A teenager knocked on the wrong door. Now he’s dead, and the homeowner is accused of murder.

[Katzndogz]

When someone knocks on my door, I never answer it unless I know who they are. I get the gun, and watch from behind the door. So far no one has tried to get in. They knock for awhile then leave. If they get past the door they broke in and are fair game.

 

[Katzndogz]

He could have put the gun down and used an axe.

True, and maybe he should have. It would have given the 15-year-old time to react.

The drunk kid would have gotten his head split open trying to get inside.

It must suck that there's no evidence the kid was either "drunk" or "trying to get inside".
However we do know he had a head, since I posted a picture of it. Shouldn't be a total loss.

We know that he was drinking too.

 

[Pogo]

He could have put the gun down and used an axe.

True, and maybe he should have. It would have given the 15-year-old time to react.

The drunk kid would have gotten his head split open trying to get inside.

It must suck that there's no evidence the kid was either "drunk" or "trying to get inside".
However we do know he had a head, since I posted a picture of it. Shouldn't be a total loss.

We know that he was drinking too.

Yes. But we don't know "drunk".

 

[Pogo]

When someone knocks on my door, I never answer it unless I know who they are. I get the gun, and watch from behind the door. So far no one has tried to get in. They knock for awhile then leave. If they get past the door they broke in and are fair game.

Why am I not at all surprised.

Must be hilarious around your place at Hallowe'en, with all the dead bodies strewn about the lawn. Real authentic.

 

[Conservative65]

Which part? The breaking glass? The guy was drunk? They were trying to get in? Brain left it out? It is funny?

The "trying to get in" part. Read the thread. Better yet, read the article.

Rhetorical question: I know you lefties have learned that if you are clear, then people can easily see that your policies, agenda, accusations, ect, are all based on lies and are bad for this nation and it's citizens.

That's nice. In English now?

Where you there? Can you prove he wasn't trying to get in?

What the fuck is it with reading comprehension around here?

I did not say he "wasn't trying to get in" -- I said there's no evidence he WAS. You can't just make up your own facts.

In the same way I did not say he was "kid sized"; I said there was no evidence he was "adult sized". Which was also made up here.

Do you actually fail to understand the difference between a negative statement and the absence of evidence for a positive? Is that just over your head or what?

Then the only thing you can be saying is he wasn't. When there are only two options and you say one wasn't happening, it only leaves the other.

NO. IT. DOES. NOT Existence just doesn't work that way.
If you tell me you robbed a bank yesterday and I say "prove it" ---------------- that in no way means I'm declaring you DIDN'T rob the bank. How the fuck would I know that?

There are only two options. You said one wasn't what happened. It leaves only one. Your example is faulty. Sorry, you lose but you were born a loser.

 

[Conservative65]

He could have put the gun down and used an axe.

True, and maybe he should have. It would have given the 15-year-old time to react.

The drunk kid would have gotten his head split open trying to get inside.

It must suck that there's no evidence the kid was either "drunk" or "trying to get inside".
However we do know he had a head, since I posted a picture of it. Shouldn't be a total loss.

We know that he was drinking too.

Yes. But we don't know "drunk".

Irrelevant. It's another one of those things that you either are or aren't much like being pregnant or not being pregnant.

 

[Katzndogz]

When someone knocks on my door, I never answer it unless I know who they are. I get the gun, and watch from behind the door. So far no one has tried to get in. They knock for awhile then leave. If they get past the door they broke in and are fair game.

Why am I not at all surprised.

Must be hilarious around your place at Hallowe'en, with all the dead bodies strewn about the lawn. Real authentic.

I don't answer the door. So far not a single trick or treater has broken in or even tried.

 

[Pogo]

The "trying to get in" part. Read the thread. Better yet, read the article.


That's nice. In English now?

Where you there? Can you prove he wasn't trying to get in?

What the fuck is it with reading comprehension around here?

