Man killed by neighbor after trying to enter wrong house

Sue McMillin and Bill Vogrin, the Gazette

Published December 29, 2008 at 12:10 p.m.
Updated December 30, 2008 at 5:14 p.m.

Text size

More Local News

Comments

December 29, 2008

12:49 p.m.

Suggest removal

Cowboy63 writes:

Looks like he picked the wrong house to rob.

Reap! Meet, Sow.
December 29, 2008

1:08 p.m.

Suggest removal

johnson writes:

Instant justice. Too bad it doesn't happen more often. Unfortunatly, there will probably be a wrongful death lawsuit from the thief's relatives.
December 29, 2008

1:15 p.m.

Suggest removal

johnson writes:

I'm sorry, I meant "alleged" thief. Oh let's just call him the "deceased".
December 29, 2008

1:19 p.m.

Suggest removal

theairdog writes:

This is what you call, "A Failure of the Victim Selection Process".
December 29, 2008

1:24 p.m.

Suggest removal

cornico writes:

I have to say, I love living in Colorado v. California! Lived in Cali for 30+ years and have been repeatedly disgusted over the lack of control homeowners have in protecting their property. For example, had a friend who encountered some local druggie trying to steal her belongings for his habit (he was TOTALLY wired while doing this to begin with), she grabbed a bat that she kept in the front hall closet and beat him in the head and arm - breaking his arm, I might add. While the reader of this is saying, "Yeah!", it didn't end well. The moron was arrested for b&e, but because HE wasn't armed, SHE was charged as well! Then he got a hold of one of those ambulance chasers and tied her up in court for two years with a civil suit for HIS pain and suffering! She ended up losing her savings and then some just to settle and avoid the bigger expense of going to court! It amazes me that there is NO stop gap for that in civil court...Did I mention how glad I am to be living here?
December 29, 2008

1:33 p.m.

Suggest removal

BRM writes:

I have no problem with the MMD Law. However, I think people vastly underestimate the burden the shooter will have to live with for the rest of their life. Burglary or no burglary, this homeowner killed someone and that is a heavy load to carry. Gun nuts, (not gun owners--there is a difference) like to think they will find an intruder, shoot 'em and go back to life as usual. Not possible.
December 29, 2008

1:35 p.m.

Suggest removal

BRM writes:

mxRider, they chose not to enter into a 2nd grade name-calling contest with you. In other words they are out living their lives. Try it sometime!
December 29, 2008

1:38 p.m.

Suggest removal

leavemealone writes:

Hey BRM,

You want to bet?

Come to rob/attack me or my family. The perp would die & I wouldn't take a step back....not one!
December 29, 2008

1:41 p.m.

Suggest removal

leavemealone writes:

The guy they found was nothing more than a worm.
December 29, 2008

1:49 p.m.

Suggest removal

BRM writes:

No thanks LMA. We're all very impressed with your interweb muscles though....(yawn).....You just confirmed my statement about gun nuts, well done!
December 29, 2008

1:50 p.m.

Suggest removal

Cowboy63 writes:

I keep a "model 10" under the bed for just such occasions. Never had to use it, but wouldn't think twice if the situation required it.

People who have guns in their homes (and are willing to use them) are more concerned about the protection of their families than the CHOICES of criminals. I would say it's much easier to go back to "life as usual" after having shot an invader than after your family has been robbed, raped or murdered.

Life is about Choices. Breaking into homes is an extremely dangerous hobby!
December 29, 2008

1:53 p.m.

Suggest removal

BRM writes:

mxRider, now slowly re-read my first comment. I have no problem with the law.
December 29, 2008

2:17 p.m.

Suggest removal

imnormal writes:

I would advise waiting for more facts on this one. I have heard some rumors here in CS that this may not be as clear-cut as it presently appears ...
December 29, 2008

2:31 p.m.

Suggest removal

sweetater writes:

I thought when you exercise the Make My Day law the idiot oops sorry the intruder had to be INSIDE of your house.
December 29, 2008

3:29 p.m.

Suggest removal

Mytoocents writes:

Anyone bother to think this could be a set up/cover up by the residents. You know, "come on over and oh by the way our door is broken so just crawl through the window". Or maybe it was interaction between the two gone REALLY bad. Then they call the cops tell them they shot a burglar. My understanding is that for the "make my day" law to stick the bad guy has to be shot inside the residence. So the those people better hope theres some blood splatter on the wall or a trail leading out the door.
December 29, 2008

3:32 p.m.

Suggest removal

leavemealone writes:

Hey BRM,

Back at=cha, Punk!
December 29, 2008

3:36 p.m.

Suggest removal

leavemealone writes:

Hey BRM,

You sound like a very simple NUT....

Goofball
December 29, 2008

3:39 p.m.

Suggest removal

HankReardon writes:

I think that there IS more to this story. The Make My Day law pertains to intruders, not prowlers. Something more might have happened here.
December 29, 2008

4:51 p.m.

Suggest removal

sweetater writes:

Thank-you Hank, I thought so they do have to be in your house correct? How was your holiday?
December 29, 2008

5:31 p.m.

Suggest removal

HankReardon writes:

Sweetater,
Holiday was good. Got some rest. How about yours?
December 29, 2008

5:35 p.m.

Suggest removal

BRM writes:

leave me alone, a little aggressive? feel like shooting someone? Boy I'm glad a real clear-thinker (and speller / typist) the likes of you is armed. I stated I have no problem with the law, only stated that while it's easy to say, "hell yeah, I'd shoot 'em without even 'taking a step back' (whatever the hell that means), is easier said than done. You jumped down my throat ASSUMING that I am anti gun. Like I said you've proven yourself to be quite the hothead, just who I want owning a gun.
December 29, 2008

5:38 p.m.

Suggest removal

BRM writes:

BRM,
"Gun nut" or "gun owner", anyone who is in that situation would probably feel more heroic for protecting and saving their own life/family/belongings than traumatized for the rest of their life for killing a bad guy.

I don't disagree. You have still missed my point. I have clearly brought up a concept that might be a bit too subtle to grasp for many of you. I will keep my comments either black or white and will avoid the subtle gray areas that actually permeate our society and require thought.
December 29, 2008

5:58 p.m.

Suggest removal

happymike44 writes:

I own a gun due to the fact the police can't and won't protect us from the dirtbag dopeheads and gang members.
elieve me when I say if you get past the dog.
You won't get past the owner.
Because if he is dead I won't have testify in court to his activities.
He won't be able to sue me becaue dead men tell no tales.
Plus why should any of us feel afraid to protect our homes and loved ones.
These people are like gum stuck to your shoes.
Scrape it off and throw it in the trash.
December 29, 2008

6:49 p.m.

Suggest removal

44roger writes:

hope the investigation is thorough, outside the house makes me wonder, if he was shot inside and ran out-OK.
December 29, 2008

8:21 p.m.

Suggest removal

WHATRIGHTS writes:

Happymike,
Love it....I have the same philosphy, if they got through my two beautiful greeters, they will certainly wish they hadn't when they meet my little friend....
December 29, 2008

8:55 p.m.

Suggest removal

mcge8715 writes:

18-1-704.5. Use of deadly physical force against an intruder.
(1) The general assembly hereby recognizes that the citizens of Colorado have a right to expect absolute safety within their own homes.
(2) Notwithstanding the provisions of section 18-1-704, any occupant of a dwelling is justified in using any degree of physical force, including deadly physical force, against another person when that other person has made an unlawful entry into the dwelling, and when the occupant has a reasonable belief that such other person has committed a crime in the dwelling in addition to the uninvited entry, or is committing or intends to commit a crime against a person or property in addition to the uninvited entry, and when the occupant reasonably believes that such other person might use any physical force, no matter how slight, against any occupant.
(3) Any occupant of a dwelling using physical force, including deadly physical force, in accordance with the provisions of subsection (2) of this section shall be immune from criminal prosecution for the use of such force.(4) Any occupant of a dwelling using physical force, including deadly physical force, in accordance with the provisions of subsection (2) of this section shall be immune from any civil liability for injuries or death resulting from the use of such force.
December 29, 2008

8:58 p.m.

Suggest removal

mcge8715 writes:

Footnote:
Fact that a homicide victim was on the defendant's porch does not permit the defendant to claim immunity from prosecution for unlawful entry to defendant's dwelling unless the court finds that defendant believed that the victim intended to commit a crime or use physical force against the defendant. People v. Young, 825 P.2d 1004 (Colo. App. 1991).
December 29, 2008

9:31 p.m.

Suggest removal

MattGuyver_007 writes:

Hey criminals, you're risking your life when you break into someone's home and it's cases like this that act as the best deterrence for Colorado citizens.

Too bad the family in California that was murdered on Christmas Eve didn't have the opportunity to defend themselves.

And BRM, I would quickly get over killing anyone breaking into my house while my wife and children are asleep. However, I would never forgive myself if I didn't or couldn't defend my own home and family.
December 29, 2008

9:45 p.m.

BRM writes:

(This comment was removed by the site staff.)
December 29, 2008

10:31 p.m.

Suggest removal

dirty writes:

Case in Lakewood, maybe 2 years old, resulted in murder conviction for the shooter. Initially reported the same way as the above story. Turns out that it was a set up.

Colorado's so called "Make My Day" law has not been used very often.

As for the whole getting "over" shooting a bad guy deal. Real easy on the internet, kinda difficult in the days, weeks and years afterwards. Not saying defending yourself is wrong, but even a righteous killing wears on the soul (in my experience), but of course we are all different.

Chances are that this guy was a burglar, however there is a possiblity that he was set up or possibly confused. Case from out east somewhere, guys gets drunk, confused, goes to the wrong townhouse, tries to get in with his keys, gets shot through the door...

It would help if the RMN would show his criminal history, assuming he has one. Given that his name and age have been released, it won't take much to check for felony arrests..but of course that would involve investigative journalism...
December 29, 2008

11:17 p.m.

