The media is having Trayvon Martin withdrawal. The Florida teen’s demise dominated the news cycle for more than a month, boosting ratings and giving commentators something serious (race relations!) to kvetch about. The obvious next step: Trayvon Martin II. Although there are plenty of firearms-related homicides from which to choose (hey, it’s a big country) finding a killing that will viralize is as difficult as not hot-linking to Israeli babes. You need exactly the right combination of ethnicity and events (for both tasks). To paraphrase Blue Peter‘s presenters, here’s one they prepared earlier . . .
A 14-year-old boy remained in critical condition Friday after being shot in the head by a homeowner who said he thought the teen was trying to break into his house. But police said the teen was unarmed and did not pose an “imminent threat” when he was shot and have charged the owner with attempted second-degree murder.
The family of Marshall Coulter said the teenager could move only the right side of his body a little, but not the left. Doctors told the family that if Coulter survives, he would likely be severely brain damaged.
The nola.com story isn’t perfect for the purposes of press preening and media milking. At the risk of seeming insensitive, Marshall Coulter isn’t dead. And it seems likely that the Louisiana teen with a history of burglary beefs wasn’t just trying to “get home.” But there are some Twitter-appropriate talking points.
Coulter’s family acknowledged the teen’s history of burglary arrests but said he had never used a gun.
Police said that Coulter did not pose a threat to the homeowner, Merritt Landry [above], who works as a building inspector for the Historic District Landmarks Commission . . .
Earlier in the evening, a different neighbor said the teen in the blue tank top had been biking around the area around 8 p.m. and the neighbor believed he was looking at different houses.
“I thought about calling the cops, but the last thing I want to do is racially profile a little kid who’s just biking,” said the neighbor, who spoke on condition of anonymity. The neighbor and Landry are white; the two teens are black.
Now there’s a twist. And you gotta give nola.com [some] credit for keeping race out of the story until the 20th paragraph. If this story blows up you can bet it will be front and center. Again. Still. And if not this one, another.
Not to put too fine a point on it, there’s gold in them thar’ white-on-black self-defense teen-involved shootings. Funny old world, innit? [h/t EW]
Oh, you’re just here to steal my stuff and aren’t armed? Well, golly OK then, help yourself. Would be a shame if I stopped you in some way.
I was disappointed that they showed a photo of his actual age. No baby photos for the precious little thieving thug?
What’s mine is yours to seize forcefully! If I said otherwise, Al Sharpton would call me a racist!
There was a time when it was universally agreed upon that burglary (armed or not) should be a high risk and dangerous (sometimes deadly) profession. Now, according to prog talking heads, we’re supposed to realize that these poor people just need our stuff more than we do… Oh yeah, and do it for the children.
Sounds like he was pretty brain damaged already.
You could talk about the Newsome/Christian rape/torture/murder/dismemberment case in Knoxville…oh wait, that was black on white crime so it doesn’t fit the narrative.
How was that not a hate crime?
According to Eric Holder, Hate Crimes only apply if someone from a majority dominant oppressive group ie white/male/heterosexual attacks someone from a traditionally oppressed and discriminated against minority group ie black/female/homosexual etc.
So, exactly HOW FAR does one need to go to be able to legally claim to be gay? Like, if I was to say that thought Tom Selleck looked really nice in his khaki shorts AND I had strong opinions about color schemes, could I claim membership in an oppressed group and get myself out of the oppressor group? Is an act in furtherance of the impulse necessary? Ralph?
Barstow Cowboy, that is a question for the ages.
Barstow Cowboy, kiss the next man you meet on the mouth. With tongue. That’s far enough. If he kisses back he’s gone far enough also. IMHO.
Half assed criminal wanna be hoping to steal some bling and a gat so he can get some street cred.
I forget to add he probably has a YOLO tattoo.
Is there any word yet on whether or not he was an aspiring rapper? Was he finally getting his life on track?
YODO too haha 😀
Wasn’t black man just aquitted for something oh-so-similar?