I did not say he "wasn't trying to get in" -- I said there's no evidence he WAS. You can't just make up your own facts.

In the same way I did not say he was "kid sized"; I said there was no evidence he was "adult sized". Which was also made up here.

Do you actually fail to understand the difference between a negative statement and the absence of evidence for a positive? Is that just over your head or what?

Then the only thing you can be saying is he wasn't. When there are only two options and you say one wasn't happening, it only leaves the other.

NO. IT. DOES. NOT Existence just doesn't work that way.
If you tell me you robbed a bank yesterday and I say "prove it" ---------------- that in no way means I'm declaring you DIDN'T rob the bank. How the fuck would I know that?

There are only two options. You said one wasn't what happened. It leaves only one. Your example is faulty. Sorry, you lose but you were born a loser.

WRONG, Gummo. *IF* you don't have evidence that something happened, *THEN* you don't have evidence that it happened. PERIOD. That in no way means it did NOT happen.

This is all sailing right the fuck over your pointy little head, isn't it.

 

[Pogo]

=> Lovell said he then walked into the kitchen and looked out the window to see a teenager walking from his back yard toward the side door, which is located under the carport. The teenager started knocking on the glass of the locked door and said something Lovell could not understand, records say.

"Mr. Lovell told this party to 'get the f--k out' and 'stay the f--k out.' As the ... party continued to bang on the door Mr. Lovell stated that the window broke at which time Mr. Lovell raised his loaded S & W (Smith & Wesson) firearm and shot one round through the glass of the door," the police report states.

When police arrived, they found no evidence that the victim entered the home, court records said.

"Mr. Lovell also indicated that the victim never entered his residence," the police report says.

Francisco was a quiet but sociable teenager who had made plenty of friends in his first year in high school and did well in his classes, Comprehensive High School Principal Derek Morrison said.

He leaves a number of family members, including his mother Heather Francisco, step-father Steven Beauregard and three younger siblings, Damien and Desiree Francisco and Anthony Beauregard.

"He was always respectful," Morrison said. "It is an absolute waste." <= ---- Court Records Reveal New Details

 

[sealybobo]

More lives wasted thanks to a paranoid gun owner.

A teenager knocked on the wrong door. Now he’s dead, and the homeowner is accused of murder.

Two teenagers were drinking in Chicopee, Mass., Saturday afternoon when they set off to find a friend, according to authorities. Whether it was the booze or the sheer similarity of the neighborhood’s low-slung homes, the teens somehow ended up at the wrong house.

One of the teenagers, a 15-year-old boy, banged on the door.

Suddenly, a gunshot rang out from inside the house, and the boy slumped on the porch with a bullet to his belly.

The boy died at a hospital. He has not yet been identified.

The homeowner, 42-year-old Jeffrey Lovell, was arrested and charged with murder, according to the Chicopee Police Department.

A white guy shot a drunk black girl who was banging on his door in the middle of the night. He was found guilty.

Unless they come in you can't shoot.

 

[Yousaidwhat]

He shot through the door and is charged with murder? Either the DA is purposely over-charging to get this guy an acquittal or we're not being given the whole story.

It's for your own good. Facts will be omitted, tempers will flare.

 

[jc456]

I wish you all would understand open investigation

 

[Geaux4it]

More lives wasted thanks to a paranoid gun owner.

A teenager knocked on the wrong door. Now he’s dead, and the homeowner is accused of murder.

Two teenagers were drinking in Chicopee, Mass., Saturday afternoon when they set off to find a friend, according to authorities. Whether it was the booze or the sheer similarity of the neighborhood’s low-slung homes, the teens somehow ended up at the wrong house.

One of the teenagers, a 15-year-old boy, banged on the door.

Suddenly, a gunshot rang out from inside the house, and the boy slumped on the porch with a bullet to his belly.

The boy died at a hospital. He has not yet been identified.