Suggest removal

mcge8715 writes:

mxRider,
Just informing the masses on the actual law, depending on the outcome of the investigation the shooting may be justified.
December 30, 2008

12:43 a.m.

Suggest removal

Creative_N_Denver writes:

I thought that in order to use the "Make My Day" law the person breaking in had to be inside the home and not outside.
With a spouse that has military training and is an expert marksman, we so far we haven't had any offers to practice on a real moving target.
December 30, 2008

12:47 a.m.

Suggest removal

Astaroth writes:

Sweetater, if the El Paso folks use Weld County as an example, the possibility of the offender being outside and the homeowner being inside will fly. Happened up here a few years ago; some guy shot another through his front door with a shotgun (homeowner on the inside, other guy on the outside). Weld DA chose not to pursue charges. As an ex-cop, I remember going over the MMD law in the academy... we were taught that the bad guy HAD to be inside. MCGE8715 did a great job in coming up with the actual statute. Leave it to lawyers to interpret the law though, right? The best advice I can give is this: if you choose to pull the trigger, regardless of circumstances, don't stop until the bad guy is dead. They call it "use of deadly force" for a reason. Don't shoot to wound.
December 30, 2008

2:46 a.m.

Suggest removal

darkman writes:

Sure, it would've been nice to get a little more info on the guy who was shot but it's possible the police didn't make it available to them at the time. To be honest, I was surprised at the "just the facts" tone of the story considering it was about guns and citizens being able to protect themselves; especially since this story came from the AP rather than a local paper.

I'm sure many of us gun owners can remember when the norm in gun stories was to send a reporter and photographer to a gun show and take a picture of the .05% that have the camo pants, long beards and the "kill 'em all and let God sort 'em out" t-shirts.

I also have a couple minor nits: I hate the term "make my day" applied to the law because it implies that you actually _want_ to shoot someone. And the term "gun nut" bothers me (no offense Brm) because it seems to usually be used as a slur on anyone who has a more liberal view than the speaker on what citizens should be able to own, or for anyone who enjoys shooting.

Although this incident is certainly tragic for both the homeowner and the guy who was shot, hopefully more people will come to understand that the vast majority of guns in citizens hands are used for lawful purposes and they save more innocent lives than they take.

Just my .02
December 30, 2008

3:17 a.m.

Suggest removal

gwats writes:

This is the kind of incident the law was put in place for and the only way I would point a deadly weapon @ another human being..in defense of my life or my family. Tragic, but boy, what a good shot!
Prayers for the homeowner's sanity. Killing another person is a heavy toll on the mind and spirit of the shooter. I would have shot this intruder instantly but it would have been a hard thing to think about later.
December 30, 2008

4:27 a.m.

Suggest removal

happymike44 writes:

I wonder when people are going to say enough is enough.
If someone comes to your house with the intent to do harm.
Then it is your right to protect yourself and your family.
The scum of the earth needs to learn you will be removed from the planet due to your actions.
We don't want your mommy whining and crying on t.v. about what happened to you.
Because you did this to yourself and you won't be missed by anyone but your mommy.
So don't do the crime if you can't do the time.
But remember it also may lead to you taking a long dirt nap due to your stupidity.
December 30, 2008

5:06 a.m.

Suggest removal

darkman writes:

Reality_Check writes:
or make sure they "fall inside" after being shot/killed.

Major bad advice-- As in the case above, chances are you will not be charged if someone is a credible threat but has not yet gotten all the way inside. But if you tamper with evidence you are asking for a murder or manslaughter charge. Not to mention, you will also lose any credibility you might have had with a jury. Most police are not stupid; they can spot a staged crime scene.
December 30, 2008

6:37 a.m.

Suggest removal

imnormal writes:

Rumors now confirmed -- this now appears to be a tragic case of the deceased being confused about which house he was at. He actually lived one block over in a house with the same number. He was dropped at the wrong house, and after finding the front door locked, he tried to get in the back, which according to his roommate was typical. Kind of casts a little bit different light on things, I think.
December 30, 2008

6:47 a.m.

Suggest removal

intothelens writes:

Happy Mike, you make it sound so easy. But determining someone's "intent" is the weak link. I hope every homeowner in a potential MMD situation is thoughtful enough to yell threats, fire warning shots, etc., to obtain "intent" information before they just start firing at intruders. It's CYA -- cover your behind -- for preventing potential charges once the cops do show up. I wish cops/lawyers would yell louder about this, to be heard above the roar of information being spouted -- and applauded -- about everyone's MMD rights.
December 30, 2008

7:01 a.m.

Suggest removal

opinionatedcolo writes:

Yesterday the shoot first and never bother with questions crew (cowboy etc)were on here cheering the death of this young man and figuratively rolling in his blood. This was when there was not a single piece of evidence that the man who was shot was a criminal. Now we know that this young man made a stupid mistake and it appears that the homeowner may have as well. Whether criminal charges are appropriate for the shooter is still not clear, but we also know that those on here who cheer for every death were wrong as well. Not that they are capable of admitting it.
December 30, 2008

7:03 a.m.

Suggest removal

DEP0433 writes:

Sounds like a justified shoot to me. The homeowners felt threatened by this guy. He probably did have the worng house, it's unfortunate.
December 30, 2008

7:06 a.m.

Suggest removal

breckrider writes:

internet tuff guys. how funny. can most of you morons even read? the make my day law applies to intruders inside the home, not outside banging on the door. the guy was intoxicated and at the wrong house, and he should die for that mistake? and i'm no bleeding heart liberal. i live deep in the woods and am fully armed, but i have the training to differentiate between a drunk banging on my back door and someone who might really be a threat to my family. i bet most of you guys on here that talk about how tough you are couldn't load a bb gun, or shoot a paper plate with said bb gun from 10 yards away.
December 30, 2008

7:06 a.m.

Suggest removal

SheikYurBooty writes:

This guy better have a good lawyer - he's gonna need one.
December 30, 2008

7:14 a.m.

Suggest removal

denverrose15 writes:

How dumb that people go out and get drunk whether they support the Broncos or not. The dumbest decisions have lasting consequences. Come on people, think! Use your brain! It is so ridiculous. I can't believe that anyone much less a father would think, "He had to much to drink as boys that age will do." How very sad it is so accepted. My sympathy to this family.
December 30, 2008

7:32 a.m.

Suggest removal

Marshdale writes:

I encountered a similar situation about 18 years ago. I was caring for my ill mother and living with her at the time. One morning at abouty 1:00am she woke me and said someone was trying to get in to the house. I grabbed the 30-30. We had two doors into the house on that side of the house. I went to the one the supposed intruder was not at. We had three large dogs. I turned them on him first. They did not bite him, but they cornered him. I had that gun cocked and ready to go. I stepped out that side door and was so close to shooting this guy when I realized he was not armed and was extremely drunk. HE HAD THE WRONG HOUSE. I thank my lucky stars till this very day that I did not shoot this guy. As it turns out he was a man who was terribly upset and terribly drunk over a divorce. He had a couple of children. The JeffCo Sherrifs department was just as amazed I did not shoot him. Had I shot him I believe I would be in prison for manslaughter. Close call. Be carefull who, how and when you point a gun at someone. It may not work in your favor. In my case it did.
December 30, 2008

7:58 a.m.

Suggest removal

HolierThanThou writes:

Based on a casual reading of this board there are plenty of cowards who enjoy a vicarious killing such as Cowboy63, mxRider, kalazoo, johnson, and cornico. These happen to be conservative chickenhawks, some who always show up to bray about the latest killing or massacre. Real murder is awful bad, so perhaps it's best for everyone that most of those with murderous intentions are usually cowards like these.

Shooting a man through the door will land you in jail, ye trigger-happy morons. The guy was just drunk but they didn't bother to find that out first. If you are well-armed then why shoot the man first? You could ask what he wants and kindly tell him that he's at the wrong house. It's an easy mistake to make in the dark of night if you're drunk and live where a bunch of houses look alike.

Burglars are not known for knocking or pounding on the door before entering the house.

The drunken man wasn't even driving. He was dropped off by friends at the wrong house. You don't have a right to shoot anyone for drunkenness... at least not today. The next report will probably be about the voluntary manslaughter charges being brought against the trigger-happy resident of that house. Maybe that will help them to live with themselves after killing a man just for being drunk.
December 30, 2008

8:03 a.m.

Suggest removal

BroncoDan writes:

Very sad, tragic story! Someone's son, brother, friend is dead. Shooting through a door because someone is knocking on it??? OOPS!!! Make my Day law won't apply.
December 30, 2008

8:07 a.m.

Suggest removal

Coco writes:

What a tragic story. My prayers to the family who lost a beloved son due to a mistake. I am so sorry for the burden the homeowner will carry for the rest of his life. And, wow, I can't believe the lack of compassion in this thread. The guy was not a burglar he was at the wrong house; I don't think he deserves to die for that.
December 30, 2008

8:09 a.m.

Suggest removal

leavemealone writes:

HolierThanThou writes:

"The guy was just drunk but they didn't bother to find that out first."

Hey HolierThanThou,

Go blow some snow you clown!!!
December 30, 2008

8:15 a.m.

Suggest removal

leavemealone writes:

HolierThanThou, BroncoDan......not a simple knock at the front door!!! POUNDING pretty aggressively on the BACK door...

NO charges.
December 30, 2008

8:21 a.m.

Suggest removal

oldgunney writes:

I own several firearms and would not hesitate to use them if someone was to enter my home by force. That being said, the takeing of a human life is a horrible thing to carry around for the rest of your life and Iam speaking from experience it may sound all brave and macho but the guilt is almost unbearable at times.
December 30, 2008

8:34 a.m.

Suggest removal

Hunters_Girl writes:

Case in Ault, Colorado just a few years ago...Homeowner shot his neighbor on the front porch. Through the door. No charges.
December 30, 2008

8:43 a.m.

