[master-lincoln]

WTF? Do you mean that you can't shoot someone without legal consequence in some US jurisdiction if you have an open door? You can still shoot them...

>You can shoot someone that rams your door to open it.

So somebody destroys a door and that entitles you to take their life?

I think in both situations you should just refrain from shooting at all. Seems to work in most of the rest of the world..

[talldatethrow]

No, you can't legally shoot someone that walks in through an open door. You can ask them to leave, but youre going to have big problems if you shoot them and all they did up to that point was not leave instantly when asked, if they walked through an open door.

If the door is locked, and they break in, you are not shooting them because they broke a lock. You are shooting them because theyve shown criminal intent by forcibly making their way through a locked door.

[wizofaus]

I'm curious in how many jurisdictions simply "showing criminal intent" is sufficient to mean they're legally a target to be shot at, potentially fatally. I'd be pretty horrified to know I was living in such a jurisdiction. Whereas somebody walking through my open door while clearly posing a threat to my life, or the life of family members (e.g. holding a weapon) I would have no hypothetical qualms over aiming a gun at, and should they continue to approach, firing. Mind you if that did result in their death I'd still expect to be required to provide evidence that it was a reasonable course of self-defence given the circumstances. Are you saying that isn't the case wherever you live?

[mynameishere]

Are you sure you can run all those calculations while breaking and entering is occurring in your home? It varies quite a bit from place to place, as you can see...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Castle_doctrine

But the basic idea is that the natural right of self-defense extends to certain areas, including one's home. (That is, you do not have to wait until the intruder has his hands around your neck in order to defend yourself.) If you would prefer to not be allowed to defend yourself, that's you. In many countries (not just the US) invading people's homes makes for a dangerous and short career, as it should.

[wizofaus]

Thanks for that link, that is pretty interesting and I can't honestly say I know exactly what the law is where I live (in Australia, but not in the state that gets a special mention in that article). And absolutely, if I happened to have access to a lethal weapon and I was sufficiently fearful I might well be tempted to use it on an intruder even well before they posed an immediate threat. But if I really were responsible for taking an intruder's life and the courts determined that they were never a realistic threat to anyone, nor was there any good reason for me to believe they were (e.g. I had a clear view of them, could see that had no weapon, and they weren't acting in any sort of hostile manner), I'd fully expect to go to jail for it.

[talldatethrow]

Instead of trying to catch me making a language error on exactly what criminal intent is... Why don't you think about this like a human.... You are at home with your wife and kids. A large man wearing all black with his face covered has broken your door lock and forced the door open. He is now making his way up your stairs where all your family is. Should you be able to legally shoot this man? If not, what is your plan for protecting your family members from this person?

[wizofaus]

Not a question of language error, I'm just interested in how different parts of the world have different takes on when taking a life can be legally justified. FWIW, in your scenario, if I simply shot the man and killed him, then I would fully expect to be questioned and possibly charged, and only acquitted if I could demonstrate killing him was a justifiable act of self-defense. I don't imagine whether he'd broken the door lock would be considered particularly relevant. As it happens, I've forced locked doors open with no criminal intent - I'd simply lost my key and needed to get back inside my own house. It's not impossible the man in question had got confused about which house was his and was doing the same thing.

[talldatethrow]

I got it. If a man breaks into your house, begins walking up the stairs while your wife and kids are there, you're going to be cautious to see if stopping him with deadly force is necessary. Maybe first let him strike you in the face too. You wouldn't want to kill him if he's punch only knocks you down and allows you to get up and fight him off like a super hero! And if he punches you so hard you loose consciousness, what's the worst he's going to do? Rape your wife?

[wizofaus]

Yes, I absolutely would be cautious - if nothing else, attempting to stop him with deadly force may well be what triggers the situation to become violent and life-threatening for my family and myself. But more importantly, all the circumstances I can realistically imagine myself trespassing into somebody's house do not involve me intending any harm to any of the occupants, so I would very much hope most people would approach such scenarios with similar caution.