The homeowner, 42-year-old Jeffrey Lovell, was arrested and charged with murder, according to the Chicopee Police Department.

Acceptable risk

Home owner needed to drag them in the door

-Geaux

 

[The Professor]

Maybe the homeowner was just following Joe Biden's advice: "[If] you want to keep someone away from your house, just fire the shotgun through the door."

Biden Advises Shooting Shotgun Through Door

Whether the man committed murder or not depends on the laws of that particular state. Some states have laws which allow a person to use deadly force against anyone who has broken into into his dwelling or is attempting to break into his dwelling. Florida is one of those states and here's a link from a very reputable source (I prefer to use the following clear and easily understood explanation instead of posting the bare language of the statute):

Florida Statute 776.013 states that a person defending their home or occupied vehicle from an "unlawful" forceful entry or attempted forceful entry by another may use deadly force to stop the invasion or attempted invasion of the property. In such instances they need not retreat before using deadly force, they need not warn the intruder of their intent to shoot, and there is an absolute presumption that the person attempting the entry was doing so with the intent to commit a violent act (i.e. "forcible felony"), and that the defender is presumed to be acting in reasonable fear of death or great bodily harm to himself or herself. In other words – no arrest or prosecution is technically "legal" if someone without a right of entry or ownership is trying to break in, and you shoot them.

http://www.floridafirearmslaw.com/o...analysis-of-florida-new-self-defense-law.html

Yeah ummm..... don't think Florida law applies in Massachusetts.

As I posted, “Whether the man committed murder or not depends on the laws of that particular state.” I gave an explanation of Florida law because that is where I live and I know the laws well (I Have a Juris Doctorate). Over the years I have observed that far too many people think they know the law and they do not. My intent was to inform others to withhold judgment until they know not only the facts of the case, but also the laws of their state. I accept your apology for your condescending comment.

PS: I don't have the evidence I need to determine whether or not there was an attempted break-in. My comment assumed that was the case so that I could address the laws regarding the use of deadly force in such a situation. Perhaps I should have explained myself in much greater detail to avoid confusing readers who have limited analytical skills.

Now I am done with this thread and with you.

 

[Pogo]

Maybe the homeowner was just following Joe Biden's advice: "[If] you want to keep someone away from your house, just fire the shotgun through the door."

Biden Advises Shooting Shotgun Through Door

Whether the man committed murder or not depends on the laws of that particular state. Some states have laws which allow a person to use deadly force against anyone who has broken into into his dwelling or is attempting to break into his dwelling. Florida is one of those states and here's a link from a very reputable source (I prefer to use the following clear and easily understood explanation instead of posting the bare language of the statute):

Florida Statute 776.013 states that a person defending their home or occupied vehicle from an "unlawful" forceful entry or attempted forceful entry by another may use deadly force to stop the invasion or attempted invasion of the property. In such instances they need not retreat before using deadly force, they need not warn the intruder of their intent to shoot, and there is an absolute presumption that the person attempting the entry was doing so with the intent to commit a violent act (i.e. "forcible felony"), and that the defender is presumed to be acting in reasonable fear of death or great bodily harm to himself or herself. In other words – no arrest or prosecution is technically "legal" if someone without a right of entry or ownership is trying to break in, and you shoot them.

http://www.floridafirearmslaw.com/o...analysis-of-florida-new-self-defense-law.html

Yeah ummm..... don't think Florida law applies in Massachusetts.

As I posted, “Whether the man committed murder or not depends on the laws of that particular state.” I gave an explanation of Florida law because that is where I live and I know the laws well (I Have a Juris Doctorate). Over the years I have observed that far too many people think they know the law and they do not. My intent was to inform others to withhold judgment until they know not only the facts of the case, but also the laws of their state. I accept your apology for your condescending comment.

PS: I don't have the evidence I need to determine whether or not there was an attempted break-in. My comment assumed that was the case so that I could address the laws regarding the use of deadly force in such a situation. Perhaps I should have explained myself in much greater detail to avoid confusing readers who have limited analytical skills.