Suggest removal

666 writes:

I find it morbidly humorous that so many mouth-frothing gunrack guerrillas are so eager to discount the obvious fact, openly stated in the article itself, that the drunken dipstick was confused and knocking on the door of the wrong house. I'm not saying that it wasn't a protect-your-family situation, but there's no call for playing this guy up to seem like a bloodthirsty al Qaeda cannibal rapist, just to make his death seem justified. He was a drunk driver and a Bronco fan...not necessarily the most redeeming qualities of mankind, but hardly grounds for being shot like a rabid dog.

Yes, the homeowners had the right to defend themselves. You're right, it's probably best to err on the side of caution in cases like this. But you've got no call to denounce the dead kid as a burglar, criminal, scumbag...etc. Because his only crime was being a drunken Broncos fan, and I'm willing to bet that a lot of you cul-de-sac-commandos have those same habits and worse.
December 30, 2008

8:43 a.m.

Suggest removal

johnson writes:

There's no reference to who the home owners are or what they might have experienced. Previous break-ins? Elderly and terrified?
Disabled?
"The guy was just drunk but they didn't bother to find that out first." wrote HolierThanThou. I can just see that scenario: "Hey Honey, there's a guy trying to break the back door down." "Go see if he's drunk".
December 30, 2008

8:43 a.m.

Suggest removal

davies writes:

Regardless of whether manslaughter or homicide charges are filed against the homeowner/shooter, and regardless of whether they are justified, a 22-year-old assistant golf pro who was just beginning his adult life is dead, due to being drunk, disoriented, and knocking aggressively because he thought he had been locked out of his own house.

I think it is safe to assume that the shooter is likely to be very remorseful. If his lawyer would only allow it, I'll bet he would even come on here and tell us so.
December 30, 2008

8:45 a.m.

Suggest removal

Cowboy63 writes:

opinionatedcolo -

Doesn't change my opinion one bit.

Breaking in to the wrong house is HIS problem - not the homeowners. Obviously he was getting violent and they felt threatened.

Moral of the story: Don't get so drunk you can't identify your own house and they try to break in the back door.
December 30, 2008

8:55 a.m.

Suggest removal

Cowboy63 writes:

They are all great guys, right up to when they are breaking through someone else's back door.

The next time someone is breaking into YOUR house be sure to stop and say:

"Excuse me, Mr. Robber... do you actually mean to rob and kill me? or do you really just live a block away and are too drunk to realize it?"

The homeowner has NO WAY of knowing that he's at the wrong house. Some scared old couple just sees a young guy trying to break in the back door. We don't know anything about the homeowner's history either (prior robberies, assaults, etc).
December 30, 2008

8:59 a.m.

Suggest removal

philvysor writes:

Here is my question: Why didn't the homeowners call 911 to report this? Their 1st instinct was to pull out the weapon and shoot? It does not seem to me that the young man was trying to break the door down, or was he carring a weapon. So what if he was pounding on the door "Hard", pounding on your door does not give you the right to shoot them. Prosecute them for murder and everyone inside for accesory to murder.
December 30, 2008

9:01 a.m.

Suggest removal

leavemealone writes:

Bottom line:

Stop blaming the victim(s) in all cases!

For the rest of you:

Should-ah, would-ah, could-ah
December 30, 2008

9:04 a.m.

leavemealone writes:

(This comment was removed by the site staff.)
December 30, 2008

9:07 a.m.

Suggest removal

666 writes:

philvysor:

READ THE STORY, including the link to the Gazette. They DID call 911.

Like I said, I think the residents were within their rights...I just don't like the way the militia-wannabes are posting here that the guy was dirt and deserved to die.
December 30, 2008

9:09 a.m.

Suggest removal

BMat writes:

Why would a guy who's trying to rob a house ring the doorbell several times and then try to beat the back door down? Wouldn't a real burglar rather avoid loud noises?

I think the resident w/the itchy trigger finger should be held accountable. Shooting some drunk kid is just unacceptable.
December 30, 2008

9:10 a.m.

Suggest removal

WestminsterJ writes:

Cowboy, leavemealone, et al: So you really don't care that this guy was simply at the wrong house, and posed no threat. What sad examples of deficient human beings you are.
December 30, 2008

9:12 a.m.

Suggest removal

BadBobby writes:

I agree with Davies, the guy that did the shooting is going to have a chance to meet the family of the young man he shot , and I'm pretty sure will be very remorseful. I'm not judging him nor am I judging the young man that was drunk and got shot. We've all made mistakes and we're lucky none of them have cost us our life or caused us to take a life. Condolences to all involved, this tragedy will be with these people their entire lives.
December 30, 2008

9:12 a.m.

Suggest removal

Creative_N_Denver writes:

I feel sad that this young man was killed because of his lack of responsibility. I believe if a homeowner feels threatened they have the right to protect themselves. My questions are, why was he outside the home shot? Did he stumble out the door after being shot? Why would you shoot another if they are still outside your home? Lots of unanswered questions.
Point: The young man tried to enter a home that wasn't his and his drinking impared his judgement. Why won't people ever learn that the short thrill of the drink/drug is not worth the consquences after the fact? Two families will now have to deal with the lack of judgement one young man chose. RMN needs to stop trying to make this young man a saint. He was a good kid, we all get it, like all the dead or injured saints that families will claim to be victims, just to read a few weeks later that the other family will be sued. However, I wonder just how much alcohol was in his system? He was old enough to know what alcohol would do if he consumed it. Yet he was also driving right before this!
Another point: The family he came across could have been a military family and the would be shooter most likely was an expert at shooting their target. Another reason for people to be more aware of their actions. My prayers go out to the families. My vote goes to making people responsibile for their actions or lack of...
December 30, 2008

9:15 a.m.

Suggest removal

leavemealone writes:

WestminsterJ writes:

"Cowboy, leavemealone, et al: So you really don't care that this guy was simply at the wrong house, and posed no threat. What sad examples of deficient human beings you are."

Not the point!

It's easy to judge after the fact, however, with home invasions & burglaries there is only the here & now.
December 30, 2008

9:18 a.m.

Suggest removal

philvysor writes:

666 I did read the story in the Gazette and from what I have read it seems like he was shot around 9:50pm and the cops showed up around 10:00pm. As a matter of fact it also says that the homeowner confronted the young man at the door and shot him. Did the homeowner even ask a question or did he just open the door and shoot? Sounds like this person was just trigger happy.
December 30, 2008

9:19 a.m.

Suggest removal

BadBobby writes:

Creative, you got one thing wrong in stating your facts, he hadn't been driving he was dropped off by friends.
December 30, 2008

9:21 a.m.

Suggest removal

timothyc writes:

This is a horrible tragedy. The families on both sides must feel terrible about this. Can't we all show some compassion towards all parties involved?

He should not have been drinking and driving. A true friend should have driven him home, sleep over, or call his family to come and get him.

Yes, why would you shoot someone outside your home? Why not call 911, and leave your door locked until help arrives? A senseless loss of human life. Too bad we all live in such a gun happy society.
December 30, 2008

9:22 a.m.

Suggest removal

leavemealone writes:

philvysor writes:

"As a matter of fact it also says that the homeowner confronted the young man at the door and shot him. Did the homeowner even ask a question or did he just open the door and shoot?"

Ask a question? LOL

It's easy to judge after the fact, however, with home invasions & burglaries there is only the here & now.
December 30, 2008

9:23 a.m.

babedawl999 writes:

(This comment was removed by the site staff.)
December 30, 2008

9:28 a.m.

Suggest removal

Beergut writes:

Wow there are lot people looking for an excuse to kill here. A friend of mine did this a few years: Knocked on the wrong house after drinking (he moved two days before) to wake up his roommates. In his case a guy came out yelled at him for waking his family, and then my friend realized his stupid mistake apologized and stumbled two blocks to his new place. Some of you I gather think my friend should be dead which I find chilling.
December 30, 2008

9:28 a.m.

Suggest removal

Cowboy63 writes:

philvysor writes: "Why didn't the homeowners call 911 to report this? Their 1st instinct was to pull out the weapon and shoot?"

Call 911 at 1am then go sit on the couch and wait for the cops to show up. If you're lucky, they might get there in 20 minutes or 30.

The homeowner didn't go out and hunt some dude down in a reckless frenzy. He was in his OWN bed minding his OWN business on his OWN property when some intruder tried beating in his back door in the middle of the night. You need to see it from their perspective.

I want to hear THEIR side of the story. It's regretful it turned out this way, but that was the kid's CHOICE, not theirs.
December 30, 2008

9:34 a.m.

Suggest removal

philvysor writes:

leavemealone: Yes ask a question, if the home owner owns a weapon and opens the door to confront the person why not advise the young man you have that weapon and ask what the H*LL he wants? If someone approaches you on the street and you don't know them is your 1st instinct to shoot them? No! You ask them to leave you alone! If they persist do you then shoot them or do you call the police and wait for help? In my opinion the homeowner was to quick to act.
December 30, 2008

9:36 a.m.

Suggest removal

philvysor writes:

Cowboy63: What CHOICE are you talking about, sounds like to me the young man was trying to get home. I guess honest mistakes require being shot. That does not make sense.
December 30, 2008

9:39 a.m.

Suggest removal

WestminsterJ writes:

LMA- The point is, the possibility of a mistake should be kept in mind by the homeowner. If there is an unexpected knock on the door in the middle of the night, yelling out "Who's there?" or "You've got the wrong house" might be in order before shooting.
December 30, 2008

9:41 a.m.

Suggest removal

leavemealone writes:

philvysor writes:

"If they persist do you then shoot them or do you call the police and wait for help? In my opinion the homeowner was to quick to act."

Wait for help? Dude....you have got to be joking?

You're being attacked & going to call police and wait for help.
Please wait Mr. Attacker the police have been called.

Come on man!
December 30, 2008

9:44 a.m.

