Intruder calls 911, afraid homeowner may have gun

[Deberg_1990]

http://www.cnn.com/2011/CRIME/03/08/...ex.html?hpt=T2



This time it was the intruder who called 911.

A man who broke into a house in Portland, Oregon, called police -- afraid the homeowner may have a gun.

The suspect, Timothy James Chapek, was in the bathroom taking a shower when the homeowner returned to the house Monday night, Portland police said in a statement.

Accompanied by two German shepherds, the homeowner asked Chapek what he was doing in the house.

Chapek locked himself in the bathroom and made an emergency call, police said. He said he had broken into the house, the owner had come home, and that he was concerned the owner might have a gun.

The homeowner also called the police to report that he had found a man in the house.

Police with dogs took Chapek, 24, into custody "without incident," they said. He was booked for criminal trespass.

They did not say if the homeowner did in fact have a gun.

[Pablo]

Originally Posted by BWillie007

It's really sad how many people actually would like to kill a man in cold blood. I mean there are many times where I would support that, but just wanting to blow someone's head off for just being in your home without regards to the situation is dumb. That Joe Horn case is one of the saddest cases out there.

There's a lot of tough talk on the internet about how I'd do this and that.

99% of people wouldn't bust down a bathroom down and shoot a guy for showering in their home. If they would, they're mildly reeruned.

[alnorth]

Originally Posted by PostRockPablo

There's a lot of tough talk on the internet about how I'd do this and that.

99% of people wouldn't bust down a bathroom down and shoot a guy for showering in their home. If they would, they're mildly reeruned.

Yeah. If someone breaks into my home, I will have my gun loaded and ready to go, but I'll try to see if they are a threat first. If someone is cowering or bolts for the door, I'm letting them go. If it looks like they are reaching for a weapon or moving to attack me, I'll shoot and hope that it doesn't end up being a tragic mistake.

The law in Iowa requires me to be a lot more careful, but I probably would be anyway. (we have a very weak castle doctrine. No duty to retreat out of your home, but you can only use "reasonable force" on an intruder, where reasonable force could mean deadly force, but does not automatically mean deadly force. You shoot a guy who broke into your house and its looks questionable that you had to, you are probably going to trial)

[Just Passin' By]

Originally Posted by alnorth

Yeah. If someone breaks into my home, I will have my gun loaded and ready to go, but I'll try to see if they are a threat first. If someone is cowering or bolts for the door, I'm letting them go. If it looks like they are reaching for a weapon or moving to attack me, I'll shoot and hope that it doesn't end up being a tragic mistake.

The law in Iowa requires me to be a lot more careful, but I probably would be anyway. (we have a very weak castle doctrine. No duty to retreat out of your home, but you can only use "reasonable force" on an intruder, where reasonable force could mean deadly force, but does not automatically mean deadly force. You shoot a guy who broke into your house and its looks questionable that you had to, you are probably going to trial)

Since you brought up the state, Iowa is currently working on changes to its version of the castle doctrine:

http://www.siouxcityjournal.com/news...ae1299fcd.html

It moved out of committee last week:

http://iowaindependent.com/53209/dea...t-of-committee

The usual groups seem to be taking the usual positions.

[Chiefaholic]

Originally Posted by Predarat

He did the right thing but how often does someone break into someone elses house to just take a shower?

My house was broke into once and all they took was food. I wasn't home when it happened, but all we could find that was missing was a 6 pack of Coke and lunch meat. There wsn't any damage to my home, so I let it fly.

[alnorth]

Originally Posted by Just Passin' By

Since you brought up the state, Iowa is currently working on changes to its version of the castle doctrine:

http://www.siouxcityjournal.com/news...ae1299fcd.html

It moved out of committee last week:

http://iowaindependent.com/53209/dea...t-of-committee

The usual groups seem to be taking the usual positions.

They aren't really revising castle doctrine, newspapers get that wrong a lot. Castle doctrine deals with your home, and sometimes your car.

In Iowa, we are one of the very few states where you have a duty to retreat if you can when you are outside your home. (ie if someone is attacking you, and running away is a reasonable option, you must run away) They are trying to change that with a "stand your ground" law that removes the duty to retreat.

A reform of our castle doctrine law would be more like changing our law to Missouri's law (if someone breaks into your house, its open season on them).