Now I am done with this thread and with you.

STILL Irrelevant.

1. Florida law does not apply in Massachusetts -- period.
   
2. Massachusetts has no "stand your ground" law.
3. The incident took place in Massachusetts. That was clear in the original article.

"Analytical" enough?

 

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

Maybe the homeowner was just following Joe Biden's advice: "[If] you want to keep someone away from your house, just fire the shotgun through the door."

Biden Advises Shooting Shotgun Through Door

Whether the man committed murder or not depends on the laws of that particular state. Some states have laws which allow a person to use deadly force against anyone who has broken into into his dwelling or is attempting to break into his dwelling. Florida is one of those states and here's a link from a very reputable source (I prefer to use the following clear and easily understood explanation instead of posting the bare language of the statute):

Florida Statute 776.013 states that a person defending their home or occupied vehicle from an "unlawful" forceful entry or attempted forceful entry by another may use deadly force to stop the invasion or attempted invasion of the property. In such instances they need not retreat before using deadly force, they need not warn the intruder of their intent to shoot, and there is an absolute presumption that the person attempting the entry was doing so with the intent to commit a violent act (i.e. "forcible felony"), and that the defender is presumed to be acting in reasonable fear of death or great bodily harm to himself or herself. In other words – no arrest or prosecution is technically "legal" if someone without a right of entry or ownership is trying to break in, and you shoot them.

http://www.floridafirearmslaw.com/o...analysis-of-florida-new-self-defense-law.html

Yeah ummm..... don't think Florida law applies in Massachusetts.

As I posted, “Whether the man committed murder or not depends on the laws of that particular state.” I gave an explanation of Florida law because that is where I live and I know the laws well (I Have a Juris Doctorate). Over the years I have observed that far too many people think they know the law and they do not. My intent was to inform others to withhold judgment until they know not only the facts of the case, but also the laws of their state. I accept your apology for your condescending comment.

PS: I don't have the evidence I need to determine whether or not there was an attempted break-in. My comment assumed that was the case so that I could address the laws regarding the use of deadly force in such a situation. Perhaps I should have explained myself in much greater detail to avoid confusing readers who have limited analytical skills.

Now I am done with this thread and with you.

STILL Irrelevant.

1. Florida law does not apply in Massachusetts -- period.
   
2. Massachusetts has no "stand your ground" law.
3. The incident took place in Massachusetts. That was clear in the original article.

"Analytical" enough?

Stand your ground has nothing to do with defending your home when it's being broken into.

Nothing.

 

[Pogo]

Maybe the homeowner was just following Joe Biden's advice: "[If] you want to keep someone away from your house, just fire the shotgun through the door."

Biden Advises Shooting Shotgun Through Door

Whether the man committed murder or not depends on the laws of that particular state. Some states have laws which allow a person to use deadly force against anyone who has broken into into his dwelling or is attempting to break into his dwelling. Florida is one of those states and here's a link from a very reputable source (I prefer to use the following clear and easily understood explanation instead of posting the bare language of the statute):

Florida Statute 776.013 states that a person defending their home or occupied vehicle from an "unlawful" forceful entry or attempted forceful entry by another may use deadly force to stop the invasion or attempted invasion of the property. In such instances they need not retreat before using deadly force, they need not warn the intruder of their intent to shoot, and there is an absolute presumption that the person attempting the entry was doing so with the intent to commit a violent act (i.e. "forcible felony"), and that the defender is presumed to be acting in reasonable fear of death or great bodily harm to himself or herself. In other words – no arrest or prosecution is technically "legal" if someone without a right of entry or ownership is trying to break in, and you shoot them.

http://www.floridafirearmslaw.com/o...analysis-of-florida-new-self-defense-law.html

Yeah ummm..... don't think Florida law applies in Massachusetts.