Suggest removal

leavemealone writes:

WestminsterJ writes:

"LMA- The point is, the possibility of a mistake should be kept in mind by the homeowner. If there is an unexpected knock on the door in the middle of the night, yelling out "Who's there?" or "You've got the wrong house" might be in order before shooting."

Absolutely!
December 30, 2008

9:47 a.m.

Suggest removal

opinionatedcolo writes:

cowboy
this story was posted at 12:10 yesterday and by 12:50 were already calling this dead kid a "robber" and saying he deserved to die. Now that you have been shown to be wrong about who this kid is, you continue to jump to unjustified and unsupported conclusions just because you love the blood. Nothing in either story says he was trying to "break in the door." That is your read, not a fact. I could just as easily assume that the homeowner is someone like you with a real desire to show how tough he is with a gun. The difference is that you always assume you know everything and other people actually wait to find out the facts.
December 30, 2008

9:49 a.m.

Suggest removal

Fancy_chance writes:

From what it sounds like he never entered. I do believe that just the young man pounding on the door may not be deemed enough of a threat to fall within the guidelines and the homeowner faces a real risk of being charged criminally and also being sued in civil court. If I was on the jury (from what I've read) I would have to say the homeowner was in the wrong and used unreasonable force in this situation. I do believe in the "Make My Day Law" but one needs to use some discretion when applying it. It does not give someone free rein to just indiscriminately shoot someone for being on their property. No where does it appear that the homeowners family or property was in danger. The homeowner is guilty of neglient homicide.
December 30, 2008

9:50 a.m.

Suggest removal

philvysor writes:

LMA: It sounds crazy but it is what has to happen, I have had countless instances like this with my son. He is walking home from school and other kids start in on him, he defends himself and he is also given a ticket for fighting. I know back in our day if someone approaches you and wants to fight hey last man standing wins right. But not in this day it just doesn't work that way.
December 30, 2008

9:57 a.m.

Suggest removal

breckrider writes:

i can only imagine what a loser cowboy is. it's called firearms training, and knowing when your life is really in danger. that is the problem with some people owning firearms, they dont know how to properly identify a real threat. it's called training, and most imbecils who own guns don't have ti.
December 30, 2008

9:59 a.m.

Suggest removal

leavemealone writes:

philvysor writes:

"LMA: It sounds crazy but it is what has to happen, I have had countless instances like this with my son. He is walking home from school and other kids start in on him, he defends himself and he is also given a ticket for fighting. I know back in our day if someone approaches you and wants to fight hey last man standing wins right. But not in this day it just doesn't work that way."

Mr. Attacker is going to hurt/kill you and/or a family member as you're walking down the street....you tell them to stop! They don't....

Please finish the above situation in your own words:
December 30, 2008

10:03 a.m.

Suggest removal

joggle writes:

How does pounding on the door justify getting shot?? If the guy gets in the house or is actually busting down the door somehow then I can see it. Otherwise it seems like a reaction by a panicked person.

I lived in the country in Texas where people weren't shy about protecting their property but I can't imagine someone getting shot there for pounding on a door. They'd at least get a warning shot first (assuming they were shot at at all).

Cowboy: "Looks like he picked the wrong house to rob."

Don't you think that's a little insane? The houses look the same and are only a block apart and he was drunk. You don't go around robbing people by pounding on their doors. He had no reason to rob anyone (playing in a golf tournament next week...), etc.
December 30, 2008

10:05 a.m.

Suggest removal

breckrider writes:

LMA. totally different situation, does not even compare.
December 30, 2008

10:09 a.m.

Suggest removal

JustSayin writes:

I will love to see the facts once this is sorted out. In particular, how long has the shooter had the weapon? Was he/she one of those who have been rushing to gun shops in the post-election Obama hysteria? Was this their first weapon? Any training or experience, ever? Curious........
December 30, 2008

10:09 a.m.

Suggest removal

HeIsInControl writes:

Joggle,

Thank you for bringing a little sanity to the discussion.
December 30, 2008

10:16 a.m.

Suggest removal

Clarence_Boddicker writes:

I liken a gun to a fire extinguisher-the only thing worse then not having one when you need it is if you don’t know how to use one

If you read the comments, everyone involved has been tried judged and convicted in the court of public opinion, I'll reserve my judgment until after the real trial.
December 30, 2008

10:20 a.m.

Suggest removal

leavemealone writes:

breckrider writes:

"LMA. totally different situation, does not even compare."

What are you talking about?
December 30, 2008

10:21 a.m.

Suggest removal

Cowboy63 writes:

philvysor writes: "What CHOICE are you talking about, sounds like to me the young man was trying to get home."

The CHOICE is trying to break into a house that isn't yours. Being "too drunk to know" isn't an excuse - the man defending his family doesn't know that. All the homeowner sees is someone violently trying to break into his home with his family in bed. Understandable.

breckrider writes: "i can only imagine what a loser cowboy is. it's called firearms training, and knowing when your life is really in danger."

Actually, it called "don't try to break into people's houses and you'll celebrate more birthdays". You never know who is on the other side of the door and what their circumstances are.

Kid made a regretable CHOICE. His responsibility, not theirs.
December 30, 2008

10:22 a.m.

Suggest removal

philvysor writes:

Mr. Attacker is going to hurt/kill you and/or a family member as you're walking down the street....you tell them to stop! They don't....

Please finish the above situation in your own words:
Run away look for a safe haven and Call 911.
December 30, 2008

10:25 a.m.

Suggest removal

Clarence_Boddicker writes:

philvysor writes:

"Mr. Attacker is going to hurt/kill you and/or a family member as you're walking down the street....you tell them to stop! They don't....Please finish the above situation in your own words:
Run away look for a safe haven and Call 911."

Concealed Carry Permit
December 30, 2008

10:29 a.m.

Suggest removal

philvysor writes:

Cowboy63: Where does it say the young man was trying to break in? To break in means to try and robb someone of their personal property. I don't read anywhere that is what he was trying to do? He was drunk and trying to get home, unfortunatly the wrong home. If he was really trying to break in do you really think the person would make that much noise and such a disturbance?
December 30, 2008

10:30 a.m.

Suggest removal

Cowboy63 writes:

Bottom line: Don't get so drunk you can't identify your surroundings then expect the rest of the world to make an exception for you.

"Life is hard. It's harder when you're stupid." - John Wayne
December 30, 2008

10:30 a.m.

Suggest removal

Clarence_Boddicker writes:

Reality_Check writes:

"Cowards shoot first ..."

........and are live to ask questions later
December 30, 2008

10:31 a.m.

Suggest removal

johnson writes:

This is a sign I placed in my front yard. I hope my neighbors are not offended:
"My next door neighbors want to ban all guns. Their house is not armed. To respect their opinion, I promise not to use my guns to help protect them."
December 30, 2008

10:31 a.m.

Suggest removal

WestminsterJ writes:

LMA- Glad we agree on that.
December 30, 2008

10:31 a.m.

Suggest removal

texacola writes:

amen, breckrider.

In my opinion, some people think they can just buy a gun, then maybe learn how to actually use it (reload, cleaning, etc...).
Then they tuck the gun away in a drawer, shelf, wherever.
Not once do they take and study up on laws, responsible gun use, determining a real threat, how to avoid a threat, how to avoid confrontation, on and on.
They just feel like, since they have the gun, they are safe and protected. Probably never even taking the gun to a firing range and practicing.
These types will be the ones that get in trouble or get killed themselves.
Like I said, my opinion.
December 30, 2008

10:32 a.m.

Suggest removal

philvysor writes:

Clarence:"Concealed Carry Permit"

I could also do somethings I learned in class, but I choose not to.
December 30, 2008

10:34 a.m.

Suggest removal

Clarence_Boddicker writes:

texacola writes:"some people think they can just buy a gun......."

What's even crazier is that some people think the police are there to protect you when their primary duty is actually law enforcement
December 30, 2008

10:35 a.m.

Suggest removal

SoCol writes:

I find it telling that none of the Keyboard Bronsons on here have bothered to respond to oldgunney's post: oldgunney writes:

I own several firearms and would not hesitate to use them if someone was to enter my home by force. That being said, the takeing of a human life is a horrible thing to carry around for the rest of your life and Iam speaking from experience it may sound all brave and macho but the guilt is almost unbearable at times.

I suspect that none of these Dirty Harry wannabes has ever had any experience or training with identifying and handling dangerous situations, etc. as breckrider points out, let alone actually having taken a human life. Cowboy, LMA, etc: Go look up the effect the shooting in Louisiana of a foreign exchange student on halloween had on the guy who shot him. He was exonerated by the MMD law, but his guilt haunts him; he wishes he had done something else.
There are options: warning shots, calling 911 and sitting at a strategic spot inside your house in case the guy does manage to break in before the cops arrive and you THEN have the option of shooting once it's clear he's actually breaking in, etc. I agree with other posters: shooting first through a door without being in direct danger and/or knowing the circumstances is the act of a coward.
His guilt will haunt him the rest of his life.
December 30, 2008

10:36 a.m.

Suggest removal

Clarence_Boddicker writes:

philvysor writes:"I could also do somethings I learned in class, but I choose not to."

What's that, get on your knees and beg?
December 30, 2008

10:37 a.m.

Suggest removal

leavemealone writes:

Reality_Check writes:

"America = A Nation of Cowards ... Shoot First ... Blame the Victim for Forcing you to Shoot ... Pathetic."

Reality_Check,

So sorry but you're a CLOWN!

A Royal Clown!
December 30, 2008

10:38 a.m.

Suggest removal

666 writes:

I should go get me a hand cannon and proactively shoot anyone who looks like a hardline conservative who comes within 10 yards of my door. It's just a matter of time before one of them shoots me, after all, and they'd probably say they were justified, that I was a terrorist or something.

It's my right to protect myself from people who are likely to do me harm, you know...
December 30, 2008

10:38 a.m.

