Man who killed burglar faces manslaughter charge

The Register-Guard(Oregon) ^ | 05/26/2002

[Lancey Howard]

I am still trying to figure out why Hooker forgot to mention that the burglar yelled at him, "I am going to kill you."
The burglar did yell that, right?

If there is a conviction (highly unlikely) then there may be a small fine and probation.
Nothing to see here....

[connectthedots]

If you read the USSC case that was linked in my earlier post, you will see that the common law at the time the constitution was passed permitted the use of deadly force if necessary to arrest a criminal. The linked case changed that interpretation only as it applies to LEOs, not private citizens.

Would you agree that based on the Washington statutes that this guy had the legal authority to use deadly force in this situation? It seems very clear to me that he did. Even if it is not clear, it is certainly ambiguous. Even if the prosecutor agrues that the law could be interpreted differently than the plain meaning, the guy would still be entitled to dismissal of the charges based on the rule of lenity, wouldn't he?

[lavaroise]

Sure, they can tell us how to behave, but we can't tell them how to behave. Makes me feel like a real sinner while they're like some kinds of virgin maries in the government. I object to this suit because of conflict of interest at the bottom line of the trial. The conflict being that the government will use this to, again, portray gun owners and bad-men killers as unworthy of such responsibilities.