As I posted, “Whether the man committed murder or not depends on the laws of that particular state.” I gave an explanation of Florida law because that is where I live and I know the laws well (I Have a Juris Doctorate). Over the years I have observed that far too many people think they know the law and they do not. My intent was to inform others to withhold judgment until they know not only the facts of the case, but also the laws of their state. I accept your apology for your condescending comment.

PS: I don't have the evidence I need to determine whether or not there was an attempted break-in. My comment assumed that was the case so that I could address the laws regarding the use of deadly force in such a situation. Perhaps I should have explained myself in much greater detail to avoid confusing readers who have limited analytical skills.

Now I am done with this thread and with you.

STILL Irrelevant.

1. Florida law does not apply in Massachusetts -- period.
   
2. Massachusetts has no "stand your ground" law.
3. The incident took place in Massachusetts. That was clear in the original article.

"Analytical" enough?

Stand your ground has nothing to do with defending your home when it's being broken into.

Nothing.

Irrelevant on top of irrelevant. There was no "break-in" happening here. That's a fabrication this thread made up.
Even the police said that. Even the murderer himself said that.

So it's got nothing to do with a law that doesn't exist in a place where Florida has no jurisdiction.

Nothing.

 

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

Maybe the homeowner was just following Joe Biden's advice: "[If] you want to keep someone away from your house, just fire the shotgun through the door."

Biden Advises Shooting Shotgun Through Door

Whether the man committed murder or not depends on the laws of that particular state. Some states have laws which allow a person to use deadly force against anyone who has broken into into his dwelling or is attempting to break into his dwelling. Florida is one of those states and here's a link from a very reputable source (I prefer to use the following clear and easily understood explanation instead of posting the bare language of the statute):

Florida Statute 776.013 states that a person defending their home or occupied vehicle from an "unlawful" forceful entry or attempted forceful entry by another may use deadly force to stop the invasion or attempted invasion of the property. In such instances they need not retreat before using deadly force, they need not warn the intruder of their intent to shoot, and there is an absolute presumption that the person attempting the entry was doing so with the intent to commit a violent act (i.e. "forcible felony"), and that the defender is presumed to be acting in reasonable fear of death or great bodily harm to himself or herself. In other words – no arrest or prosecution is technically "legal" if someone without a right of entry or ownership is trying to break in, and you shoot them.

http://www.floridafirearmslaw.com/o...analysis-of-florida-new-self-defense-law.html

Yeah ummm..... don't think Florida law applies in Massachusetts.

As I posted, “Whether the man committed murder or not depends on the laws of that particular state.” I gave an explanation of Florida law because that is where I live and I know the laws well (I Have a Juris Doctorate). Over the years I have observed that far too many people think they know the law and they do not. My intent was to inform others to withhold judgment until they know not only the facts of the case, but also the laws of their state. I accept your apology for your condescending comment.

PS: I don't have the evidence I need to determine whether or not there was an attempted break-in. My comment assumed that was the case so that I could address the laws regarding the use of deadly force in such a situation. Perhaps I should have explained myself in much greater detail to avoid confusing readers who have limited analytical skills.

Now I am done with this thread and with you.

STILL Irrelevant.

1. Florida law does not apply in Massachusetts -- period.
   
2. Massachusetts has no "stand your ground" law.
3. The incident took place in Massachusetts. That was clear in the original article.

"Analytical" enough?

Stand your ground has nothing to do with defending your home when it's being broken into.

Nothing.

Irrelevant on top of irrelevant. There was no "break-in" happening here. That's a fabrication this thread made up.
Even the police said that. Even the murderer himself said that.

So it's got nothing to do with a law that doesn't exist in a place where Florida has no jurisdiction.

Nothing.

You don't know what happened anymore than anyone else. The link does not provide the unredacted story.

 

[jc456]

Maybe the homeowner was just following Joe Biden's advice: "[If] you want to keep someone away from your house, just fire the shotgun through the door."