It’s like the same, but not, because only the colors are reversed and rhis is a “Home Invasion, technically speaking.
If someone is in my house and does not respond to comands his fate will more than likely be the same.
We don’t know the exact details of the case, but that is what trials by juries are for if there is some form of reasonable question the homeowner didn’t act accordingly to the law (of his heart) of self-defense of person and property.
Ultimately the choice is theirs whom did the invading As to whether or not they leave willingly or get carried out on a stretcher.
People focus on the “unarmed” point without understanding that just because you’re unarmed does NOT mean you’re not an imminent threat to my life or well-being.
Additionally just because the investigation after the fact shows you are unarmed does not mean I knew that in the moment. I do not have to wait to be fired upon, slashed at, or swung at before I can start defending myself.
Apparently there is a security camera recording showing the shootee and his friend riding bikes up and down the street at about 2000, but the neighbor who saw them didn’t call police for fear of being perceived as having racially profiled a “kid who’s just biking.” The same camera apparently shows the two of them talking in the street at 0144, and then shows the teen in the light top climbing over the fence into Landry’s yard. The shooter was inside his house with a baby daughter and a pregnant wife.
The shootee was shot in the driveway of the home, just a few feet from the back door, inside a locked, gated yard. The only way he could have gotten there was by illegal entry. Fvck him.
There’s a good write-up (from a self-defense attorney), including photos of the gate and the back door area, over at legalinsurrection.com.
Thanks for the link. Looking at those pictures of the gate and yard, I am even more convinced that this charge is ridiculous. Anyone going over that at two in the morning is clearly intent on committing multiple felonies, and does not deserve the benefit of the doubt.
Nothing good happens after 2 AM, except maybe a DGU.
Thanks for the link Matt, that provided much more (and very high quality) information.
why was a 14 yr old out of his house at 1 am?? Yeah, guess Bible study got out late, huh?
Dirk, maybe his mom said he was a thg and made him go live with his dad?
Read the article, his dad died of cancer three years ago.
Screw the police who stated their opinion on this one “he was not a risk.” I bet if they were in a situation, they would have drilled him. I have seen cases here in north Florida where LEO shot a guy because he was allegedly reaching for a pocket knife “inside” a pocket even though the guy was 15 feet away.
Yet a punk in the middle of the night in a locked gate, it is o.k. If that is the case, I suggest that statutes be passed that these particular LEO can’t shoot until actually shot at and see how their tune changes.
Shooting someone in the stomach is iko-iko; in the yard, not so much so.
Unless the now-paralyzed lad said something like, “I’m going to clean you and the baby like fish, and rape your ho.” I suppose we’ll find out, one way or the other.
Are the gun-banners scared they’ll be bitten in the hiney-quarters again with this case? Well, we shall see. It looks like it’s all wrapped up in ribbons and expensive paper for them. Will they take the bait?
Shooting someone who (according to the article) is thirty feet away and only in your yard, not yet breaking into your house, is always going to be risky from a legal standpoint, especially if that person turns out to be an unarmed juvenile. But even assuming the worst, attempted second-degree murder seems an excessive charge, given that the young man was a known thief engaged in trespassing prior to (likely) burglary. If there wasn’t good lighting, his age and unarmed status likely wasn’t clear to the homeowner.
We’ll see, I suppose, but unless there’s evidence that the kid was clearly leaving or had surrendered I find it hard to see how this is attempted murder.
Meanwhile, wouldn’t it be nice if just once the family said something like “yeah, he was a young punk who was a menace to the community, and we did a terrible job raising him.”
its the next logical step, really. They wont stop trying, but they realize they cant govern the RIGHT to KEEP and BEAR, but the right to USE is up for grabs. They’ll make the circumstances in which a DGU is acceptable so narrow, that it’ll be like castle doctrine and stand your ground laws don’t exist, even if they do.
Oh, the invader tripped and fell after you pulled the trigger but before the bullet hit him? Well, your knowledge of physics is insubstantial for you to be allowed to own a firearm, thus making you a retroactive criminal and you are now guilty of murdering a yoot only in you domicile to admire your belongings, or so his mother says.
