Gun Control & RKBA

Common Sense Party

(14,139 posts) Wed Mar 28, 2012, 09:58 AM Mar 2012

Man who shot burglar in Chicago has support

"If a man can't defend himself from harm, what can he do?" asked Darryl Smith, surrounded at a news conference by dozens of longtime neighborhood residents and activists. "If he hadn't defended himself, we would be here for a different reason — because an intruder came in and killed him.

...

Police say Homer Wright and his wife were sleeping when someone broke into their home at about 6:30 a.m. Monday, police said. The intruder broke through several boards and entered through a rear bathroom window in what police say was an attempt to steal some liquor.

Wright was awakened by his wife and grabbed a handgun and shot the intruder in the lower right leg, police said.

...

Anita Dominique, head of the block club in the neighborhood, said she has known Wright for more than 30 years. "He is a pillar of our community," she said. "What does it say to me and other senior citizens, that we will be arrested if we defend ourselves?"

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/765563672/Man-who-shot-burglar-in-Chicago-has-support.html

Granted, the tavern owner is no saint--he had two prior weapons convictions from 1968 (come on--that was 44 years ago) and 1994 and also was convicted of theft in 1990. But the man is 80 years old. He's not allowed to defend himself or his property anymore?

11 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Man who shot burglar in Chicago has support (Original Post) Common Sense Party Mar 2012 OP

A classic case of Stand Your Ground and Castle Defense ProgressiveProfessor Mar 2012 #1

Is it because no one (except criminals) are supposed to have guns in Chicago? Common Sense Party Mar 2012 #2

I thought the Chicago handgun law was the one that was struck down by the Supreme Court... NaturalHigh Mar 2012 #3

You are correct AH1Apache Mar 2012 #4

How I feel. Glassunion Mar 2012 #5

Agree on all points. n/t X_Digger Mar 2012 #7

Were those charges felonies? jeepnstein Mar 2012 #8

They said two felony weapon convictions on the radio this morning. Glassunion Mar 2012 #9

Given that we're talking about Chicago... pneutin Mar 2012 #10

Doesn't really matter. jeepnstein Mar 2012 #11

He's not allowed to defend himself or his property anymore? discntnt_irny_srcsm Mar 2012 #6

ProgressiveProfessor

(22,144 posts)

1. A classic case of Stand Your Ground and Castle Defense

Reply to Common Sense Party (Original post)

Wed Mar 28, 2012, 10:09 AM

Mar 2012

Common Sense Party

(14,139 posts)

2. Is it because no one (except criminals) are supposed to have guns in Chicago?

Reply to ProgressiveProfessor (Reply #1)

Wed Mar 28, 2012, 10:22 AM

Mar 2012

I'm ignorant of Illinois laws, I'll admit. Assuming a guy didn't have prior convictions, does Illinois/Chicago ban him from using a gun to defend his home/business?

NaturalHigh

(12,778 posts)

3. I thought the Chicago handgun law was the one that was struck down by the Supreme Court...

Reply to Common Sense Party (Reply #2)

Wed Mar 28, 2012, 10:38 AM

Mar 2012

or maybe it was just discussed when the DC handgun bill was struck down. I don't really remember, but Chicago has always been hostile towards an individuals right to bear arms.

AH1Apache

(502 posts)

4. You are correct

Reply to NaturalHigh (Reply #3)

Wed Mar 28, 2012, 10:42 AM

Mar 2012

SCOTUS struck it down: See McDonald v City of Chicago.
The city of Chicago has always been very hostile to the 2A but yet the city officials can have guns or security, just not the little people or the criminals.

Glassunion

(10,201 posts)

5. How I feel.

Reply to Common Sense Party (Original post)

Wed Mar 28, 2012, 10:59 AM

Mar 2012

It is a fact that he was ineligible from owning a firearm. He had 2 prior convictions that prohibited him from owning a firearm. In obtaining a firearm he did violate both state and federal law.

You can have convictions expunged, however this can be quite expensive depending on the courts.

Seeing that the judge released him without bail, I feel that they may go lightly on him. But I personally cannot ignore the fact that a felon illegally obtained a firearm. If this case is put though with a zero tolerance policy however, I will have a problem with that. Each case is unique and should be tried as such.

He was right to defend himself and his wife.

X_Digger

(18,585 posts)

7. Agree on all points. n/t

Reply to Glassunion (Reply #5)

Wed Mar 28, 2012, 11:14 AM

Mar 2012

jeepnstein

(2,631 posts)

8. Were those charges felonies?

Reply to Glassunion (Reply #5)

Wed Mar 28, 2012, 11:19 AM

Mar 2012

I'm missing that in all the media chatter. Either they are downplaying it or he caught a couple of misdemeanors and they're trying to make it sound like more than it really is. If he's a felon in possession of a firearm I have no sympathy for him at all.

Oh, and he has lousy aim.

Glassunion

(10,201 posts)

9. They said two felony weapon convictions on the radio this morning.

Reply to jeepnstein (Reply #8)

Wed Mar 28, 2012, 11:25 AM

Mar 2012

But we all know how accurate the media is. I have yet to see anything to contradict that.

pneutin

(98 posts)

10. Given that we're talking about Chicago...

Reply to Glassunion (Reply #9)

Wed Mar 28, 2012, 03:12 PM

Mar 2012

...it would be interesting to know what exactly those two weapon convictions were for.

jeepnstein

(2,631 posts)

11. Doesn't really matter.

Reply to pneutin (Reply #10)

Wed Mar 28, 2012, 03:58 PM

Mar 2012

They've got him, guilty as Nixon.

discntnt_irny_srcsm

(18,482 posts)

6. He's not allowed to defend himself or his property anymore?

Reply to Common Sense Party (Original post)

Wed Mar 28, 2012, 11:06 AM

Mar 2012

Of course not! This is Chicago.
He should have just called 9-1-1 and waited.

Some words from a true civic leader, a 1%er:
Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel declined to talk about Wright's arrest. "I cannot comment on it in the middle of an investigation."
Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel: "You never want a serious crisis to go to waste."

Reply to this discussion