80 Year old man charged with felony after shooting intruder....SMH

So this story got me thinking.... Here in Chicago a 80 year old man is being charged with a felony for shooting a 19 year old boy who broke into his home trying to burgularize it. The 80 year old man grabbed his hand gun and shot the man in his right leg, when cops showed up the burgler was arrested, but so was the 80 year old man who was protecting his home. What got me thinking is the fact that there is a story that took the nation by storm, the Trayvon Martin/George Zimmerman incident down in Florida. So how is it that Zimmerman hasnt even been charged, but this man here in Chicago, who was protecting his home, is charged with a felony??? Reading the story below you will see that the 80 year old man had 2 weapons convictions, one from 1968 and one from 1994. Does this mean he cant protect himself in his own house? Should he just allow a burgler to steal from him? Should he just call the police and hide in a closet? I hope these charges are eventually dropped by the Chicago PD...

www.chicagotribune.com...

No.

It means that it is a felony for him to have a gun.

Possession of a weapon by a convicted felon in the state of Illinois. I believe only Texas allows a convicted felon to keep a fire arm in their home for self defense. I dont agree that the laws of Illinois are right, just stating the facts

Originally posted by jhn7537
Reading the story below you will see that the 80 year old man had 2 weapons convictions, one from 1968 and one from 1994. Does this mean he cant protect himself in his own house? Should he just allow a burgler to steal from him? Should he just call the police and hide in a closet? I hope these charges are eventually dropped by the Chicago PD...

A felony conviction and a few "violent" misdemeanors effectively revoke your 2nd Amendment right.

In a very kafkaesque way any attempt to operate or own a firearm after such a conviction becomes an automatic conviction in itself compounding your "evilness" in the eyes of the law and the plebes on the street.

We're all afraid of criminals after all.

Better to pay the price of having a gun than be killed by the burglar for not having one.

Originally posted by Submarines
No.

It means that it is a felony for him to have a gun.

Cops can bend the laws, they constantly do that here in Chicago.... If anything, they could have taken the gun from him and not charged him with the felony...

Correct me if I am wrong but, I believe it is against the law for a felon (in this case 2x over) to posses a firearm. If this is the case, yes, he will be arrested for possession of an illegal firearm and for using it.

X

Originally posted by jhn7537
So this story got me thinking.... Here in Chicago a 80 year old man is being charged with a felony for shooting a 19 year old boy who broke into his home trying to burgularize it. The 80 year old man grabbed his hand gun and shot the man in his right leg, when cops showed up the burgler was arrested, but so was the 80 year old man who was protecting his home. What got me thinking is the fact that there is a story that took the nation by storm, the Trayvon Martin/George Zimmerman incident down in Florida. So how is it that Zimmerman hasnt even been charged, but this man here in Chicago, who was protecting his home, is charged with a felony??? Reading the story below you will see that the 80 year old man had 2 weapons convictions, one from 1968 and one from 1994. Does this mean he cant protect himself in his own house? Should he just allow a burgler to steal from him? Should he just call the police and hide in a closet? I hope these charges are eventually dropped by the Chicago PD...

www.chicagotribune.com...

Handguns are illegal in Chicago..Or they were. And what he said as far as a felon possessing.

U

reply to post by jhn7537


If these facts are true, I guess he was unlucky enough to have arresting officers with a cumulative IQ of 60.

Bureaucracy screwed this guy.

Originally posted by jjkenobi
Better to pay the price of having a gun than be killed by the burglar for not having one.

I agree, I just dont like that the Chicago PD is punishing this man for protecting his home...

Originally posted by jjkenobi
Better to pay the price of having a gun than be killed by the burglar for not having one.

Ahh the old saying.. Better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6.

U

Originally posted by loam
reply to post by jhn7537

 

If these facts are true, I guess he was unlucky enough to have arresting officers with a cumulative IQ of 60.

Bureaucracy screwed this guy.

edit on 27-3-2012 by loam because: (no reason given)

Just sounds like an unfortunate set of circumstances, he wasnt looking for this fight, it came to him, and he acted.... I truly hope these charges are dropped, it just leaves a bad taste in my mouth with this story happening in my neck of the woods...

