Gawd bless the USA!

Different laws. Depending on state, you can legaly shoot intruders. You don't have to use Resonable force and the rest of the differences.
 
Massive difference in the laws. Some states have implied right, we don't. It's a huge difference.

Indeed, it's very different. In some US states, merely being in someone's house unauthorised is enough to warrant using deadly force. That's not the case in the UK.
 
Massive difference in the laws. Some states have implied right, we don't. It's a huge difference.

I'm not familiar with an implied right, please do expand.

So if this incident had happened in Oxford rather than Oklahoma, you'd be comfortable that the woman would have been arrested, fingerprinted, DNA tested, clothes taken off her etc?
 
Indeed, it's very different. In some US states, merely being in someone's house unauthorised is enough to warrant using deadly force. That's not the case in the UK.

Wow they must have many, many incidents of killers inviting their victims round to their house then killing them over tea and biscuits.
 
I'm not familiar with an implied right, please do expand.

So if this incident had happened in Oxford rather than Oklahoma, you'd be comfortable that the woman would have been arrested, fingerprinted, DNA tested, clothes taken off her etc?

It's called castle law of which Oklahoma has such laws.

Because McKinley acted in self defense, she was not charged, with Oklahoma's castle doctrine law cited as one reason.[46]

You're trying to be clever from the last thread and failing, our laws are not the same. We don't have these laws, so it's not a clear case. It's upto cps to decide if they think it was Resonable or not.

There's probably also difference in statements, where you have more rights under caution over here.
 
Last edited:
Indeed, it's very different. In some US states, merely being in someone's house unauthorised is enough to warrant using deadly force. That's not the case in the UK.

Thankfully!

I'm interested to know why she didn't fire a warning shot first, surely an intruder would bolt like hell if they heard a shotgun going off in the house they were trying to break into?!?!?
 
I personally think killing him was a bit harsh, something i wouldn't have done, but good on her and good on america for letting her do such a thing to such scrotes
 
Indeed, but did she open fire the second he bust down the door dropped in through the window!?!?!?
ie. was the intruder given the chance to flee once he realised she was armed?

She doesn't need to.
She also said she saw a glimpse of metal in his hand and thought it might be a pistol.

Doctrine (also known as a Castle Law or a Defense of Habitation Law) is an American legal doctrine arising from English common law[1] that designates one's place of residence (or, in some states, any place legally occupied, such as one's car or place of work) as a place in which one enjoys protection from illegal trespassing and violent attack. It then goes on to give a person the legal right to use deadly force to defend their place, and any other innocent persons legally inside it, from violent attack or an intrusion which may lead to violent attack
 
Legally not in the crazy USA, morally 100% she should have UNLESS you have zero respect for human life!!

No she doesn't she saw something metallic in his hand and fired. She said she thought it may of been a pistol.
Do you give someone with a gun a warning shot, don't be daft.
 
Hindsight - It's awesome sitting behind your computer screen, dissecting decisions taken in seconds while fearing for your life, when you have all the time in the world isn't it?
 
No she doesn't she saw something metallic in his hand and fired. She said she thought it may of been a pistol.
Do you give someone with a gun a warning shot, don't be daft.

You fire a warning shot before they actually manage to break INTO the house, I'm pretty sure they didn't just walk into the house! After-all she had time to call the police and WAIT until he was successful in breaking in!!
 
Back
Top Bottom