Break in - can you shoot ?

[Bushwick100]

Every One is different they don't know how there going to react until they are in that situation, I have seen guys freeze in Scud attacks , and have to go home and be replaced. I'm not judging anyone we are all different!

 

[summer44]

I like this line of thinking, but the way the law is written, if this were to happen away from your habitation, you really DO have to perceive that your dog isn't handling the threat adequately and thus your safety is STILL at risk.
I think that this requirement, imposed on you by the law regardless of your feelings, also carries and IMPLIED duty to honestly evaluate the performance of your first-deployed line of self-defense (in this case, your dog) and only go to guns if a REASONABLE PERSON in your situation would also think the dog may not keep the intruder fully occupied or just incapacitate him.

What about their preventing the continuation of a forcible felony?

 

[summer44]

I believe in the state of GA they call this type of entry a forcible felony. Where the intruder has forced their way into a residence. This escalates the perpetrator into a new bracket of aggravated circumstances. I feel like the distance is key in the OP’s lay out. 25’ is a long ways to identify a immediate deadly threat to ones life. Now if you were within attack range of this forcible felony perp, and your dogs life is in jeopardy, intervening to stop damage to property wouldn’t be unreasonable. During this intervention the perp is displaying an immediate threat, and here comes the deadly force authorization. IMO that’s the way it should or could play out.

also surprised no one has plot twisted this and made the Intruder the ATF since a dog being killed is part of the story lol.

25 ft is about 8 yards most lethal confrontation are about 7 yards or less, I think we can live with a yard or two variation

 

[summer44]

There are a lot of opinions on this thread and a lot of bold ODT'ers who sound like they wouldn't hesitate to kill. In this hypothetical, you better hesitate. According to the OP, there is time to hesitate. If you don't, you will have a wife who is cleaning the blood off the floor while you are in jail.

I think this is sound advice from @GAgunLAWbooklet:

Dogs are property and you cannot use deadly force to protect property. So, if fear for your dog's life is all that you are considering, you are going to jail.

"I think that this requirement, imposed on you by the law regardless of your feelings, also carries and IMPLIED duty to honestly evaluate the performance of your first-deployed line of self-defense (in this case, your dog) and only go to guns if a REASONABLE PERSON in your situation would also think the dog may not keep the intruder fully occupied or just incapacitate him."

Also from @GAgunLAWbooklet,
"Using deadly force to defend your habitation is OK if (and only if) you reasonably believe that it's necessary to prevent the burglar from committing a further felony (aside from the burglary itself) inside the home.
Like, for example, brandishing that knife at you in a way that would be aggravated assault, putting you in reasonable fear of getting cut. Or, in another example on the same facts, you believe the burglar has already used "force" to get into your home-- broke a window, pried-open a door lock, picked a lock, etc. This "habitation" law draws a distinction between a break-in and somebody just letting themselves in through an unlocked door."

My point here is the intruder is 25' away with a knife- not a gun- and is temporarily distracted by your property. Wisdom says that a reasonable man should hesitate with deadly force until things become more obvious, especially if he doesn't fully know the gun laws. An intruder with a knife in his hand- especially if he isn't threatening you with it at the moment- may not be enough of a reason to use deadly force.

As a rule in this hypothetical: Use deadly force only if your life or the lives of your family members are imminently in danger. In this scenario, with these strict facts in play, there seems to be not enough threat to warrant deadly force- even with an intruder in your home.

In today's world, you best be dang sure!

If you are at home this man is not just committed a burglary he is committed a home invasion

 

[summer44]

It ain't about YOU.
It's what is REASONABLE to an even-tempered, rational, thoughtful person who finds himself in that same situation you did.
You over-reacting due to your own mental issues is NOT a defense. It's a mitigating factor that might get you less prison time, if you get convicted of something other than murder. (Murder carries an automatic life penalty, no term of years).

Most people would find it reasonable to shoot an Intruder armed with an edged weapon whom has just broken into your home. Regardless if he was being attacked by a dog or not.

 

[summer44]

My dogs are part of my family, so if he is trying to hurt my dog(s), guess what

If someone is just trying to harm your animals and not a threat to you(I m not talking after someone breaks in to your home) and you kill them you are going to jail and then to court if you don't plead out.
Then if you end up with some die hard animal lovers on the jury you might get away with it. You and your family will be penniless by the time it's over. I have had many animals throughout my life that I cared for very much, they are not however a human. they lack a soul they are not equal to people.