You might be on to something here. We must be aware of this potential new tactic.
Too bad they didn’t profile him and call the police, he’d still be able to jerk off with both hands.
shoot him and put a knife in his hand …how hard is that?
Nice thought but I wouldn’t want to roll the dice on that one, forensic science and such being what it is. Remember they checked GZ’s heater for DNA.
just have the shooter say he checked a pulse and took the knife from his hand to make sure he couldn’t get up and keep attack. Geez. how hard do we have to make this??
“police said the teen was unarmed and did not pose an “imminent threat” when he was shot”
How would they know? They weren’t there.
From the cops’ POV, to be a threat worthy of shooting, he has to be talking back to a cop…or have a dog.
…. Or driving a Toyota Tacoma in LA.
A lot of people are discussing the age of the intruder, as if that should be a mitigating factor in the shooting. There is a lot about this story we do not know yet, but I fail to see how the age of the intruder is relevant. I spent a year doing juvenile, criminal defense. It was heartbreaking work, and a big factor in why I am now a civil litigator. I couldn’t take doing it. And one reason why the work was so painful was that you saw teenage boys with little to no impulse control doing things that they likely would not have done in their later years. A teenager is not less dangerous than a full grown man. He is often more dangerous. I have a 7-year old son. He is a sweet caring child. Nonetheless, I often pray that he will get to adulthood without doing something stupid that could put his future at risk, or his life.
I feel your pain as to the sadness of juvenile criminal defense, though I’ve only been on the periphery. What is interesting about this story is that New Orleans has a curfew to prevent exactly this kind of risk to juveniles. Those aged 16 and under have an 8 p.m. curfew…which the two boys apparently beat after their first loitering in the neighborhood. (The curfew is 11 on weekends, and does not apply the the kid’s own block, or when accompanied by parents.) To return to the same house at 1:44 a.m., and to hop a locked gate, is a bit beyond impulse. Sounds more like a plan. No parents? Parent works a night shift? There was a mugging-turned-murder in the neighborhood recently. Tough town, obviously.
… and there were also the criminals in training. And the parents? The parents are rarely actual parents. Point being that “kid” when caught by the homeowner trying to burglarize his house could pose a greater threat than an adult caught doing the same. The impulse control issue can also cause a crime to be escalated.
That fella looks like a 21 year old mid level thug. The kind that would make me lock my car door if I saw him walk by on the street. 14 you say? I guess him mom didn’t have any photos handy of when he was 6.
Ditto, that ‘kid’ appears not only to be much older, but from the provided picture he’s several inches taller and heavier than me by at least 30 lbs. At 2:00am in bad light that’s a man. Either way, if he was 4’10” and skinny, if he had a gun he was a lethal threat. Perhaps the lesson here is that if you missed the lesson on not breaking and entering at least make sure you took the course on how to respond when confronted by an armed person. (Hint for the quiz, don’t reach for your waist or pockets!)
The guy in the Pic is the brother of the kid that was shot- there is a caption that goes with the pic in the NOLA .com article.
Well, I’ve read everything I can find on it. I’m thinking (though the prosecutor probably isn’t) that proving2nd degree murder will be impossible unless the defendant confesses that he was just waiting around for a chance to kill someone.
I’m also thinking that having scaled a locked gate to gain access probably meets LRS 14:19(A) since this was certainly a trespass and seems to have advanced to an actual attack (based on the defendants report of the offender appearing to reach for a weapon). I’d say this should have been a no charge Mark 1 Mod. 0 defensive shooting and the charges are politically and or racially motivated.
What I want to know is if this offender was on probation for his previous burglaries (and thus violating his probation via curfew and trespass), if there is a general curfew in that municipality and whether the offender was in violation of it, and what charges are to be filed against his parent(s) or guardian(s) resulting from their failure to properly supervise the offender in their care. If your 14 year old has a history of burglary (or even if he doesn’t) what is he doing at large at 2:00AM? I’m thinking this one is a third rail for the race baiters. Too many questions about the offender and his family will have to be answered and it seems they wont be terribly comfortable.