Suggest removal

Clarence_Boddicker writes:

SoCol writes:"I agree with other posters: shooting first through a door without being in direct danger and/or knowing the circumstances is the act of a coward.
His guilt will haunt him the rest of his life."

Except that's not what happened
December 30, 2008

10:39 a.m.

Suggest removal

mike181 writes:

Obviously nobody in this forum has never been 22 and/or drunk. The kid biffed, but he shouldn't have died for it. Ridiculous.
December 30, 2008

10:39 a.m.

Suggest removal

The_Punnisher writes:

Five words: Not a DARWIN AWARD WINNER...

Just another tragic reminder that YOU ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR YOUR OWN BEHAVIOR.

You usually live to understand the consequences, this fellow DIED BECAUSE OF THE CONSEQUENCES OF HIS BEHAVIOR.

I guess a lot of people never learn that, especially in our PC world today...

REALITY BITES.....HARD!!!
December 30, 2008

10:40 a.m.

Suggest removal

johnson writes:

philvysor writes:"Run away look for a safe haven and Call 911."
Usually attackers pick on someone less able bodied then themselves. So the "run away" plan really doesn't work for most victims.
December 30, 2008

10:40 a.m.

Suggest removal

Mytoocents writes:

For those of you who are big proponents of accountability for the choices one makes, I couldn't agree more. There is a huge lack of accountability in today's society. It's always somebody else's fault or some justifiable reason for the action one takes. However, it cuts both ways. The homeowner made choices too. He may think it's the kids fault for getting drunk and he truly feared for his life so his decision was justified. Problem is this doesn't and probably won't get him out of some serious legal and financial trouble. Both parties made choices now both will have to live and die with the consequences of those choices. Safe to say if either had made different choices the result would be different. So for those of you defending the homeowner and saying you'd do the same thing, the more power to you but be prepared to hire a good lawyer and/or spend a some time in jail/prison for that choice. Oh, and you'll loose your right to own your guns forever.
December 30, 2008

10:42 a.m.

Suggest removal

Clarence_Boddicker writes:

666 writes:"I should go get me a hand cannon and proactively shoot anyone who looks like a hardline conservative who comes within 10 yards of my door. It's just a matter of time before one of them shoots me, after all, and they'd probably say they were justified, that I was a terrorist or something.
It's my right to protect myself from people who are likely to do me harm, you know..."

Colorado’s laws permitting deadly force would not protect you from prosecution in that case
December 30, 2008

10:44 a.m.

Suggest removal

vendari01 writes:

My impression is that this young man was new to the community, and, having arrived, intoxicated, at the wrong house, was pounding on the back door in an attempt to get his housemates to let him in. Now, I can see wher the homeowner might be thinking "home invasion", but I read the ROE as demanding that the intruder be inside the house. Rather hard to identify the target through a door. So, while I do sympathize, I cannot, from what I've read so far, call this a rightous shoot. My condolensces to all involved; this was a genuine- and aviodable- tragedy.
December 30, 2008

10:44 a.m.

Suggest removal

Clarence_Boddicker writes:

So reality_check are you now trying to say he shouldn't call the police?
December 30, 2008

10:45 a.m.

Suggest removal

Lesh writes:

>Shooting a man through the door will land you in jail

Well put, call 911, wait inside. If he comes through the door, then you are in danger and are justified in shooting.
December 30, 2008

10:48 a.m.

Suggest removal

leavemealone writes:

666 writes:

"I should go get me a hand cannon and proactively shoot anyone who looks like a hardline conservative who comes within 10 yards of my door. It's just a matter of time before one of them shoots me, after all, and they'd probably say they were justified, that I was a terrorist or something.

It's my right to protect myself from people who are likely to do me harm, you know..."

Whoa....666, down boy!
December 30, 2008

10:48 a.m.

Suggest removal

Clarence_Boddicker writes:

The details of the shooting are not printed, it doesn't say he was shot through the door.
December 30, 2008

10:49 a.m.

Suggest removal

SoCol writes:

Boddicker- I read both the RMN and Gazette accounts, sounds like that's exactly what happened.
December 30, 2008

10:51 a.m.

Suggest removal

breckrider writes:

sorry cowboy, but it's actually accountability towards your target. whether a cop, or a homeowner it is your responsibility to make sure the person you are shooting at is an immenent threat to your personal well being, and someone banging on the back door is not. a person in your home is.
December 30, 2008

10:53 a.m.

Suggest removal

Clarence_Boddicker writes:

Reality_Check writes:"May they call the police when it's "your child" who's acting up ..."

Try and focus, you're supposed to be trashing on individual freedoms like the right to self defense. It's not time for the fascist police state argument, that was another topic.
December 30, 2008

10:54 a.m.

Suggest removal

leavemealone writes:

philvysor writes:

"Run away look for a safe haven and Call 911."

Are you for real?

You sound like the next victim we'll read about in the RMN.
December 30, 2008

10:59 a.m.

Suggest removal

Clarence_Boddicker writes:

"SoCol writes:
Boddicker- I read both the RMN and Gazette accounts, sounds like that's exactly what happened."

Sounds? You must've been hearing voices. Here are the details printed:

"Sean Kennedy had been drinking at a weekend Broncos party when he drove to the wrong Colorado Springs house, scared the homeowner by pounding on the door and was fatally shot, his father said Monday."
"Officers were called to the home at 9:50 p.m. Sunday on a report of a burglary in process. They found Kennedy in the backyard. He had been shot once."
"One of the residents confronted Kennedy at the back door and fired a handgun at least once, Whitlock said. He said the two people inside the home did not know Kennedy."
December 30, 2008

11 a.m.

Suggest removal

johnson writes:

So what if the homeowner was also drunk. Would it be a push?
In that scenario alcohol made them both act irrationally. So if the intruder shouldn't be held accountable for his actions,(or "mistake" as some would call it) 'cause he was wasted, neither should the shooter.
December 30, 2008

11:02 a.m.

Suggest removal

Clarence_Boddicker writes:

Reality_Check writes: "America = A Nation of Cowards"

So what does that make you? You can't even form a cohesive argument. Just ranting and raving, beating your fists on the table like a child........
December 30, 2008

11:02 a.m.

Suggest removal

TheDenverB writes:

to me, this sounds like a simple case of thinning the herd.

"Reality_Check writes:

America = A Nation of Cowards"

no. a nation of idiots who are dumb enough to a) drive drunk b) drive drunkenly to the wrong home c) bang on the front door after their keys don't work, still thinking it's their house.
December 30, 2008

11:02 a.m.

Suggest removal

leavemealone writes:

Reality_Check writes:

"America = A Nation of Cowards"

Are you for real?

Where are you from RC?
December 30, 2008

11:04 a.m.

Suggest removal

Clarence_Boddicker writes:

johnson writes: "So what if the homeowner was also drunk. Would it be a push?
In that scenario alcohol made them both act irrationally. So if the intruder shouldn't be held accountable for his actions,(or "mistake" as some would call it) 'cause he was wasted, neither should the shooter."

There are many "what ifs" that would have changed the outcome of this tragic situation, all of them equally irrelevant now
December 30, 2008

11:07 a.m.

Suggest removal

philvysor writes:

leavemealone: Yes I am for real. Like I said i have had these kind of instances happen and that is the advice given. I just can't shoot someone on the street because I thought they might have been or looked like the possiblity of the person robbing me.
December 30, 2008

11:07 a.m.

Suggest removal

SoCol writes:

Boddicker- Right, I think he shot through the door. If he bothered to open the door, it certainly was not to clarify the situation, but to pull the trigger. If that's the case, excuse me. Anyone who shoots first in a case like this, whether through a closed door or through the crack of an open one, is cowardly. But the real point is this: the shooter screwed up, shot first without excersizing other more prudent options and will now live the rest of his life with incredible guilt. Ask oldgunney.
December 30, 2008

11:10 a.m.

Suggest removal

leavemealone writes:

Reality_Check writes:

"America = A Nation of Cowards"

philvysor writes:

"Run away look for a safe haven and Call 911."

Wow....both of you need to get out more.
December 30, 2008

11:11 a.m.

Suggest removal

philvysor writes:

johnson: The young man should be held accountable for his mistake, But does that mean he has to be shot and killed? Wow I guess knocking on the wrong door is punishable by Death. Hope no one in here is a door to door sales rep.
December 30, 2008

11:15 a.m.

Suggest removal

Lesh writes:

philvysor: you make it sound like he was politely knocking.
December 30, 2008

11:16 a.m.

Suggest removal

blm69 writes:

I agree that gun lovers look forward to the day they can legally kill somebody. I totally believe in being able to defend property, but you should be sure that the person is really a threat before you kill them. I used to live out in the country. I had a gun in the home. Several times drunks would fly off the rather sharp turn near my home, they would come to my door looking for a ride. One guy had blood dripping down his face and was knocking hysterically. I helped them all out and had I shot one of them, I'm sure that it would have haunted me the rest of my life.
December 30, 2008

11:17 a.m.

Suggest removal

leavemealone writes:

philvysor writes:

"I just can't shoot someone on the street because I thought they might have been or looked like the possiblity of the person robbing me."

I never said "Shoot"!

Defend by any means necessary including fists, rocks, sticks, eye gouging, etc....or a firearm

The police are not your body guards. They write reports AFTER THE FACT!
December 30, 2008

11:18 a.m.

Suggest removal

law1 writes:

I have yet to see any evidence in either the Rocky or the Gazette that he was actually breaking and entering. I guess the rabid MMD adherents on here have yet to master reading comprehension. Which puts into question whether or not those posters should be allowed to have a firearm. I'm no foe of the Second Amendment, but maybe we should add I.Q. tests to the requirements for purchasing a gun.
December 30, 2008

11:25 a.m.

Suggest removal

Cowboy63 writes:

Mytoocents writes: "The homeowner made choices too. He may think it's the kids fault for getting drunk and he truly feared for his life so his decision was justified. Problem is this doesn't and probably won't get him out of some serious legal and financial trouble."