Biden Advises Shooting Shotgun Through Door

Whether the man committed murder or not depends on the laws of that particular state. Some states have laws which allow a person to use deadly force against anyone who has broken into into his dwelling or is attempting to break into his dwelling. Florida is one of those states and here's a link from a very reputable source (I prefer to use the following clear and easily understood explanation instead of posting the bare language of the statute):

Florida Statute 776.013 states that a person defending their home or occupied vehicle from an "unlawful" forceful entry or attempted forceful entry by another may use deadly force to stop the invasion or attempted invasion of the property. In such instances they need not retreat before using deadly force, they need not warn the intruder of their intent to shoot, and there is an absolute presumption that the person attempting the entry was doing so with the intent to commit a violent act (i.e. "forcible felony"), and that the defender is presumed to be acting in reasonable fear of death or great bodily harm to himself or herself. In other words – no arrest or prosecution is technically "legal" if someone without a right of entry or ownership is trying to break in, and you shoot them.

http://www.floridafirearmslaw.com/o...analysis-of-florida-new-self-defense-law.html

Yeah ummm..... don't think Florida law applies in Massachusetts.

As I posted, “Whether the man committed murder or not depends on the laws of that particular state.” I gave an explanation of Florida law because that is where I live and I know the laws well (I Have a Juris Doctorate). Over the years I have observed that far too many people think they know the law and they do not. My intent was to inform others to withhold judgment until they know not only the facts of the case, but also the laws of their state. I accept your apology for your condescending comment.

PS: I don't have the evidence I need to determine whether or not there was an attempted break-in. My comment assumed that was the case so that I could address the laws regarding the use of deadly force in such a situation. Perhaps I should have explained myself in much greater detail to avoid confusing readers who have limited analytical skills.

Now I am done with this thread and with you.

STILL Irrelevant.

1. Florida law does not apply in Massachusetts -- period.
   
2. Massachusetts has no "stand your ground" law.
3. The incident took place in Massachusetts. That was clear in the original article.

"Analytical" enough?

Stand your ground has nothing to do with defending your home when it's being broken into.

Nothing.

Irrelevant on top of irrelevant. There was no "break-in" happening here. That's a fabrication this thread made up.
Even the police said that. Even the murderer himself said that.

So it's got nothing to do with a law that doesn't exist in a place where Florida has no jurisdiction.

Nothing.

You know shit

 

[Pogo]

Yeah ummm..... don't think Florida law applies in Massachusetts.

As I posted, “Whether the man committed murder or not depends on the laws of that particular state.” I gave an explanation of Florida law because that is where I live and I know the laws well (I Have a Juris Doctorate). Over the years I have observed that far too many people think they know the law and they do not. My intent was to inform others to withhold judgment until they know not only the facts of the case, but also the laws of their state. I accept your apology for your condescending comment.

PS: I don't have the evidence I need to determine whether or not there was an attempted break-in. My comment assumed that was the case so that I could address the laws regarding the use of deadly force in such a situation. Perhaps I should have explained myself in much greater detail to avoid confusing readers who have limited analytical skills.

Now I am done with this thread and with you.

STILL Irrelevant.

1. Florida law does not apply in Massachusetts -- period.
   
2. Massachusetts has no "stand your ground" law.
3. The incident took place in Massachusetts. That was clear in the original article.

"Analytical" enough?

Stand your ground has nothing to do with defending your home when it's being broken into.

Nothing.

Irrelevant on top of irrelevant. There was no "break-in" happening here. That's a fabrication this thread made up.
Even the police said that. Even the murderer himself said that.

So it's got nothing to do with a law that doesn't exist in a place where Florida has no jurisdiction.

Nothing.

You don't know what happened anymore than anyone else. The link does not provide the unredacted story.

I post nothing that I don't know and can't back up.
All of the above is in my last link. There ain't nothing "redacted" in it --- they're actual quotes.