Ravenwood - 07/25/05 08:30 AM
Leonard Gamage is 87-years old and a veteran of World War II. So when 20-year old James VanderVeen allegedly broke into his home, he relied on his trusty .22 caliber rifle to be his equalizer.
Gamage said as soon as the door was open a few inches, VanderVeen allegedly grabbed the screen door and stepped inside the home.Gamage broke two rules; never fire warning shots, and never shoot to wound. Now, had Gamage let his Illinois mandated FOID card expire, he'd likely face a Class A misdemeanor charge and a stiff punishment for his unlicensed rifle. Of course other than being shot in the foot, the home invader got off easy.During the next 45 minutes, Gamage and VanderVeen scuffled twice. The second fight ended when Gamage managed to grab an old .22 caliber rifle from his gun rack.
Gamage said he fired a couple of warning shots, but when the suspect appeared determined to enter the house, Gamage shot the intruder in the left foot.
In a negotiated plea VanderVeen was sentenced to 12 months court supervision and fined $100 plus court costs. If VanderVeen successfully serves the year of court supervision, the misdemeanor will be wiped from his record.Next time aim for the chest, and shoot twice. (Maybe three times with that .22.)
Category: Defending Your Life
Comments (8) top link me
Shoot twice in the chest, then fire one or two shots in the air, then you can say that you fired warning shots but the intruder continued to enter the house anyway.
Posted by: John at July 25, 2005 8:17 AMA Detroit policeman once told me that if I had to shoot them as they were coming into the house, make sure before I called 911 to drag the body in.
Posted by: kjo at July 25, 2005 8:24 AMJohn,
The problem with warning shots is one of legal liability. It can be said that if you were able to fire warning shots, you should have been able to run away in the first place.
Typically you are only justified in using lethal force if you had no other alternatives. Firing warning shots suggests that you had other alternatives.
Posted by: Ravenwood at July 25, 2005 9:56 AMThe only "warning shots" you should fire would be those fatally impacting goblin #1 and heard by any additional goblins out of range or view.
Posted by: Steve Scudder at July 25, 2005 10:53 AMkjo: My retired Detroit cop buddy also told the sad story of the shopkeeper that failed to clean up the blood and drag marks in the alley behind his shop. First burglar was quite righteously shot at close range with a 12 gauge after forcing his way through the back door. Second one was chased, shot in the back, and dragged back - and too many people saw the drag marks so the investigators couldn't overlook them...
Posted by: markm at July 25, 2005 10:59 AMI agree with the comments above about warning shots and self defense, but this story doesn't seem to make sense.
The 20 yr old enters the house and two scuffles occur over 45 minutes. 45 minutes!!? This must be one pathetic 20 yr old or a very impressive 87 yr old.
Some how after the second scuffle the 20 yr old ends up outside again? and trys to break in again and is then shot.
Posted by: Dougly at July 25, 2005 8:55 PMWarning shots are a no-no in some liberal jurisdictions. If you don't have the justifiable use of force then and there when shooting someone you are not allowed to shoot warning shots and can get the criminal discharge charges on you. Its wrong but I've seen it in print.
For those that live in those drag the body inside states you all need to move. Even in my liberalised state of Kansas we are allowed to kill anyone who attacks our dwelling. (HOME!)
Posted by: Rhett at July 26, 2005 2:49 AM"Gamage broke two rules; never fire warning shots, and never shoot to wound."
Wounding is ok, if it consists of several shots to the groin; that tends to cool down assailants.....
Posted by: Robert Garrard at July 26, 2005 10:31 AM(c) Ravenwood and Associates, 1990 - 2014
