Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Though folks get away with it from time to time, its not technically legal in this state to shoot someone dead merely for trespassing. Sorry. If you want to kill people for fun go somewhere else.
The only things its really about is the facts of the case and Louisiana law. We can read the law now, if we want. We may need to wait for a jury to determine the facts. You're going to need some patience.
He shouldn't of shot him if he wasn't a threat.
Should of called the police and turned the lights on is what I'd of done.
Blacks kill twice as many whites per year then the other way around...But somehow that doesn't cause any outrage.
Zimmerman Redux, Merritt Landry | Louisiana Self-defense - Downtrend.com
Hazouri reports that Landry, who has a baby daughter and whose wife is pregnant, believed that the victim was trying to break into his house. All I know is that Merritt had told his family that he had said: Freeze! and it looked like the guy turned at him and had his hand on his hip, Hazouri reported.
The rear door of Merritt Landrys home, and the driveway where car was parked, when Landry came upon intruder at 2:00AM.
Landry has been charged with attempted second degree murder. His bond was set to $10,000; he posted bond late Friday afternoon. Landry works for the City of New Orleans as a building inspector. The city says he has been placed on emergency suspension without pay pending the outcome of this case.
This is getting ridiculous. The prosecutor is going after this man only because he is a white man who killed a black man, and had it been a black man who killed that young man no one would have said shit.
Do people realize what this will lead to if it keeps up?
Merritt doesn't need to worry - he'll get off. In Louisiana, its legal to kill children merely for stepping foot on your property.
Yoshihiro Hattori - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Wait a minute. Are some of you guys telling me that I can't shoot a kid on my lawn? What the hell other pleasure does a crabby old guy like me have anymore?
No, that is not what anyone has said.
Try a reading comprehension class, then get back to us.
Try developing a sense of humor, and then get back to me.
Bullet does not tumble when going up. The aerodynamic nature of the bullet takes it to a higher altitude which gives it more potential to accelerate on its way downward. As I said earlier, the terminal velocity is not a constant thing, it depends on the density of the projectile.
If you want to shoot gun in the air and kill someone I cannot stop you but it is a stupid thing to do.
I don't understand why people think someone entering a house to steal should be killed. Since when was the sentence for burglary execution?
It just seems an excuse to blow someone away. If someone plans to enter your house to burlarize it, you feel it is approproprite to kill that person. Whatever the law allows or doesn't allow as far as shooting anyone who enters your home unauthorized, why, as an individual, do you wish to kill the person? Why talk about shooting them through the head or turning their body into Swiss cheese?
For example, why couldn't the guy in the original post have simply fired a warning shot into the sky and warned the kid he was armed? Then lock up his home tight and call the police? Once the supposed burglar knows he has been spotted and that the potential victim is armed, wouldn't it be reasonable to assume he would leg it? Why kill him? And most importantly of all, why do so many posters who say they'd shoot him describe the potential experience of killing an intruder with such pleasure and relish?
The home owner did warn the thug when he said freeze. If the thug ran away at that point he likely would not have got shot because shooting in the back is a big no no unless he has done something real bad. But sounds like this thug turned toward him & grabbed waste area & got shot in the face.
Good point. You can always say 'he reached for something,' and then it looks like you had a right to shoot, regardless of whether he actually did reach for something. One of the things that is notable is the total acceptance by the pro-gun people of whatever the shooter says: the story of the armed citizen is believed totally and w/o question every time. Why is that?I don't understand why people think someone entering a house to steal should be killed. Since when was the sentence for burglary execution?
It just seems an excuse to blow someone away. If someone plans to enter your house to burlarize it, you feel it is approproprite to kill that person. Whatever the law allows or doesn't allow as far l shooting anyone who enters your home unauthorized, why, as an individual, do you wish to kill the person? Why talk about shooting them through the head or turning their body into Swiss cheese?
For example, why couldn't the guy in the original post have simply fired a warning shot into the sky and warned the kid he was armed? Then lock up his home tight and call the police? Once the supposed burglar knows he has been spotted and that the potential victim is , wouldn't it be reasonable to assume he would leg it? Why kill him? And most importantly of all, why do so many posters who say they'd shoot him describe the potential experience of killing an intruder with such pleasure and relish?
The home owner did warn the thug when he said freeze. If the thug ran away at that point he likely would not have got shot because shooting in the back is a big no no unless he has done something real bad. But sounds like this thug turned toward him & grabbed waste area & got shot in the face.
Let's say you are the shooter. What are you going to say the about the kid? He Reached for something or not say he did. Of course you will say he reached for something, otherwise you just shot an unarmed kid because you were scared.
