[manbearpig]

Thread in Politics on this a week or two ago. But here are my .02 cents.

1) Old guy witnesses a robbery.
2) Calls cops.
3) Robbers leaving house before cops get there, presumably going to get away.
4) Old guy thinks he is within his rights to protect his neighbors property with force.
5) Goes outside, warns them, then shoots them.

Seems simple enough to me. The writer on the law says it was not to be interpreted to cover something like this but I think it is arguable at least.


Those of you in the "it was only a VCR camp:" Where do you draw the line? Any amount of property?

Or what if it was your own house? And the robber did not know you were there and you knew for a fact they were unarmed? Is force justified then?


The bottom line is that if somebody considering robbing a house thought there was a good chance they would get shot if caught they might think long and hard before stealing a couple hundred bucks worth of stuff.