I don’t know the law where this occurred, but in my place of residence, lethal force is justified when used to stop a perp in the process of committing a felony, so long as the shooter has a legal right to be present.
Let’s see, shooter is in HIS PRIVATE HOME.
Teenage punk has committed FELONY BURGLARY simply by trespassing (look it up).
Home owner demand perp leave his private property, and perp refuses to comply.
Home owner prevents perp from making further progress in self defense of himself, his daughter, and his wife.
30 foot rule (a perp closer than 30 feet can attack you faster than you can draw your weapon, therefore 30 feet is generally accepted minimum safe distance) is also very valid here.
What the FVCK is the issue? Why are charges filed against the home owner?? Did this occur in a Communist (Police) state?
Because the homeowner is white.
yeah, as a Black man, have to agree . . . . this is only an issue b/c the shooter is older and white. sad. but if I shot the fvcker, sharpton and jackson would argue that since I am a high yellow brother (yes, we discriminate amongst ourselves) with a corporate job, I am an Uncle Tom and thus a proxy for the white man. Hence, they would demand my a$$ on a platter, too.
TTAG made out pretty well over the controversy surrounding the GZ/Tm case. It wasn’t just the msm. As for this case, I wouldn’t have known about it if it hadn’t been presented here. Apparently racial conflict does sell.
I’m sure he was a good kid, a total saint, kind to dogs and children, the sole support of his pregnant mother and his twelve brothers and sisters. He was training to be an all-night on-call locksmith when all of a sudden — blam!
You’re killing me Ralph! Apparently this thugs family didn’t get the memo. They have already admitted his involvement in multiple burglaries.
Sure, but if Trayvon Martin was worth a million bucks, this kid ought to be worth, what, a few grand at least.
I’m starting to wonder if all the publicity these shootings are garnering might have a hidden beneficial effect. Could it be that in time would be attackers and burglars will curb their activity in light of the fact they may be shot?
I’ve never burgled a house and I’ve always feared getting shot. Maybe the 2 are related? I also have a fear of being on fire, but that’s a whole other issue. Not many folks protect against intruders with flamethrowers.
Too much collateral damage with the flame thrower. I’ve never been inclined to steal, what I’m wondering is if the publicity of such cases causes those who are so inclined to decide against it.
That would be hard to qualify. How many people didn’t commit a crime over fear of being shot? I wouldn’t know where to start on a project like that.
A few choice excerpts from the article:
A spokesman for the City of New Orleans said Landry has been placed on emergency suspension without pay, pending the outcome of the criminal investigation. (Well that sucks and goos luck getting another job)
Coulter is the seventh of eight children. Coulter’s 23-year-old brother, David Coulter, said he had largely raised the children after their father died three years ago of stomach cancer.
“He would steal — he was a professional thief, sure,” David Coulter said. “But he would never pick up a gun, not in a million years. He was too scared to aim a gun at the grass, let alone aim it at a person. (Seems like Daddy David tried to gangster-up little Bro)
A quote like that reveals a mentality: He was just there to steal, you didn’t have to shoot him. I suppose this is really how some people think.
I just thought of it, but after multiple convictions for burglary, wouldn’t attempting to train him in the use of a gun constitute felonies for both this thug and who ever provided him with the gun?
Kid needs a Manssiere.
Now, you’re a homeowner with his wife and kids to protect and you have a possibly armed intruder coming at you in the dark. Seems reasonable to shoot.
I just went to the range yesterday and had a first happen too me that causes me to start rethinking my self defense strategy. I had quit shooting my 9 and was shooting my airweight j frame. I was practicing with standard pressure .38 special, no problem. At the end of the practice session I was going to run a few rounds of my defense loads thru my gun. My defense loads for the .38 are the 158 grain lead semi wadcutter hollowpoint loads at +p levels. While I was shooting my first 5 round string of +P loads my gun locked up tighter than a drum.