 

[Boot71]

Over 100 posts here, and I still haven't figured out how the dog factors into the equation concerning legality. While a dog may be considered by many to be "family", and absolutely be protective of it's home and owners, the dog is not a weapon, nor can it be held accountable for my safety. The dogs actions/inactions are not guaranteed either way, and are simply background noise, when the focus should be on the immediate threat.
If a man forcibly enters my home, wielding a deadly weapon, (knife, in the OP) I'm not going to assume he's there to make me a midnight sandwich, or trim the flowers on my wife's kitchen table. I will also not assume he's there to simply attack a dog, and then leave. The situation would be assessed, and determination made that in fact, the forcible entry (breaking/entering) of my home guarantees that the intruder understood that he had no permission to be inside. Barring the INSTANT drop of the knife and IMMEDIATE prone position of the intruder at the mere sight of the home being defended with a 12ga, he would indicate that he has intention to use his weapon against me or my family. This is fear of my safety......... I seriously doubt he would be interested in conversation, and outlining his plans for the evening. These assessments shouldn't take long....
(All of this is a terrible scenario, and I've been fortunate enough so far to have never had to live through a home invasion.) Whether or not the dog is chewing on his leg, is not relevant to the equation. I'm not going to hit the dog, and I'm not shooting center mass to defend the dog. The shot would simply be to remove the threat to myself and my family. The dog's safety would be a byproduct of my family being safe from an intruder with a deadly weapon. People who have an invitation, permission, or are welcome in my home generally don't need to force their way in.
The worst part would indeed be the aftermath, where some jacka$$ attorney would try and say that I brought a 12ga to a knife fight, and wasn't being fair to the guy who forced his way into my home. I'm sure the prosecution would indeed try to say it is unreasonable that I may not have had time to dial 911 and wait for someone to come help, or wait until myself or my wife was stabbed/killed before I removed the threat that forcibly entered my home wielding a deadly weapon. I guess (according to some) I should offer the intruder a glass of sweet tea and we could've watched jeopardy reruns until the police arrived.
The world will always have criminals, no getting around that. The problem is multilayered, and includes, but is not limited to: the way the system we have protects criminals more than it protects law abiding citizens, the way that most police don't police their own so the average public can have faith in them like they should be able to, and mostly the way that so many lawyers advance their political careers and fatten their wallets by making names for themselves prosecuting citizens for defending themselves, or defending those who are foolish enough to bring a knife to a gun fight after forcibly breaking into another person's home while the homeowner is trying to sleep.
Ok, rant over. Got started and couldn't stop. It's just piss poor the way things are now......

 

[lostchild]

Dog? What dog?
And those powder burns are from where he continued to advance after being warned/shot initially.

 

[romans1212]

If someone is just trying to harm your animals and not a threat to you(I m not talking after someone breaks in to your home) and you kill them you are going to jail and then to court if you don't plead out.
Then if you end up with some die hard animal lovers on the jury you might get away with it. You and your family will be penniless by the time it's over. I have had many animals throughout my life that I cared for very much, they are not however a human. they lack a soul they are not equal to people.

Not commenting on the dog…but your comment above flirts with why I said hesitate to kill the intruder. I didn’t say you couldn’t win in court and I know there are some laws protecting us during a home invasion. One must consider that there is nothing simple about the law and there are innumerable conditions attached to every law and precedents that attorneys and judges consider. Im only saying to hesitate until the moment that it is your life or his regardless of whether he is in your home. In today’s world, you could follow the law to the letter and get your a$$ handed to you by a jury of your woke peers, risking prison, bankruptcy and the loss of your family. I think we would agree on that!
Best to you, friend.

 

[summer44]

Not commenting on the dog…but your comment above flirts with why I said hesitate to kill the intruder. I didn’t say you couldn’t win in court and I know there are some laws protecting us during a home invasion. One must consider that there is nothing simple about the law and there are innumerable conditions attached to every law and precedents that attorneys and judges consider. Im only saying to hesitate until the moment that it is your life or his regardless of whether he is in your home. In today’s world, you could follow the law to the letter and get your a$$ handed to you by a jury of your woke peers, risking prison, bankruptcy and the loss of your family. I think we would agree on that!
Best to you, friend.

To start the goal can not be to kill the intruder, it has to be to stop the threat and that may result in his or her death.
2nd that hesitancy may cost you your life. Lastly one should not take someone's life unless that is the only option left. One may get away with it in regard to the law, however at some point one is going to have to answer to their maker. Lies, and bs reasoning isn't going to fly