Califbill wrote:
wrote:
On Sun, 31 Aug 2014 23:04:37 -0400, Roger wrote:


I agree. It's a shame that we are legally better off killing an
intruder rather than shooting them in the knees and disabling them
alive. It's got to be difficult living with the memory of killing
someone even if they were a lifetime loser. I hope I never have to deal
with that.
Unfortunately you are as likely to be charged with aggravated assault
for trying to "arrest" someone as anything. If the bad guy becomes
immediately compliant and calmly waits for the police you may be OK
but if he suddenly changes his mind, your case starts getting far more
complicated. The best you can hope for is they just run away. The
longer you spent looking at each other while you were holding them at
gunpoint, the farther you get from imminent threat.
"Citizen's arrest" is probably the biggest myth in the law. You
certainly have no right to use deadly force to affect that arrest.

At least be sure you are holding them in the corner so they have to
come towards you to get away. You certainly want to shoot them in the
front if that is your intent.
Hire a good lawyer. Plan on living broke. Zimmerman is still on the
hook for about a half million.

Wounding someone is the worst possible outcome. Not only might you be
charged but you will certainly be sued.
And very likely lose the suit. Like the burglar years ago, who fell
through the roof breaking in, and sued and won for damages.
You hear about those cases and it always amazes me that the perp wins.
How can that happen in a jury trial?