public street unbothered…)!

    You made the assertion, back it up, Counselor!

    AD - RtR/OS! (3b92f0)

  17. 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.

    Have Blue (854a6e)

  18. 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.

    nk (db4a41)

  19. nk – Better not live in Chicago then. Our betters will treat you very badly.

    Have Blue (854a6e)

  20. 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.

    AD - RtR/OS! (3b92f0)

  21. 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?

    Gazzer (d79016)

  22. OK, I just gotta say it…

    Now that (the shooting by the homeowner) was gun control I could support.

    Sorry. Kind of like “squirrel!”

    iconoclast (c91a7c)

  23. 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.

    nk (db4a41)

  24. (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.)

    nk (db4a41)

  25. Sigh.

    nk (db4a41)

  26. Sigh is right. Complete non sequitir.

    Gazzer (d79016)

  27. Non sequitor to what?

    Make your question clearer.

    nk (db4a41)

  28. they want nk gun
    haiku say must pry out his
    cold and dead rat paws

    ColonelHaiku (2ce3dc)

  29. That sounds like self-defense in almost every State.

    Dunno about California…

    Blacque Jacques Shellacque (9fe4a5)

  30. Colonel Haiku,

    I am a poet. You’re an idiot.

    nk (db4a41)

  31. haiku snuck up from
    behind and say to last Greek
    “hey… want see my watch?”

    ColonelHaiku (2ce3dc)

  32. 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.

    Gazzer (d79016)

  33. nk suffer much
    separation disorder
    when rat mother leave

    ColonelHaiku (2ce3dc)

  34. Tort Tourettes – I like that. I’m stealing that Gazzer.

    Have Blue (854a6e)

  35. I can shoot MOA all day with my keyboard, too. But I have a life.

    nk (db4a41)

  36. You’re welcome HB.

    Gazzer (d79016)

  37. nk have a life
    “life” exist in Illinois?
    haiku learn something

    ColonelHaiku (2ce3dc)

  38. Righteous self defense and home protection, but I think this will stay with the homeowner for many, many years.

    GeneralMalaise (2ce3dc)

  39. “…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.

    Machinist (497786)

  40. 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.

    AD - RtR/OS! (3b92f0)

  41. 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.

    Kevin Stafford (ff3afb)

  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.

    AD - RtR/OS! (3b92f0)

  43. 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.

    Dmac (3d61d9)

  44. 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.

    daleyrocks (1d0d98)

  45. Civility rule now applies in this thread as well.

    Patterico (c218bd)

  46. 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.

    GaleH (4fbede)

  47. Great North Wet

    Very, very good!

    AD - RtR/OS! (3b92f0)

  48. “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?

    daleyrocks (1d0d98)

  49. 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.

    Patterico (c218bd)

  50. “#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.

    Machinist (497786)

  51. Machinist – Just wait for the next thread. You can do it again.

    daleyrocks (1d0d98)

  52. 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 ….”

    nk (db4a41)

  53. “life” does exist in
    Illinois, but stifled by
    ten percent tax rate

    Icy Texan (d1faea)

  54. #53, NK,

    No and no. I don’t think we can discuss it here given the host’s comment at #45. Thank you.

    Machinist (497786)

  55. 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.

    nk (db4a41)

  56. 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.

    nk (db4a41)

  57. 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.

    Machinist (497786)

  58. Must have been this one, then. http://krites.blogspot.com/

    nk (db4a41)

  59. patterico not
    want posters insult argue
    act like laker fan

    ColonelHaiku (2ce3dc)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.1887 secs.