Now let us take air resistance into the account. It is true, on its way down, the projectile reaches what is called terminal velocity due to steadily increasing friction caused by +g. However, the terminal velocity of the projectile is dependent on the density of the projectile and the aerodynamic nature of its shape. High density coupled with good aerodynamics results in high terminal velocity. Bullets are usually made of lead which is a highly dense metal. Bullets fired from high powered rifles are quite aerodynamic and have high density. As a result they have high terminal velocity. It is not uncommon for bullets to fall down with a speed of 300mph if fired straight up. Now imagine a 7.62mm ammo falling on your head with a speed of 300mph. It can and will kill you. It is dangerous to shoot guns in the air.
falling on your head with a speed of 300mph. It can and will kill you.
unlikely but anything is possible
As a result of these obstacles, the experimental results are mixed. Hatcher calculated that his .30-caliber rifle bullets reached terminal velocitythe speed at which air resistance balances the accelerating force of gravityat 300 feet per second. You might die from a bullet moving at that speed, but it's unlikely. Lighter bullets, like those fired from a 9mm handgun, max out at even lower speeds, between 150 and 250 feet per second, according to computer models.
Can falling bullets kill you? - Slate Magazine
That's nonsense. I have no idea what the actual facts of this case are, but the right to use force to defend ourselves comes with reasonable restrictions. Trespassing doesn't warrant 'shoot-to-kill'. As others here have noted, if he'd actually tried breaking into the house, there's little dispute the homeowner would have been within his rights to shoot. But if all that happened here was the kid hopped a fence, I think blowing him away is little over the top, don't you?
At one am? I don't care if it was a kid or not, he had no right to be there and at that hour you can be damn certain he was not there to play checkers with the kids. I'm not going to let a thug enter my home, by then it might be too late. If he's got a problem being shot dead, well too fucking bad he shouldn't have been trespassing at odd hours of the night.
This isn't a race issue either. It's about one's right to defend himself and his family. When it comes to protect those I care about, I'm not going to open the door and play 20 questions with him.
No, that is not what anyone has said.
Try a reading comprehension class, then get back to us.
Try developing a sense of humor, and then get back to me.
Try posting something funny.
That's nonsense. I have no idea what the actual facts of this case are, but the right to use force to defend ourselves comes with reasonable restrictions. Trespassing doesn't warrant 'shoot-to-kill'. As others here have noted, if he'd actually tried breaking into the house, there's little dispute the homeowner would have been within his rights to shoot. But if all that happened here was the kid hopped a fence, I think blowing him away is little over the top, don't you?
At one am? I don't care if it was a kid or not, he had no right to be there and at that hour you can be damn certain he was not there to play checkers with the kids. I'm not going to let a thug enter my home, by then it might be too late. If he's got a problem being shot dead, well too fucking bad he shouldn't have been trespassing at odd hours of the night.
This isn't a race issue either. It's about one's right to defend himself and his family. When it comes to protect those I care about, I'm not going to open the door and play 20 questions with him.
You know, I misspoke. I said it was nonsense. But on reflection, I'd say it's cruel and insane.
And no, it's not an issue of race. My son's white, and I don't want to worry that if he hops the wrong fence some trigger happy fool amped up on Rambo films blows him away.
Yes, there is. Like it or not, there is a massive difference between walking onto your front yard and actually jimmying the door and entering.
But the line becomes more blurred when someone vaults over your fence to come onto the gated portion of your property on which your actual house resides.
And if the particular collection of State Law in-question ALSO makes provision for the use of lethal force in order to PREVENT a break-in and to protect one's PROPERTY, well...
Now, whether all of that applies here, in this context, we have yet to learn...
I have no clue how such things work in Australia, but here in the US, each State makes its own related Law in this area, subordinate to any overarching Federal Law...
And I'm beginning to wonder whether the State of Louisiana has left this shooter some wiggle-room in which to dodge the criminal charges that he's facing...
Assuming it was his property. If he was renting, then does he have the right to protect a front yard that doesn't belong to him?
If you apply the law in that way, you could, by rights, shoot a door to door salesman because he entered your front yard.
Good point. You can always say 'he reached for something,' and then it looks like you had a right to shoot, regardless of whether he actually did reach for something. One of the things that is notable is the total acceptance by the pro-gun people of whatever the shooter says: the story of the armed citizen is believed totally and w/o question every time. Why is that?The home owner did warn the thug when he said freeze. If the thug ran away at that point he likely would not have got shot because shooting in the back is a big no no unless he has done something real bad. But sounds like this thug turned toward him & grabbed waste area & got shot in the face.
Let's say you are the shooter. What are you going to say the about the kid? He Reached for something or not say he did. Of course you will say he reached for something, otherwise you just shot an unarmed kid because you were scared.
Now let us take air resistance into the account. It is true, on its way down, the projectile reaches what is called terminal velocity due to steadily increasing friction caused by +g. However, the terminal velocity of the projectile is dependent on the density of the projectile and the aerodynamic nature of its shape. High density coupled with good aerodynamics results in high terminal velocity. Bullets are usually made of lead which is a highly dense metal. Bullets fired from high powered rifles are quite aerodynamic and have high density. As a result they have high terminal velocity. It is not uncommon for bullets to fall down with a speed of 300mph if fired straight up. Now imagine a 7.62mm ammo falling on your head with a speed of 300mph. It can and will kill you. It is dangerous to shoot guns in the air.