I agree! The homeowner made a CHOICE when he pulled the trigger and I'm not saying there are no responsibilities for that either. CHOICE and RESPONSIBILITY goes both ways. He'll get to explain the situation and his response in court - I never said he shouldn't be held accountable. I said I understand where he's coming from.

When in doubt, it's:

"Better to be judged by 12, than carried by 6".
December 30, 2008

11:27 a.m.

Suggest removal

The_Punnisher writes:

My favorite SIG:

When seconds count, Officer Friendly will be there in MINUTES, HOURS or possibly NEVER....

Calling 911 has the same effect ( and usefulness ) as calling Dial-A-Prayer....

Remember the Supreme Court ruled in Castle Rock vs Gonzales THAT THE POLICE ARE UNDER NO OBLIGATION TO PROTECT YOU!!

That's right, you are on your own!
December 30, 2008

11:27 a.m.

Suggest removal

johnson writes:

Clarence, you're right, there are a lot of "what ifs" that could have changed the outcome of this young man's fate. Yet there are still many "what ifs" that will be relevant to the shooter's fate.
December 30, 2008

11:28 a.m.

Suggest removal

leavemealone writes:

The police are not your body guards.

They write reports AFTER THE FACT!
December 30, 2008

11:33 a.m.

Suggest removal

Mytoocents writes:

"The homeowner made a CHOICE when he pulled the trigger and I'm not saying there are no responsibilities for that either. CHOICE and RESPONSIBILITY goes both ways. He'll get to explain the situation and his response in court - I never said he shouldn't be held accountable."

Sounds like we're on the same page Cowboy
December 30, 2008

11:36 a.m.

Suggest removal

HopiMedicineMan writes:

When my neighbors try to break into my trailer, I follow these simple steps:
1. I locate my .45, which could take ten minutes.
2. I locate a loaded magazine, which could take 20 minutes.
3. I locate a flashlight, which could take another ten minutes.
4. If they're still trying to break in, after 40 minutes and with all the lights going on, I point the beam of the flashlight in their face.
5. I tell them they're at the wrong trailer since all the trailers look the same.
6. If they don't leave, I rack the slide.
7. If they rack their's, I fire.
December 30, 2008

11:40 a.m.

Suggest removal

SammHill writes:

This poor guy traveled right past my place on the way to choose life or death.

There is a price for stupidity, getting drunk, not knowing where he was going, and then being violent, aggressive, obnoxious, and threatening. What a fool. He paid the maximum price for his mistakes.

He forgot the most important rule to follow in this situation: "An armed society is a POLITE society" He forgot to be polite, and the penalty in this case was (justifiably) his life. Wise readers will take note. Others will just take their chances.

Anyone coming to my door in similar circumstances will end up dead too.
December 30, 2008

11:58 a.m.

Suggest removal

BroncoRick69 writes:

I cant believe the attention craved comments posted here, to be honest with you. No one in their right mind says "good" or " He deserved it" when someone makes a mistake and ends up dead for it. What a bunch of pathetic individuals. I am so glad I don't know any of you.
December 30, 2008

12:14 p.m.

Suggest removal

HankReardon writes:

The question is, "What have the rest of us learned from this tragic event?" There are responsibilities and consequences.
It also helps to admit when you are wrong or quick to judge before the facts. Isn't that kind of 'shoot first/ask questions later' mentality what got us into Iraq in the first place? (or was it 'bomb first/find threat later'?)

Regrets.
December 30, 2008

12:18 p.m.

Suggest removal

newsjunkie writes:

DenverB - and all you others on here harping about drunk driving - READ the Gazette article - it clearly states his friends dropped him off on the wrong street (altho' the RMN said he drove - I'm going with the Gazette version) - he wasn't driving!!!!

And since when does getting drunk = a death sentence? The death of this young man was totally unnecessary. Burglars do not pound on the door and shout to be let in. No doubt it is frightening to be woken up in the middle of the night by such a commotion - but use of a firearm in response is completely unwarranted.
December 30, 2008

12:21 p.m.

Suggest removal

FatTony writes:

@SammHill

Moron.

Somebody pounding on my door repeatedly is DEFINITELY trying to break into my home. That's exactly how I would try to break into someone's home...be loud as possible at 9-10p at night, and let everyone know you're there.

How did you get that he was being "violent, aggressive, obnoxious, and threatening" from the article? Can you read? Gotta ask...

I truly hope what goes around for you, comes around.
December 30, 2008

12:27 p.m.

Suggest removal

joggle writes:

HopiMedicineMan:

My procedure:

1) Try to see who's trying to break in.
2a) If the person seems pretty harmless or likely harmless (ie, not holding any weapons) then I would give them a verbal warning.
2b) If they are holding a weapon or there's more than one person then I would skip to 3.
3) If they don't go away call 911.
4) A few minutes later the cops show up and deal with it (about 5 minutes since police station is only 1 mile from my house).

Regardless, the cops would be there before you would even find your gun apparently (if their presence was even requested). Of course, adding in the fact that there's only been one murder in my city in all the years I've lived there (and even that was a domestic dispute) I'm not too worried in Lafayette.
December 30, 2008

12:30 p.m.

Suggest removal

davies writes:

I think the comments thread started out very poorly here when the story did not originally include the facts concerning the shooting victim's being drunk and mistakenly trying to enter the wrong house.

Now everyone is squaring off on whether or not it's OK to shoot an intruder, when this particular story could end up going either way. That is, the homeowner COULD have over-reacted and mistakenly shot a noisy drunk kid who meant no harm. Or on the other hand, knowing the effects of alcohol on some people, the homeowner may have opened the door, and the kid COULD have been belligerent and threatening, even so drunk as to still be trying to bull his way into the wrong house, in which case it may have been entirely reasonable to assume he meant harm, and shoot.

But hating on everyone else isn't going to resolve the questions here.
December 30, 2008

12:33 p.m.

Suggest removal

vendari01 writes:

For the record, I carry a sidearm on duty. That weapon is quickly accessible to me, off duty, as well. I was thoroughly trained in the use of firearms, which included rules of engagement. I have repeatedly considered various scenarios, and not one involves shooting through a closed door. The only valid reason for me to discharge my weapon in combat is to save lives, and they are in little danger, while the door remains closed. Time enough to shoot, should the door be forced open. blm69, I genuinely hope that I never have to shoot anything but paper, and I have had an encounter much like this one, where a drunk was pounding on my door and making threats. I'm sure the Colt got his attention, but as far as I know, the fool is alive today. If the time ever comes to fire, it will be eye-to-eye with a genuine threat to my life, or those of innocent people.
December 30, 2008

12:40 p.m.

Suggest removal

buffsblg writes:

Sammhill

You can take that position, but be aware that if the person has not entered your home the shooting is not covered by Make My Day. The statute provides:

(2) Notwithstanding the provisions of section 18-1-704, any occupant of a dwelling is justified in using any degree of physical force, including deadly physical force, against another person when that other person has made an unlawful entry into the dwelling, and when the occupant has a reasonable belief that such other person has committed a crime in the dwelling in addition to the uninvited entry, or is committing or intends to commit a crime against a person or property in addition to the uninvited entry, and when the occupant reasonably believes that such other person might use any physical force, no matter how slight, against any occupant.

Note the requirement of "unlawful entry" and another crime. Your decision to kill some one knocking at your door, no matter how annoyed you may be or how impolite the other person is, might get you some fun time in prison with real criminals. Your NRA stance that you have life and death authority to discipline those you dislike is understood, but it is not the law.
December 30, 2008

12:41 p.m.

Suggest removal

davies writes:

Oh, and Cowboy63, I believe your saying should be: Sow, meet reap; not: reap, meet sow.

As in, "as ye sow, so shall ye reap" ;-)
December 30, 2008

12:45 p.m.

Suggest removal

minvanz writes:

Seems like the only one here that has any common sense/intelligence is imnormal “ would advise waiting for more facts on this one. I have heard some rumors here in CS that this may not be as clear-cut as it presently appears ...” And now the facts come out that this so called low life burglar was just an innocent individual that had to much to drink. Unless cowboy63, mxrider, kalazoo leavemealone are saints, I’m sure they’ve been just as intoxicated as this young man was. Ignorant readers such as these are why we arm ourselves. Haven’t you ever heard don’t believe anything you read and only half of what you see. Don’t worry the bunny huggers will be coming out now. I hope this man that shot this guy is prosecuted to the full extent of the law. The time it took for him to access his weapon, take aim and shot an innocent man he could have called 911 or comforted him but the coward shot him through the door it sounds. When fools like the ones that pre-judged the situation come to prosecute me is why we arm ourselves.
December 30, 2008

12:55 p.m.

Suggest removal

philvysor writes:

vendari01: I like your style and thats how it should be. If this homeowner took the same principle and applied it this young man would be alive today.
December 30, 2008

12:59 p.m.

Suggest removal

Dub writes:

Did I read correctly, that the homeowner "confronted" the drunk, then fired? How do you "confront" someone through a closed door? Sounds like the drunk "confronted" back and got shot.
December 30, 2008

1 p.m.

Suggest removal

Cowboy63 writes:

davies - BINGO.

This story opened with about 10% of the relevant information (we're still waiting for the homeowner's account, etc.). It would be nice if the RMN gathered ALL the facts before they "report" anything.

Do I believe that being drunk is not an excuse - yes. Does the fact that the kid was drunk temper my belief that he was a robber - yes. Does it dismiss the fact that the homeowners were unaware and afraid for their lives - no. Have I ever been pleased that a drunk kid got killed - no. Do I still believe individuals need to be held accountable for their Choices - absolutely.

Even though I strongly believe people have a right to defend their homes and family - you are still accountable when you pull the trigger, justified or not.
December 30, 2008

1:21 p.m.