My gun was completely useless. It was a bullet walking out of the case in a chamber and it locked the gun up so badly that it took several minutes of working and an extra set of hands to free the gun. This would have been a disaster in a self defense scenario.
Now it’s dark and you’re trying to defend your wife and kids from an intruder. Seems to me that if you have reason to carry a gun, you should be carrying 2.
Was the load crimped? Produced by a first-rate manufacturer?
Federal. Factory fresh. I haven’t done reloads in years.
get some Hornady critical defense.
One thing that is not evident from the news article, but worth emphasizing: your character counts in a DGU. If you are an a$$hole yourself, with lots of tickets, and a history of being a troublemaker, complainer, whatever, well, good luck on defending yourself. If you go to church regularly, including serving in a leadership role, mentor kids, volunteer with different groups, give generously to causes that support the less needy, are a good neighbor who shovels the snow for all of the seniors on your block, etc., well, it is hard to be crucified in the press. Just sayin
Tell that to GZ, the “evil racist” who volunteered with poor black kids.
There are lots of great arguments for carrying two guns JWM but you’ve just mitigated one of them. If you practice with the ammo, magazines and ect that you’ll be using in an emergency the likelihood of malfunction (especially of the difficult to clear type) is low. For the average citizen in the average situation I’d say a second gun is like insurance on an insurance policy, useful, but highly unlikely to be necessary. On the other hand if two guns makes you happy, by all means, I certainly wouldn’t call it paranoid nor overkill. It’s often said in some communities that one gun is none and two is one. There is a reason for it.
I’ve used this ammo in this gun for a year and a half now with no prior problems. I’ve used the same ammo for years in my M10 with nary a hitch. I try to get to the range at least once a month and more if possible. It’s a sobering experience to have a gun lock up on you at a clean well lit range.
On the street against an opponent intent on killing you? It may be a rare occurence but Murphy likes to show up at the worst moment.
Cant argue with that JWM. Now stop it before my hyper vigilance kicks in and I have to start carrying a second [email protected]!
You might be shooting too much powder/bullet for a lightweight j-frame revolver. Standard .38 Special 158 grain bullets are probably fine. And .38 Special +P 125 grain bullets are probably fine. However, .38 Special +P 158 grain bullets may be causing too much recoil in the light revolver and causing a marginally crimped bullet to jump forward in the cylinder. And if your grip strength isn’t quite what it used to be (which happens as we age), that could be contributing to more recoil than previous range trips as well.
When it comes to .38 Special j-frame revolvers, I would go with standard (not +P) 158 grain bullets. Those were adequate for police officers for decades. I think the 125 grain +P could also be a good choice.
As for two guns, two j-frames would be the ticket and enable a “New York reload”. A New York reload means that you simply produce a second handgun and keep shooting when your first handgun runs out of ammunition (rather than stopping your shooting to actually reload). Carrying two handguns also means you could hand one to a family member or friend in an emergency.
Uncommon. I went thru my ammo supply and came up with enough Hornady non +P 158 grain jacketed hollow points for my j frame and it’s speed loaders. I also had some remington +p 125 grainers and Winchester PDX 130 grainers in +p. I’ll reserve the heavy +P loads for my all steel m10. It’s a sweetheart to shoot next to my airweight j frame.
I looked at a Ruger LC9 at the range. They had them for a little less than a j frame. I might look into one of those as a second. Any reason to buy a new gun. Am I right?
The Ruger LC9s seem like nice little handguns. And they are much thinner than a j-frame revolver which could be a huge advantage in some situations. For example Ruger LCPs in pocket holsters are pretty much invisible unless your pants are really tight. I wonder if the LC9s would be equally invisible in a pocket holster?
I believe an LC9 is a solid choice for a second or even a primary self-defense handgun. Make sure you report back if you end up purchasing one!
You might also look at the Taurus TCP. TTAG reviewed one not long ago and liked it. I got mine a few weeks ago and haven’t had any problems. Nice trigger and last shot hold open for less money than the Ruger.
Maybe that’s why Biden suggested the double barrel shotgun for defense. That badboy will never have a feeding issue.