Originally posted by ExhibitEx
Correct me if I am wrong but, I believe it is against the law for a felon (in this case 2x over) to posses a firearm. If this is the case, yes, he will be arrested for possession of an illegal firearm and for using it.

X

You're right, but I think there should be exceptions to this rule (it shouldnt be so black and white), and I think the police should recognize that this was an old man just protecting his home.....

Originally posted by jhn7537

Originally posted by ExhibitEx
Correct me if I am wrong but, I believe it is against the law for a felon (in this case 2x over) to posses a firearm. If this is the case, yes, he will be arrested for possession of an illegal firearm and for using it.

X

You're right, but I think there should be exceptions to this rule (it shouldnt be so black and white), and I think the police should recognize that this was an old man just protecting his home.....

Totally agree, everyone has a right to protect himself and his/her home. But even an 80 year old can be dangerous with a firearm. After all the man did have 2 convictions previously (for which I am not privy to the exact circumstances). He could have used a bat, a knife, a crossbow, anything besides a gun for which he should not have had. Anyway thank you for the interesting and thought provoking thread!

Originally posted by ExhibitEx

Originally posted by jhn7537

Originally posted by ExhibitEx
Correct me if I am wrong but, I believe it is against the law for a felon (in this case 2x over) to posses a firearm. If this is the case, yes, he will be arrested for possession of an illegal firearm and for using it.

X

You're right, but I think there should be exceptions to this rule (it shouldnt be so black and white), and I think the police should recognize that this was an old man just protecting his home.....

Totally agree, everyone has a right to protect himself and his/her home. But even an 80 year old can be dangerous with a firearm. After all the man did have 2 convictions previously (for which I am not privy to the exact circumstances). He could have used a bat, a knife, a crossbow, anything besides a gun for which he should not have had. Anyway thank you for the interesting and thought provoking thread!

edit on 27-3-2012 by ExhibitEx because: Reworded

Depending on his conditions of release, he may not be allowed to have even a pocket knife or " any dangerous weapon." That would include throwing a hot pan of H2O for his tea or coffee at him. Yes it is ridiculous! But this is what we have become. Especially when the gobrmnt needs to fill up the jails and prisons to make a profit.

reply to post by ExhibitEx


No problem, i read the story, it got me thinking, so i figured it would get the ATS community thinking as well...... I think this is going to be a law they will need to look at, and reform, moving forward... I also think the police should take into account when a persons last convictions were...1968 (44 years ago) and 1994 (18 years ago) is a very long time... If the man was charged 2 years ago sticking up the corner store than it would be a different story...

Different state different laws and the guy was not supposed to have a gun in the first place.

What? How dare he have a firearm and use it to protect himself in the peoples socialist republic of Chicago...

First off, there is no mention in the article that the 80 year old man is a felon. Where did some of you come up with that?

Chicago has some veyr very tough firearm laws and regulations. This is no secret. The Unlawful use of a weapon charge seems to be a pretty strange law. I have been looking for the actual law, with no success, but it is worth mentioning that this charge of unlawful use is even charged to people who are transporting a firearm through the City.

The following comes from a web site for a Chicago based attorney's office.

Among the common scenarios we have seen include people from out of state transporting their weapon through the Chicago area. These people are frequently in complete compliance with the gun laws of their state, but, unfortunately, those laws may differ greatly than those in Illinois. When a police officer pulls such a person over, they will often charge the person with unlawful use of a weapon.

Another situation we have seen is people being charged with unlawful use of a weapon because they have accidentally let their permits expire. For example, a security guard whose FOID card lapsed even a short time prior to being arrested may face serious criminal charges.

It can also happen that Chicago residents have a gun on their property, and are arrested by police for technicalities.

It seems like this law is very broad. I will try to keep searching for the actual law.

reply to post by MrWendal


In the article it states that he had 2 weapons convictions one in 1968 and one in 1994.... it doesnt say he was a felon but it did say he had a couple dings on his record.....