Now let us take air resistance into the account. It is true, on its way down, the projectile reaches what is called terminal velocity due to steadily increasing friction caused by +g. However, the terminal velocity of the projectile is dependent on the density of the projectile and the aerodynamic nature of its shape. High density coupled with good aerodynamics results in high terminal velocity. Bullets are usually made of lead which is a highly dense metal. Bullets fired from high powered rifles are quite aerodynamic and have high density. As a result they have high terminal velocity. It is not uncommon for bullets to fall down with a speed of 300mph if fired straight up. Now imagine a 7.62mm ammo falling on your head with a speed of 300mph. It can and will kill you. It is dangerous to shoot guns in the air.
falling on your head with a speed of 300mph. It can and will kill you.
unlikely but anything is possible
As a result of these obstacles, the experimental results are mixed. Hatcher calculated that his .30-caliber rifle bullets reached terminal velocity—the speed at which air resistance balances the accelerating force of gravity—at 300 feet per second. You might die from a bullet moving at that speed, but it's unlikely. Lighter bullets, like those fired from a 9mm handgun, max out at even lower speeds, between 150 and 250 feet per second, according to computer models.
Can falling bullets kill you? - Slate Magazine
According to your article, it might not kill an adult unless it hit them in the eye. Well, isn't that teh awesome. I tell you what, you dopes that think a falling bullet is harmless: gather up your loved ones and even some neighborhood kids and have them stand around the yard while you experiment. Don't forget to keep shooting until someone is unlucky enough to be hit by a falling bullet. Then report back to us.
Bullet does not tumble when going up. The aerodynamic nature of the bullet takes it to a higher altitude which gives it more potential to accelerate on its way downward. As I said earlier, the terminal velocity is not a constant thing, it depends on the density of the projectile.
If you want to shoot gun in the air and kill someone I cannot stop you but it is a stupid thing to do.
Now let us take air resistance into the account. It is true, on its way down, the projectile reaches what is called terminal velocity due to steadily increasing friction caused by +g. However, the terminal velocity of the projectile is dependent on the density of the projectile and the aerodynamic nature of its shape. High density coupled with good aerodynamics results in high terminal velocity. Bullets are usually made of lead which is a highly dense metal. Bullets fired from high powered rifles are quite aerodynamic and have high density. As a result they have high terminal velocity. It is not uncommon for bullets to fall down with a speed of 300mph if fired straight up. Now imagine a 7.62mm ammo falling on your head with a speed of 300mph. It can and will kill you. It is dangerous to shoot guns in the air.
falling on your head with a speed of 300mph. It can and will kill you.[/B
unlikely but anything is possible
As a result of these obstacles, the experimental results are mixed. Hatcher calculated that his .30-caliber rifle bullets reached terminal velocitythe speed at which air resistance balances the accelerating force of gravityat 300 feet per second. You might die from a bullet moving at that speed, but it's unlikely. Lighter bullets, like those fired from a 9mm handgun, max out at even lower speeds, between 150 and 250 feet per second, according to computer models.
Can falling bullets kill you? - Slate Magazine
Large mass bullets like a 2700 pound bullet from a 16" gun on a Navy destroyer can fall at 900/mph. Make it out of depleated uranium & it will go faster yet.
falling on your head with a speed of 300mph. It can and will kill you.
unlikely but anything is possible
As a result of these obstacles, the experimental results are mixed. Hatcher calculated that his .30-caliber rifle bullets reached terminal velocitythe speed at which air resistance balances the accelerating force of gravityat 300 feet per second. You might die from a bullet moving at that speed, but it's unlikely. Lighter bullets, like those fired from a 9mm handgun, max out at even lower speeds, between 150 and 250 feet per second, according to computer models.
Can falling bullets kill you? - Slate Magazine
According to your article, it might not kill an adult unless it hit them in the eye. Well, isn't that teh awesome. I tell you what, you dopes that think a falling bullet is harmless: gather up your loved ones and even some neighborhood kids and have them stand around the yard while you experiment. Don't forget to keep shooting until someone is unlucky enough to be hit by a falling bullet. Then report back to us.
It wont fall at 300 mph. They fall at 120 mph.
Tried to find the mythbusters episode but I'm not having any luck. They found that the bullets fell much slower then they expected and the math predicted.
But again. Thats only if fired straight up. The round needs to come to a complete stop to ruin the ballistics.
That's why my kids never jumped a fence to get onto private property at 2am.
I parented!
Why is it some parents take the death of a child as a cue to brag about their own parenting abilities? Good for you buddy! Why don't you send the victim's mother a letter telling her what an awesome parent you are? Jeez, no one gives a shit you think you're awesome.
I know my kids will not be killed committing any crime, even if it is a pointless crime of trespass to intimidate.
Believing you can predict your kids' behavior can be a serious miscalculation. With that attitude its almost certain that one of them will get into drugs. Don't worry, you'll probably never even realize it.
[MENTION=21954]Sunshine[/MENTION]..... This one is for you.