I had some Winchester that want properly crimped a couple weeks ago. With manufacturers pushing out ammo add fast add they can quality control had been suffering. Just make sure to check each round putting in your cylinder or magazine.
I thank the shooter for taking out the trash. Police need to be sued for the charge.
There really should be a penalty for suing for the sake of suing. If your case ends up being evidently bogus, you should be required to pay all the legal fees of the defendant and then be barred from suing anyone again for a year.
Just unfortunate that the victims of crime in the US are all too often unjustly prosecuted even when all the facts exonerate them from the get go, and the prosecutors aren’t penalized or punished even when it’s so obvious they’re trying to dupe the system or just harass the victim.
And seriously, they should just stop with the race card already. It’s so often abused and misused as a political tool it’s a joke nowadays, it’s just adding insult to injury. They should just focus on the facts of the case, not the color of someone’s skin. Reverse racism, anyone?
I’m with you on the race card issue TJ. Is there anyone who thinks GZ or this latest guy wouldn’t have shot a white attacker? Personally the race of the person bashing my head in or appearing to draw on me inside my locked, fenced backyard at 2:00am is completely irrelevant. In fact, I seriously doubt anyone has ever thought “Well, looks like I’m about to die, but since he’s the same race as me I guess I won’t defend myself.” Or the equally absurd “Gee, this guy trying to kill me isn’t the same race as me, I’d better shoot him.” It not only demonstrates the racism of the people who ply the race card as having effect on every situation, it also clearly demonstrates their ignorance of how life and death decision making works.
What is ironic is whenever they throw out the race card, it pretty much guarantees the prosecution is attempting to distract people from potentially damaging information about the perp. And it’s a clear sign the prosecution doesn’t have a strong case or they would be defending their arguments with pertinent facts or evidence from the crime scene, witness reports, etc. You go to the Race Card when you have no case and just want media exposure and hope the other person can’t afford it. Period.
I’m pretty sure if you go to Law School now, it’s probably on page 2 of How to Ruin a Case and it says, “Using the Race Card: Don’t do it unless you want lots of exposure” followed closely by “and don’t use it unless you really think you will win based on an airtight case based on actual facts or you are going to look like an idiot in front of millions of people”.
THERE’S NO SUCH THING AS *REVERSE* RACISM. Sorry about the shouting, but this subject really burns my biscuit.
The fact that anyone actually uses reverse racism as a term shows how completely the race-baiters have perverted the public thought process. They’ve got everyone thinking that there’s a natural version of racism that inherently belongs to white people — white people are naturally racist, and darker people are inherently pure. If one of the pure people does something racist, then they’ve reversed the “natural” paradigm, so it’s racism in reverse.
Dunno about you, but the idea that there are inherently pure races and naturally hate-filled ones sounds a lot like racism to me.
Bias against someone else because of race is racism. No reversing necessary. Racism is racism and that’s all there is to it.
So does that mean every person denied a school loan (or other gov assistance) specifically because they were white, and not any other color, is a victim of RACISM?
Yes, that’s precisely what that means. Racism is judging someone by their skin rather than their actions. It does not matter who is doing it to whom. All that matters is that they are judging someone by factors completely out of their control.
@RKBA You could make that case, yes.
It’s similar in degree to the institutionalized racism that cost black people so many opportunities in the not-so-distant past. Maybe not similar in effect — yet — but give it long enough, and it might be.
I get why they’re doing it. They want to rectify a monumental injustice. But what burns me is that they can’t for anything be brought to see that they’re just redirecting injustice against someone else.
It isn’t just the race of the “victim” as far as the gun grabbers and mainstream media are concerned. It is also the fact that the “victim” was a “child” and did not possess a weapon.
What the race baiters don’t tell anyone, however, is that the person who defended themselves from the “victim” had no way of knowing the “victim” was a “child” since the “victim” was just as tall and muscular as any man you would pass on the street. Nor do the race baiters tell anyone that the person who defended themselves from the “victim” had no way of knowing that the “victim” had no weapons until after the event.