Suggest removal

Beergut writes:

Dub: How do you know the guy didn't open up the door and shot him point blank? Maybe he shot through the door. Maybe the guy went up the door and said: "I'm lost" and then the home owner said: "This is my chance to kill and claim self defense" and unloaded and then lied. Which is the basic problem the "Make my Day" law. I agree the right to defend yourself, but if you are the only witness why should you be believed? Maybe you are just one of the crack pot posters who appear to be itching to kill at the first chance they get.
December 30, 2008

1:52 p.m.

Suggest removal

cterryr2 writes:

Criminals do not ring the doorbell. I hope the shooter goes to jail forever! There is no excuse at all. Murder. He could have done 50 other things besides shoot first.
December 30, 2008

1:53 p.m.

Suggest removal

opinionatedcolo writes:

Backing and filling now cowboy. Less than an hour after the story was posted you said:

"Looks like he picked the wrong house to rob.

Reap! Meet, Sow."

Now you complain that people are jumping to conclusions and have the nerve to blame the paper. Yesterday without any information you were positive this was a robber who deserved to die (Hence the reaping and sowing comment) Now we get a lecture on "responsibility" and your completely unsupported statement that the homeowners were "unaware and afraid for their lives" which is not stated anywhere in any article. Any action can be justified by those unconcerned with the actual facts. Given that you already messed up once jumping to conclusions, maybe you should wait for real information before your next lecture.
December 30, 2008

1:56 p.m.

Suggest removal

repeal68guncontrolact writes:

I'm a longtime gun nut who owns every gun the government likes to ban, plus I support "castle doctrine" (A.K.A. "make my day" laws), and I'm a member of Gun Owners of America and an "associate" ($10) member of the NRA,

BUUUUT I want everyone to know, especially non gun owners who read this, that I am infuriated at what this homeowner did. I hope he is charged with manslaughter. Knocking on a door in the middle of the night, even knocking loudly, does not warrant being EXECUTED. I really REALLY hate people who shoot through doors (it appears that happened here).

I would say this to the idiot homeowner: YES PAL WE GET IT, you're scared when someone bangs on your door in the middle of the night, but be a man, go to the door with your gun, turn a light on and go from there. Period. I am so tired of modern males who panic like frightened school girls. This homeowner panicked and killed an innocent person. I hope he gets charged. I would convict him so he'd better pray that I'M not on the jury (and I would not convict most people who are charged by these horrible prosecutors these days because prosecutors OVER charge and they charge people for possession issues which are not crimes unless the item is stolen).

The media will use this to make gun owners look bad and to bash "castle doctrine" laws which are very good laws. This homeowner didn't even bother to assess the perceived "threat" so he is NOT PROTECTED UNDER "CASTLE DOCTRINE" (A.K.A. "make my day") laws.

I'm seeing a lot of comments by ignorant people who applaud the pointless killing of this guy. BOTTOM LINE: police are not justified when they murder people just because they "felt threatened," (when the facts show there WAS no threat against a cop), and this homeowner is also not justified for killing someone just because he "felt" threatened. The law states there needs to actually be some evidence of a threat. Stupid feelings are not enough (although police get away with it all the time, but that doesn't make it legal OR right).
December 30, 2008

2:05 p.m.

Suggest removal

MGD writes:

There are several key facts still unknown by these posters. Lots of assumptions going on.

I took a firearms class in Nevada and they did a demonstration where one instructor had a gun and was the "intruder" while the other instructor was the "home owner". (They were both looking down range).

The home owner gave a verbal warning, something like "stop or I'll shoot". Before he got to "I'll shoot" the intruder had fired two rounds into a target 10 yards down range. Center of chest cavity shots and fired in far less than a second. It was pretty clear that if you are facing someone who is trained and IN YOUR HOUSE, you are better off to shoot then to try and give a warning. In that situation, you shoot center body mass, no leg shots. Two shots to the chest. One more shot between the eyes if the assailent continues to advance.

After having gone through that training with law enforcment, members of the armed services, civilian contractors, and the general public I came to realize that if you are in a situation like this you have literally less than a second to make your shoot or not shoot decision.

A lot of you are comfortable making assumptions about what happened, what should have happened, and how you would have handled it. It sounds like the home owner did call 911. Maybe he shot through the door, maybe the door came open and the kid stumbled in.

If I read the statute correctly, in order to shoot someone you should see that they are in your house and either have commited a crime or you have to think that they are going to commit a crime.

As well trained and experienced as I am with a handgun, I keep mine locked away in a safe and not available for home protection. I have two dogs and access to a phone and an ice axe. If I lived in an area where home invasions were more common then I would consider a gun close by. Perhaps stored in a bio-metric controlled hand safe bolted to the side of a dresser.

The decision to take a life is huge and if you keep a firearm for protection, please take the time to think about the consequences of using it. Take a class, I went to FrontSight academy in Nevada and they spent a lot of time explaining the consequences of shooting. It's worth the money.
December 30, 2008

2:28 p.m.

Suggest removal

Winthrop writes:

One night a sound woke me, it came from my basement.

I got my gun and went to the top of the basement stairs.

The intruder brushed past me, and ran out the kitchen door. I realized that this person was of small stature, so I don't know if that was the reason I didn't fire, or that I forgot I had the gun in my hand.

Thank God I didn't use the weapon; the intruder was my neighbors son. He was about 10 at the time.

Even though he was trying to steal from me, if I had of used the weapon; how could I have lived with myself, knowing that I took a childs life?
December 30, 2008

2:28 p.m.

Suggest removal

Cowboy63 writes:

opinionatedcolo writes: "Now we get a lecture on "responsibility" and your completely unsupported statement that the homeowners were "unaware and afraid for their lives" which is not stated anywhere in any article."

You're not paying attention, opinionatedcolo. That's OK, I'm here to educate you.

What makes you think the homeowners weren't afraid? Anytime someone feels the need to fire to defend their home and family, you can bet they were "unaware and afraid for their lives".

You're the one jumping to conclusions. "Reap and Sow" does NOT mean "deserve to die". What is means is you pay the price for your CHOICES. Sometimes bad Choices lead to death. Learn the difference.
December 30, 2008

2:40 p.m.

Suggest removal

Clouser writes:

Someone banging on your backdoor repeatedly and loudly at 10:00 at night could definitely be regarded as a threat. Who, other than some drunk moron, would do that if they didn't intend harm? Should we assume that any would-be intruder is actually a mistaken drunk kid? How about I come to your house, where you are peacefully minding your own business, and bang loudly & repeatedly on your door at 10:30 some night and we'll see how you react. You may very well feel in fear of your life or safety - at least a possibility, don't you think?

I feel badly for this kid and his family. To say that he was killed for being drunk is disingenuous. He was killed for (mistakenly) doing a good job of impersonating an intruder. A tragedy all the way around for certain.

Also, all the talk of "cowards" who shoot first is ridiculous. When the guy at the door does have bad intentions, maybe you "heroes" who want to ask a lot of questions of him first can be called courageous during your eulogy.

That said, I hope the homeowner didn't shoot him through the unopened door. If he did, he's a moron as well and he'll be lucky to stay out of jail.

Personally, I would have called 911, stepped away from the door to a nice firing position and if the door opened, let him have it. If he wasn't breaking in, the police would show up and everyone would go to bed alive.
December 30, 2008

2:43 p.m.

Suggest removal

Lvsport writes:

I usually don't respond to these, but this one made me think. I will first qualify my statements by saying I am a police officer and have been for 22 yrs. Those of you that say shooting someone for any reason, justified or not would be easy, is a joke. Taking the life of another is never easy and as a police officer would do it to protect life, but trust me I would not think it was fun, easy, feel cocky by any means. I would, feel sadness, remorse and hope and pray I never have to do it again.

The other issue I have heard; a drunk banging on the door does not classify as a robber breaking into a house. I haven't read anywhere where he banged so hard the glass broke, that would be a big issue, because now he has access inside. And yes the intruder must be in the house, not standing outside banging.

I wish both sidesides good luck, the homeowners will be charged. The DA has no choice.
December 30, 2008

2:44 p.m.

Suggest removal

TheDenverB writes:

again, thinning the herd. this guy was clearly not the brightest star in the sky, and this just happened to be his time to go.
December 30, 2008

2:46 p.m.

Suggest removal

Cowboy63 writes:

cterryr2 writes: "Criminals do not ring the doorbell."

It's off the subject, but criminals "ring the doorbell" all the time. Sometimes they're casing the place just to see if anyone is home. My neighbor was recently robbed and when the police caught the guy, turns out he was there a few days earlier trying to "sell" them a home security system!

Criminals posing as nonthreatening vendors is nothing new. There have been plenty of stories of real estate agents being raped and killed by criminals posing as friendly neighborhood home shoppers. It pays to be diligent in all situations. You don't need to be paranoid, but it pays to be aware and ask questions. When in doubt, defend yourself and your family.

In this particular case, this wouldn't be the first time the, "too drunk to know any better" defense could have been played. Actually, it's still not too late. I can already see that non-excuse getting pulled out in a criminal/civil case.
December 30, 2008

2:48 p.m.

Suggest removal

Cowboy63 writes:

Clouser - Hitting the nail right on the head!
December 30, 2008

2:52 p.m.

Suggest removal

newsjunkie writes:

yeah, sometimes bad choices do lead to death, cowboy, but this choice - getting drunk and becoming disoriented after being dropped off on the wrong street - isn't one of them. this death was completely senseless. the kid got drunk (don't pretend that this doesn't happen a lot - with good and bad kids alike, with good and bad adults alike) but he was responsible enough to have someone else take him home - that's a lot more than you can say for most young drunk people. I don't blame the home owners one bit for being terribly frightened by the sound of pounding at the door in the middle of the night - but think about this: this person pounding at the door could've been anyone - even someone they knew - like a neighbor in great distress seeking aid. so shoot first and find out who it is later?? the decision to shoot was completely unwarranted. and now a 22 year old man with a great life ahead of him - is dead.
December 30, 2008

2:56 p.m.

