Justice includes not bearing false testimony, something that
Old Media needs to remember. (Courtesy of Wikipedia
Using lethal force against armed burglars is a difficult choice for decent folk, but Old Media abdicates their responsibility when they twist the story into an opinionated diatribe against self-defense.
On October 13, 2009, two small business owners arrived home after a 12-hour workday to find burglars rifling through their house and wearing their jewelry. At least one of the suspects was armed with a gun. The victims armed themselves with handguns and entered their home, confronting two or 3 suspected burglars. One burglar was killed and another wounded, with a possible third still at large.
According to the Orlando Sentinel, it seems that youths were just committing a harmless misdemeanor prank when they were attacked by two pistol-wielding vigilantes intent on killing them, rather than calling the police to handle it. Further, the homeowners hid behind Castle Doctrine law to justify using deadly force, stymieing police arrest authority and leaving prosecutors to “decide whether charges should be filed.”
From the Sentinel:
The trespassers broke a rear window. They pulled out drawers and dumped the contents. They tried to open a closet safe. They sorted through papers and envelopes, jewelry and coins. They upended bedding and tossed around clothes. [emphasis added]
According to Florida statute, trespass on an unoccupied property is a second-degree misdemeanor, punishable “by a definite term of imprisonment not exceeding 60 days” and a maximum fine of $500.
Florida defines burglary as: “Entering a dwelling, a structure, or a conveyance with the intent to commit an offense therein…” Burglary is a first-degree felony “punishable by imprisonment for a term of years not exceeding life imprisonment” if the invader “Is or becomes armed within the dwelling, structure, or conveyance, with explosives or a dangerous weapon…”
In the former case, the use of deadly force would be unjustified, because trespass doesn’t create risk of grievous bodily harm. From Florida statute:
A person is presumed to have held a reasonable fear of imminent peril of death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another when using defensive force that is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm to another…
Further fantasy by Sentinel
The Sentinel continues with revisionist history about the right of self-defense:
Under the state's Castle Doctrine, however, residents can legally use deadly force to protect themselves against intruders.
In 2004, prior to Florida’s Castle Doctrine, the use of deadly force in self defense was legal. From 2004 Florida statute:
However, the person is justified in the use of deadly force only if he or she reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the imminent commission of a forcible felony. [emphasis added]
Castle Doctrine only changed the law so that defenders don’t have to retreat when they are in a place they are legally entitled to be. The intruders had already committed the forcible felony of burglary and were armed with weapons that could “cause death or great bodily harm to another.”
The Sentinel writer’s revisionist history and inability to research Florida’s online statute database indicate a lack of professionalism and/or initiative, but the message is clear: self-defense is a shameful act.
Fox Orlando, while short on text, includes three videos on the incident. The videos tell a more complete story about how the shooting happened, and notes that the case is still under investigation, explaining why law enforcement hasn’t yet reported whether the shooting was justified or not.
****************************************
For in-depth analysis of the issues discussed here, read Howard’s book Four Hundred Years of Gun Control: Why Isn’t It Working?, which deconstructs the gun control agenda and motivates more people to support our civil right of self-defense. Autographed copies are available from the author.
Atlanta: Ed Stone | Austin: Howard Nemerov | Boston: Ron Bokleman | Charlotte: Paul Valone | Cheyenne: Anthony Bouchard | Chicago: Don Gwinn | Cleveland: Daniel White | DC: Mike Stollenwerk | Denver: Dan Bidstrup | Grand Rapids: Skip Coryel | Los Angeles: John Longenecker | Minneapolis: John Pierce | National: David Codrea | Phoenix: Douglas Little | Seattle: Dave Workman | St. Louis: Kurt Hofmann | Wisconsin: Gene German
Comments
WTH fox? I heard two different stories of what happened in the first minute of the video. I'm sure this guy wasn't going to be a punching bag for criminals.
I assume the Orlando Sentinel runs a full page ad somewhere in their fishwrap extolling the virtues of armed burglary/robbery, oh wait, that what the article did. Can they not be considered accomplices before the fact if this has been their policy all along? Encouraging burgary/robbery.
It became an armed robbery when the occupants of the home came home. So can we assume the Orlando Sentinel is in favor of armed robbery? If not, they got some 'splainin' to do.
Im sure you can all see the problem here..this story was written by a (ha ha) NewsPaper Reporter and we all know that these people don't have the faintest clue as to what is happening around them so do not confuse them with the Real Newspaper reporters of the good old days.
Got something to say?
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!