Knowing all of the facts and having lots of time to ponder them, it is really easy to condemn the person who defended themselves. What we have to realize, however, is that the person who defended themselves had neither time nor facts. They had an instant to respond to a large male aggressor who had already broken the law.
A split second can make the difference between life and death. Monday morning quarterbacks have a lifetime to second guess a situation they were not present for.
Why anyone would come to the defense of ANYONE who is trespassing on private property at two in the morning, and not defend a man who was only protecting his family farm potential harm is so far beyond me….. I just can’t understand it.
Why should ANYONE assume that someone trespassing a private residence at two in the morning does not intend any ill will?
And why should ANYONE have the expectation they CAN trespass a private residence at 2am without fear of consequence?
If there is someone at 2am fsking around your back yard when it’s locked up tight like that, there has to be a presumption for force on the homeowner’s inside. If the person is so intent that they will violate a serious barrier, that should be considered part of the “castle”
I think we should just bring back moats filled with crocodiles. Much less confusion to be had about Castle Doctrine.
“Sorry officer, the idiot jumped my drawbridge and got eaten because they didn’t seem to notice the moat.”
“We found a shoe in a turd about an hour later.”
We do have a castle doctrine here in California. I would hate to push it to cover my backyard tho. In this state we don’t have immunity from lawsuits by the perp or his family and I’ve worked to hard to get what I have to lose it over a questionable shoot. The threat has to be real and imminenet to me and my loved ones. Not my car or outside property.
You know, in Texas you can use deadly force to protect your personal property.
Because it is YOUR PROPERTY!
And because Texas don’t like being messed with.
In California you can use deadly force against someone who “unlawfully and forcibly” enters your residence and is not a member of the household. You can’t legally shoot someone in the yard for trespassing. You can’t shoot someone just for trespassing even in Texas.
Here’s what the linked article says about why the homeowner shot:
Unless there’s more to it that got omitted from the story (always a possibility), that doesn’t sound justified.
“You can’t shoot someone just for trespassing even in Texas.”
Are you sure about that? May want to check your sources before you start making wild assumptions.
Hint: Check specifically for law(s) regarding the use of lethal force between dusk and dawn. 🙂
The system doesn’t let me reply to RKBA, so I’ll have to reply to myself:
Yes, I’m quite sure, and yes, you should check your assumptions.
For the benefit of anyone curious, in Texas you can use deadly force “during the nighttime” (presumably what Mr. Assumptions means by “between dusk and dawn”) to prevent theft or criminal mischief or stop someone from fleeing after committing theft or criminal mischief. Criminal mischief is a fancy way of saying “vandalism”. This means that you can shoot someone for spray-painting graffiti on your driveway at night, but not just for standing on it.
Sounds like we agree completely, Ken 🙂
If you read my original post, I did specify ‘to protect your property’.
Plenty of case law to quote to that effect.
BTW, in Texas, the legal definition of ‘night time’ is the period of the day that occurs after dusk and before dawn.
Google map the property it is the red building on 700 block of Mandiville St (corner is Dauphine St) in NOLA. This yard is really one (possible two- not possible to tell) off street parking spots that are directly adjacent to the guy’s house (that held his kid and prego wife) and behind a locked gate. He supposedly shot the kid from 30 ft away – which may sounds like a lot but the house is only 42 ft long and 20 ft wide -His yard is not much bigger.
If Obama had a [email protected] son.
Did this puke actually enter the home? I don’t know the laws in question but where I am I’d wait for him to enter. Removes all doubt of his intentions and provides all the reason to shoot.
Concerning a second gun, I always been taught: two is one and one is none.
But this works with everything on life, that’s why my car came with 5 wheels and tires, and a New York reload is better than a spare magazine.
NY Reload +1 FTW
I thought I remembered reading about a similar case in Louisiana years ago, and a bit of searching turned it up:
I think the home owner was foolish. He saw the kid coming and should have waited for him to break before shooting him. Once he was in the house he was fair game. Here is a general rule of thumb. Line up your shot and wait for BG to break 10 yards before you shoot him. It’s very hard to plead self defense if the threat is 50 yards away.