Suggest removal

coloradovet writes:

Like a thief is going to be dumb enough to pound on your door. Pounding on your door is not an excuse to kill someone. Hell, I've passed out drunk in neighbors back yards before. Yeah, I ended up in jail, but at least they didn't kill me.
December 30, 2008

4:13 p.m.

Suggest removal

HopiMedicineMan writes:

Joggle,
The question is at what point have you the right to take another life. The individual in this situation who shot through the door and killed Sean Kennedy, I believe, did not have that right. I'm sure the home-owner will be charged. A burglar doesn't usually knock. I could be wrong. Davies probably knows.
December 30, 2008

4:14 p.m.

Suggest removal

ThingFish writes:

This home owner's day has definitely been made. As has his year and probably the next 10-20 years.
December 30, 2008

4:16 p.m.

Suggest removal

DragonInTheSky writes:

"Officers were called to the home at 9:50 p.m. Sunday on a report of a burglary in process."

Where are people getting the idea that this occurred in the middle of the night?! It wasn't even 10pm yet when the police were called to the scene.

Cowboy63..You are a macho, fearful, paranoid coward.
December 30, 2008

4:17 p.m.

Suggest removal

HopiMedicineMan writes:

Reality_Check
Touché
December 30, 2008

4:18 p.m.

Suggest removal

NDeeZ writes:

How do you distinguish "pounding on the door to be let in" from "pounding on the door to break it down?"

And thieves do ring the doorbell to see if someone's home. When nobody answers, they go around back (out of sight) to break in.

Key here, and unreported by ALL of the news agencies so far is whether the victim had gained access.

Tragic from any angle.
December 30, 2008

4:30 p.m.

Suggest removal

DragonInTheSky writes:

It is easy to distinguish between pounding on a door, and trying to break a door down.
December 30, 2008

4:32 p.m.

Suggest removal

NDeeZ writes:

Don't buy it...not if you're inside and scared.

Again--shooting through the door will put the homeowner in serious jeopardy, but if the guy had forced his way in...
December 30, 2008

4:34 p.m.

Suggest removal

HopiMedicineMan writes:

Dragon
At least Cowboy63 isn't disorganized.
December 30, 2008

4:46 p.m.

Suggest removal

HopiMedicineMan writes:

NDeeZ
The Gazette story is a little different.

"One of the residents confronted Kennedy at the back door and fired a handgun at least once, Whitlock said. He said the two people inside the home did not know Kennedy."

This was after calling 911. This doesn't sound like shooting through the door. I had that impression too from the News take. I don't know where that came from.

So Sean Kennedy may have been so drunk he tried to push his way in and the frightened character, a male, my impression, fearful Kennedy might pass out, blasted away in self defense. Somehow I don't think that's going to fly with the DA.
December 30, 2008

4:48 p.m.

Suggest removal

Mytoocents writes:

Clouser:
Someone banging on your backdoor repeatedly and loudly at 10:00 at night could definitely be regarded as a threat. Who, other than some drunk moron, would do that if they didn't intend harm?

Uhhh how 'bout:
1. Neighbor trying to tell you your house is on fire.
2. Victim of an attack looking for help.
3. Witness to a terrible car accident looking for help.
4. Ed McMahon running late with his big checks and trying to get you to come to the door
5. Over zealous missionaries

I suppose all of the above should expect lead to come flying their way. Lesson here is always wear a flak jacket if approaching a residential home of assistance or business or criminal activity.
December 30, 2008

5:02 p.m.

Suggest removal

opinionatedcolo writes:

Cowboy, that you really really want to believe something does not make it true. Yesterday you really really believed this kid was a robber who got what he deserved and you were WRONG, which you are yet to admit. I do not know the attitude of the folks in the house and neither do you. The difference is that I will wait for more information to form an opinion, whereas your opinions are not grounded in anything more than preformed biases.
December 30, 2008

5:10 p.m.

Suggest removal

Clarence_Boddicker writes:

Anyone asserting the shooting was or was not justified is making assumptions based on personal bias.
Here are the facts: Officers were called to the home at 9:50 p.m. Sunday on a report of a burglary in process. They found Kennedy in the backyard. He had been shot once.
Judgement should be reserved untill more facts are released
December 30, 2008

5:39 p.m.

Suggest removal

SammHill writes:

Buffsbig:

Here is the relevant part: "or is committing or intends to commit a crime against a person or property in addition to the uninvited entry, and when the occupant reasonably believes that such other person might use any physical force, no matter how slight, against any occupant."

More than one person in CO defending their home has successfully argued that situations similar to this one allowed them to use deadly force.

Phrases are often created in response to reality, and persist because of the truth they convey. In any event, the phrase, "Better judged by 12 than carried by 6" is the operational phrase here.
December 30, 2008

6:19 p.m.

Suggest removal

WestminsterJ writes:

>In any event, the phrase, "Better judged by 12 than carried by 6" is the operational phrase here.

In the end, we are all judged by One. That's the judgment we need to be worried about.
December 30, 2008

7:11 p.m.

Suggest removal

SammHill writes:

WJ:
Not sure what your post has to do with being judged by 12 here on earth, but I'm confident of that judgment by God.
December 30, 2008

8 p.m.

Suggest removal

The_Punnisher writes:

Has it ever occurred to you that God might be a committee?
-- Jubal Harshaw
R.A.H.

A former resident of Colorado Springs...
December 30, 2008

9:24 p.m.

Suggest removal

BenchBoss writes:

This thread is hilarious.

Mostly a bunch of cowards threatening to kill another over STUFF. As if anyone wants your junk anyway. Keep typing, wimps. Hide behind that barrel too. Er - I mean keyboard. So scared. Big, bad men with their bug guns posting on the internet. How pathetic. Watch out! Someone could be breaking in for your junk right now! Look out!
December 30, 2008

10:18 p.m.

Suggest removal

NDeeZ writes:

Reality-Check sez: ""Thou Shall Not Kill" ... unless you're a cowardly gun-nut."

...or the former Governor of Texas!
December 31, 2008

12:23 a.m.

Suggest removal

Clarence_Boddicker writes:

What does Ann Richards have to do with this?
December 31, 2008

4:16 a.m.

Suggest removal

psydoc writes:

Hopi, your scenario of Sean Kennedy possibly attempting to force his way into the home would put a different spin on this story. However, I doubt seriously this was what happened. In that case, the body would more than likely been found 1) in the doorway 2) on the porch. He was found in the backyard. Could be wrong, but sounds unjustified to me.
December 31, 2008

8:02 a.m.

Suggest removal

davies writes:

BenchBoss:

Why do you call us cowards? You dont even know how tough we are. We will come up on you like japanese ninas and youll never even know what hit you. Well a can of whuppass hit you thats what, and not a soupcan, no. A big tomato juice can of whuppass on your big mouth head. So watch your back my freind.
December 31, 2008

9:04 a.m.

Suggest removal

Grim_Reefer writes:

what's a japanese nina?
December 31, 2008

9:30 a.m.

Suggest removal

davies writes:

Why, it's your mom, Grim_Reefer.

;-)
December 31, 2008

9:33 a.m.

Suggest removal

Cowboy63 writes:

newsjunkie writes: "yeah, sometimes bad choices do lead to death, cowboy, but this choice - getting drunk and becoming disoriented after being dropped off on the wrong street - isn't one of them."

newsjunkie - "getting drunk and becoming disoriented" IS a Choice. 99 times out of 100 you won't pay for it. It's the 100th time you need to watch out for.

I just have to laught at all the "adults" calling each other names on this post! Why is it that concepts such as "responsibility", "accountability", and "choice" scare everyone into hysteric name-calling? Isn't there an old saying about "sticks and stones..." that you should have learned in the 3rd grade? You're going to have to do better than that.
December 31, 2008

9:38 a.m.

Suggest removal

Cowboy63 writes:

DragonInTheSky writes: "Cowboy63..You are a macho, fearful, paranoid coward."

That's all you got?
December 31, 2008

1:17 p.m.

Suggest removal

HankReardon writes:

Knock knock Cowpoke, I'm at your back door!
December 31, 2008

1:59 p.m.

Suggest removal

sweetater writes:

Hank,
Can you please answer a question on the transgender thread?
December 31, 2008

2:31 p.m.

Suggest removal

MGD writes:

LOL, thanks tater.
December 31, 2008

3:59 p.m.

Suggest removal

HankReardon writes:

Sweetater,
? ;)
February 4, 2009

9:28 a.m.

Suggest removal

Karlo writes:

some observations...first this IS tragic for all involved...
the occupants did excerise some proper judgement in immediately calling 911...
It may forever be argued that he may have been too 'quick on the trigger', in this case the investigation should look into wether the occupant(s) had reason to believe that someone was coming to cause greivous harm or kill them, i.e. drug or gambling depts...or threats from stalkers or former lovers ect.
I think that the 911 tape, clearly showing that the glass was being broken, helped determin 'probable cause'...
I myself do keep a loaded .38 out of sight but close by in my home.
As a precaution, the first round is a 'shot shell', this serves as both a warning and a non-lethal 'first shot'. If it is an intruder he will in most cases turn and run, if it is the paper boy, he will not be 'dead', and if it is a 'mad man' or someone not detered, the remaining 4 or 5 rounds will take him out...
and if it is an intruder that surprises you and is at very close eange, a shot shell, may not be 'lethal' but may take the fight out of him...and you still have the remaining rounds...

Home › News › Local News

Man killed by neighbor after trying to enter wrong house

Sue McMillin and Bill Vogrin, the Gazette

Published December 29, 2008 at 12:10 p.m.Updated December 30, 2008 at 5:14 p.m.

More Local News

Share

Comments

Featured

Columns & Blogs

Published December 29, 2008 at 12:10 p.m.
Updated December 30, 2008 at 5:14 p.m.