Homeowner arrested for shooting tresspassers in Hillsboro

[spider]

what would have been the best way to go about this? Tape a bowie knife to the rear door slide, hoping the intruders grab it, then open the sliding glass door, wait for them to get in and then pop them?

 

[oregonshooter]

How about "hey get the **** off my yard!" It ain't always a nail you are trying to solve.

 

[spider]

point a laser at them, when in the shape of a pointer finger

 

[pokerace]

this is a very good site. try it for info.

https://www.oregonlaws.org/ors/161.209

 

[R-Rizzo]

First of all, let me say thats its entirely too easy to sit back and armchair quarterback the situation and i'm sad that an otherwise lawful gun owner has found himself on the wrong side of the law. However, (Insert Cheesy Spiderman quote) You are ultimately responsible for your actions and in my humble opinion, It doesn't sound like this could reasonably be considered a good shoot, especially if he had hit them. I guess he can be thankful all he's charged w/ at this point is unlawful discharge.

Again in my very humble opinion and please dont mistake me for a "Bleeder" but firearms have got to be a last resort. If you have other options, it would behoove everyone to explore those options. If these two "Fine Upstanding Citizens" were merely trespassing, make sure your lower level is secured, and call the police.

However, once they cross the figurative threshold into unlawful forced entry and literal threshold of physically entering your home, then defend yourself, your family, and your property with any and all tools at your disposal.

For the love of dear baby jesus in his golden diaper, I am not looking to start a thread war, I am merely stating my opinion. #ThatIsAll

 

[mattg521]

Baby Jesus wore golden diapers?!?

 

[R-Rizzo]

Baby Jesus wore golden diapers?!?

YouTube - Talladega Nights - Grace

 

[mattg521]

YouTube - Talladega Nights - Grace

Oh man that's wrong
Funny
But wrong

 

[LCDR]

You do have the castle doctrine, but you also have a worthless libby law called the "duty to retreat".
You actually have to do everything possible to retreat YOUR OWN HOME if someone breaks in before you can legally fire a weapon. I moved to KY a couple months ago to get away from those stupid laws.
Last week a college football "star" got in a fight with two other guys in a car. The football player was reaching in the window of the other persons car and beating them up, one of the guys pulled a gun and shot and killed the football player. Police treated, and as of now ruled it as self defense.

That would never happen in Oregon.

Actually you are incorrect on both accounts:

Oregon does Not have a Castle Doctrine.
Oregon residents do Not have a duty to retreat.

LCDR

 

[mjbskwim]

this is a very good site. try it for info.

https://www.oregonlaws.org/ors/161.209

Good link Thanks

 

[pitrow]

but it all boils down to 12 idiots in a box.

As someone currently sitting on the wash. co. grand jury, thank you for lumping me in as an idiot.

 

[Trlsmn]

Except that Grand Jury is not 12 people so he was obviously referring to a trial jury.

 

[Kimber Custom]

Just because someone is breaking into your home is not enough to shoot someone.

161.219 Limitations on use of deadly physical force in defense of a person. Notwithstanding the provisions of ORS 161.209, a person is not justified in using deadly physical force upon another person unless the person reasonably believes that the other person is:

(1) Committing or attempting to commit a felony involving the use or threatened imminent use of physical force against a person; or

(2) Committing or attempting to commit a burglary in a dwelling; or

(3) Using or about to use unlawful deadly physical force against a person. [1971 c.743 §23]

 

[spengo]

161.219 Limitations on use of deadly physical force in defense of a person. Notwithstanding the provisions of ORS 161.209, a person is not justified in using deadly physical force upon another person unless the person reasonably believes that the other person is:

(1) Committing or attempting to commit a felony involving the use or threatened imminent use of physical force against a person; or

(2) Committing or attempting to commit a burglary in a dwelling; or

(3) Using or about to use unlawful deadly physical force against a person. [1971 c.743 §23]

So, does that mean castle law for your HOUSE but not the rest of your property? (Actually that seems to cover neighbors' houses too)

 

[pitrow]

Except that Grand Jury is not 12 people so he was obviously referring to a trial jury.

Except that for it to even make it to a trial jury it has to pass a grand jury, therefor he's assuming that the grand jury is also idiots for passing the bill.

 

[riverrat373]

First of all, let me say thats its entirely too easy to sit back and armchair quarterback the situation and i'm sad that an otherwise lawful gun owner has found himself on the wrong side of the law. However, (Insert Cheesy Spiderman quote) You are ultimately responsible for your actions and in my humble opinion, It doesn't sound like this could reasonably be considered a good shoot, especially if he had hit them. I guess he can be thankful all he's charged w/ at this point is unlawful discharge.

Again in my very humble opinion and please dont mistake me for a "Bleeder" but firearms have got to be a last resort. If you have other options, it would behoove everyone to explore those options. If these two "Fine Upstanding Citizens" were merely trespassing, make sure your lower level is secured, and call the police.

However, once they cross the figurative threshold into unlawful forced entry and literal threshold of physically entering your home, then defend yourself, your family, and your property with any and all tools at your disposal.

For the love of dear baby jesus in his golden diaper, I am not looking to start a thread war, I am merely stating my opinion. #ThatIsAll

+1

 

[riverrat373]

As someone currently sitting on the wash. co. grand jury, thank you for lumping me in as an idiot.

Oops!

 

[LCDR]

So, does that mean castle law for your HOUSE but not the rest of your property? (Actually that seems to cover neighbors' houses too)

Keep in mind that true Castle law also covers Civil liability. To the best of my knowledge there is NO protection against civil suit in Oregon, even if criminally it was found to be justified. Not saying you would be found guilty just that there is nothing stoping someone from suing you.

LCDR

 

[LCDR]

161.219 Limitations on use of deadly physical force in defense of a person. Notwithstanding the provisions of ORS 161.209, a person is not justified in using deadly physical force upon another person unless the person reasonably believes that the other person is:

(1) Committing or attempting to commit a felony involving the use or threatened imminent use of physical force against a person; or

(2) Committing or attempting to commit a burglary in a dwelling; or

(3) Using or about to use unlawful deadly physical force against a person. [1971 c.743 §23]

Keep in mind, that the provisions of ORS 161.209 still apply, this just adds more restrictions to the use of deadly force.

 

[Kimber Custom]

So, does that mean castle law for your HOUSE but not the rest of your property? (Actually that seems to cover neighbors' houses too)

164.205 (2) “Dwelling” means a building which regularly or intermittently is occupied by a person lodging therein at night, whether or not a person is actually present.

Your barn doesn't count because a horse isn't a person

Yes, you can protect your neighbors house under the same statute.