The Neighbor who did not call the Police on two minors riding Bicycles at 1:45AM in the morning because he feared he’d be accused of “racial profiling” needs a good “talking to”. The Parents who apparently had no idea where their 14 year old son was at 1:45 AM should be charged with Parental Neglect, particularly since they acknowledge this child had committed burglary previously.
Mr. Landry, in my opinion, should not have shot until/unless Marshall Coulter actually broke-in to the house. Climbing over the Locked gate and fence onto Landry’s property creates little reasonable doubt that he did so intending to break-in to the house and puts Coulter in violation of Trespass Law. Landry’s claim that Coulter made as if to reach for something at his hip might be tough to convince a Jury of, particularly if Coulter recovers enough to claim he put his hands up and said “I surrender!” then Landry shot him anyway.
“The Neighbor who did not call the Police on two minors riding Bicycles at 1:45AM in the morning because he feared he’d be accused of “racial profiling” needs a good “talking to”.”
This is how it starts. By this, I mean the dissemination of bad information, leading to bad conclusions.
The neighbor who saw the kids and decided not to call did so at 8 p.m. Now, N’awlins apparently has an 8 p.m. curfew for kids under 18, so they still should have been home, but it’s not nearly as bad as you make it sound.
Thanks for the note. I had read several linked articles on this by the time I wrote and posted my comment, and no doubt got things mixed-up. My bad.
The neighbor was quoted as telling the Police or Reporters he didn’t want to risk being accused of “racial profiling” and an observation time around 8:00 PM would be more consistent with what he said.
No offense intended. Just like to catch stuff early. I feel like if someone had corrected the first few “non-media” people that they heard repeat the “if GZ had just stayed in his truck when he was told to” line, that whole line of BS might have been headed off at the pass.
No offense taken at all. I agree it’s important to correct misstatements early on. PLEASE feel free to do so in response to my comments any time. I appreciate it!
Are there any stats kept on white on black killings: Black on white killings, corrected for relative population sizes, in the US?
Sounds like a political arrest to me,so they can keep the natives from getting restless.Since this happened in New Orleans,I can tell you I have an uncle that lives down there and he is always telling me how black folks are committing crimes against each other non-stop.Also the amount of blacks being shot by other blacks is almost as much as Chicago,but we just aren’t hearing about it in the MSM.New Orleans is a very dangerous place,I have a ccw and when I go down there I difinitely carry!Be prepared and ready.Keep your powder dry.
Yesterday, the article has a photograph of a black male ‘youth’ suffering from a severe case of The Thugs; Today, we see a photograph of a rotund white male adult with the facial expression of someone who kills puppies for fun and who’s never met a pie he didn’t like. Gosh, he might even be a Redneck.
Is there a message, here?
Yup. The previous picture was not the perp. I couldn’t find one. So I swapped out the photo for one of the arrested homeowner.
Isn’t there one of the homeowner surrounded by Cub Scouts or maybe kittens? Smiling?
You could put up one of Ann Coulter and call it an honest mistake.
Another of obama’s ‘sons’?
Let’s see, many states have verbal threat laws (don’t know how that one works in a rational world) yet physical proximity with a burglary, not a B & E, is not a threat. Were the police there at the time of the shooting?? How come police can cap someone with impunity based on their training and experience yet a citizen defending oneself receives special scrutiny? More b.s. to make us victims.
Trying so hard not to make it a race thing. Turns it into just that. And they almost got away with burglary. Too bad they were such a bad shot.
Best news for iPhone and Ipad holders! Do u are looking for Power Rangers at your hand?. You have often seen heroes frequently on television, at the moment It’s opportunity to think&guessing them
kamen rider decade belt game play http://apple.co/293e5r0
When I initially commented I clicked the “Notify me when new comments are added” checkbox and now each time a comment is added I get three emails with the same comment. Is there any way you can remove people from that service? Bless you!|