Shared publicly  - 
Residents in a northern Utah city are coming to the defense of a man who was arrested and faces charges for shooting at burglars as they drove away from his property. 
Albert Sheldon's profile photoLinda Kimble's profile photoMichael Amaral's profile photoDon Derbin's profile photo
He could have killed a child in a home across the street.  
Messed up world when the criminals go unpunished but the victims are prosecuted. Yes, this person made a mistake but what a waste of time and money when the the bad guy gets away! 
Shooting someone who is fleeing the scene is usually not legal.  Look at it this way, if it had been a cop who had shot a burglar in a residential neighborhood as the burglar ran away would would the situation be any different?
My Rottie would rip the throat out of anyone attempting to get in our home before I could ever get to my gun.  I find more and more I don't need it.
WELL, police can shoot you for delivering newspapers. WTHeck???
I can shoot you for delivering newspapers... what's your point?
Spoiler alert - recovering lawyer writing here.

Illegal to do this in probably every jurisdiction.

In the old days, law officers could shoot people who were fleeing from the commission of a felony. You have probably seen this in the old movies, where the cop screams at the guy to stop and the guy doesn't, so the cop draws a bead on him right there on the sidewalk and shoots him in the back. I'd be surprised if even that is legal today in any jurisdiction.
He could have stole a nuclear warhead and detonated it in the neighborhood too. No telling what he he could have done.
He probably could get away with it in Texas, or at least be fortunate enough to have a grand jury that would refuse to indict. 
Jury trial, and change the stupid law.  What's next criminals will be able to call a "TIME OUT!" or perhaps a "DO OVER!"  It's pretty simple.  Don't do the crime if you don't want to be shot at.  Do the crime, worse that will happen is you drop your weapon and you can be pretty confident that you won't get shot.  This is illogical and just plain dumb.  You people are way to afraid of guns.  Get one, learn to use it, you know just like that thing you use everyday full of an explosive that can disfigure, or kill you and people around you if it isn't used correctly?  Yes your car or truck.
Funny howthe same people who are all about changing the law when it's something they like are the first ones to scream "judicial activism" when it's about changing a law they like in place.
Paul Chinn - have you been reading what the police are getting away with lately?  This man fired one (1) round.  He did not unleash a hail of gunfire.  Yes, his behavior was irresponsible and illegal.  My objection is that our law enforcement wastes their time and the public's money to go after him when the real "alleged" criminals will likely never be apprehended and only a cursory investigation, if any, will ever be conducted.  
I am all for the second amendment but I am sure he was outside of the law.  Most laws say it is home defense while they are in your house, not while they are outside running away from it.
James may sarcastic point is, the police can't shoot you for no reason, why can't a man protect himself from an intruder. Get it now??? 
+John Bond yes, I have stated twice that his actions were against the law.  Common sense appears to have fled from our government officials.  If they prosecute this person they are wasting our resources - assuming you pay taxes.  The police have every right and even an obligation to arrest him, that is their job but if the DA pursues prosecution (as they probably will) they are ruining a homeowner's future while doing nothing about the actual problem.  Which is that criminals feel they can break into someone's home because law enforcement will likely never catch them and they can get get away with it. One more time, in what sane world do we prosecute the victim and not the criminal?
Yes, I get the sarcasm.  FYI, my father was a 30 year veteran of law enforcement.  He shot ZERO people, and most police probably never have to either.  Recently, I have seen a number of occasions where excessive force has been used and there were no consequences - if cop murders someone it appears to be allowed? This poor homeowner made a mistake but he is being arrested while the burglar isn't likely to even be investigated much less apprehended.  S
+RAQUEL LIGHT Correct... the police cannot shoot you for no reason, nor can I.  He didn't protect himself either.  He shot at a moving vehicle and risked the lives of those living around him.  That's illegal and fucking stupid too.  Read the story.
+James Moore If you read the article, you'd see that the thief has been arrested.
Get real, James May!! Two ladies delivering newspaper got blasted in Cali. Me Get REAL!
I agree. He should not have fired once the perpetrator was off his property, fleeing, and unarmed. He was no longer defending himself or anyone else. I am a gun owner and a strong supporter of the 2nd amendment (for ALL guns) but I know what the legal limits are when using my firearm. If you threaten me and you have a weapon then you are fair game. If you turn around to put space between us but still have the weapon in hand. .... same deal. Weapon equals threat in that situation. If someone threatening me is significantly larger than me or I think they are reaching for a weapon. That is a threat. But unarmed and fleeing? It isn't defense anymore.

