- Nov 21, 2018
The homeowner's attorney can reasonably argue that the homeowners were not in violation of the restrictions in RSMo 563.041...et al.569.100. Property damage in the first degree — penalties. https://revisor.mo.gov/main/OneSection.aspx?section=569.100
When STLMPD did not respond to their 911 call the cops exercised their Warren v. DC defense.https://revisor.mo.gov/main/OneSect...011&bid=34960&hl=forcible+felony%u2044563.011
Chapter definitions. (4) "Forcible felony", any felony involving the use or threat of physical force or violence against any individual, including but not limited to murder, robbery, burglary, arson, kidnapping, assault, and any forcible sexual offense;
Federal law:Threating deadly force and defensive display seems to be two different things.
The merely having a firearm or having one and threating some one with it seems to be different.
Defensive display where legal is tool that can end a situation before it can become worst.
Either situation can change in a matter of mere seconds and one needs to be situational aware to go with the flow.
(my emphasis)18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(4) For purposes of this subsection, the term “brandish” means, with respect to a firearm, to display all or part of the firearm, or otherwise make the presence of the firearm known to another person, in order to intimidate that person, regardless of whether the firearm is directly visible to that person.
This is Missouri's definition of brandishing.§ 571.030. Unlawful use of weapons — exceptions — penalties. — 1. A person commits the offense of unlawful use of weapons, except as otherwise provided by sections 571.101 to 571.121, if he or she knowingly:
(4) Exhibits, in the presence of one or more persons, any weapon readily capable of lethal use in an angry or threatening manner;
Seems like the homeowners are in like Flint...
(my emphasis)We therefore regard the area "immediately surrounding and associated with the home" — what our cases call the curtilage — as "part of the home itself for Fourth Amendment purposes." Oliver, supra, at 180, 104 S.Ct. 1735. That principle has ancient and durable roots. Just as the distinction between the home and the open fields is "as old as the common law," Hester, supra, at 59, 44 S.Ct. 445, so too is the identity of home and what Blackstone called the "curtilage or homestall," for the "house protects and privileges all its branches and appurtenants." 4 W. Blackstone, Commentaries on the Laws of England 223, 225 (1769). This area around the home is "intimately linked to the home, both physically and psychologically," and is where "privacy expectations are most heightened." California v. Ciraolo, 476 U.S. 207, 213, 106 S.Ct. 1809, 90 L.Ed.2d 210 (1986).