I hope the prosecutor doesn't go after this guy for his mistake, however. It was in the heat of the moment and a mistake. Nobody was injured so it should just but used as a learning experience. 
+RAQUEL LIGHT Right.....  I found the story and you can't seriously believe that this one incident is cause to think the police... any police... can shoot you for delivering newspapers, can you?  Are you fucking high?
Its simple, you cant go running down the street after a burglar has fled and droo his weapon shooting at him. It puts other people at risk of being shot by a stray bullet. Nuff said and irresponsible. 
James it's a good thing for you my husband isn't going to hear you speak to me like that. 
Legally he cannot do that. The law used to be that cops could if they had reason to do so. Now the law is match force with force ( no more no less). This means that if a cop was to respond to a man who robbed Turkey Hill with a gun he cannot shoot him if that robber runs out of the store and into wooded area. This is very messed up. The explanation is that thee robber is temporarily causing no harm by running into a secluded area.
Now as for the cops shooting that delivery truck: Can you spell lawsuit? Those cops should be prosecuted for breaking the law.
That man defended Himself and should have the right to defend himself. He should have hurt them while they were in the house. It would have been harder for him to get charged. 
he was just pretecting him self from the robber dum cop
Jon Dye
The robbers would have to admit their guilt to prosecute the homeowner.
That would be one freakin' crazy day! :-o
Yea going to haft to restrain and perfect that aiming. If it takes you shooting dow the road at your target. Its time to get to a gun range for some practice. I shoot and if in question! Inside or out? Ill drag they're butt back in. Dont have time for courtroom BS. 
No excuse for disobeying the law.  They were fleeing, you no longer have the right or need to fire.  Protect yourself, your family and your property but let the cops do the recovery.  Now, let them come back around for another try, TAKE THEM DOWN BEFORE THEY LEAVE.
I think you wouldnt haft to worry about another round after narrowly escaping. Although im sure there are those dumb enough to try. 
I don't know about Utah, but in Florida, shooting an individual is only legal if it's a home invasion and the perpetrator is inside your home.  These burglars were in their car and off his property.  The law is right, sorry that it is.  I'll keep my comments to myself as to how I'd handle that if someone were outside my home coming in.  But I'll bet 95% can guess.
@richard, you need to re-read the law. The castle doctrine has been extended to "wherever you have a legal right to be." So as long as the basic test of "reasonable fear for your life or the life of another" is met you may be within your rights to use deadly force. 
If you have someone fleeing in their car - unless they're shooting at you  - which I didn't see - it's not reasonable to bring out a gun and play cops and robbers (discharging a dangerous weapon in public).  I don't need to read the law.  In your version,( which is indeed the legal "extended" one)  anyone who has a ccw or arms in their home and feels threatened by someone yelling at them while the perp is walking away, has the right to shoot them in the name of self defense.  I'm a 2nd amendment advocate.  But not to such an extent.  The man was wrong.  The bad guys were running away, and the threat was come and gone.  Unfortunately, this individual used poor judgement.
As I said, read the law. You say that someone yelling could be construed as "reasonable fear for ones life?".. I give people more credit than that and dide with the law when people push the limits. As I said above, this guy was certainly not in the right and needs to be prosecuted for unlawful discharge and public endangerment. I only had disagreement with you malrepresentation of our castle.
Unlike most people, I don't feel the need of defending my statement.  Nor is it my intent to get into a debate.  If you wish to be right, you're right.  Have a nice night.
I'm a gun owner, concealed permit holder, member of NRA and GOA and I fiercely defend the right to keep and bear arms and I am against gun free zones, yada yada. But this guy is a total dumbass who should know that shooting at someone in that instance is not a proper use of deadly force. He should have his permit revoked, if he has one, and he gives the rest of us gun owners a bad name.
Seems the law is that you may only shoot them in the house not while in get away mode outside,
Add a comment...