Wienerdogtroy wrote:bayouhazard wrote:couzin wrote: If you did shoot one of these kids - you might have a defense criminally - but I'm betting the entire family is going to sue in civil court and probably win.
The frivolous lawsuit should get tossed by summary judgement if it even makes it that far. There's civil immunity for crime victims who fight back with justified deadly force.
Meanwhile, I think the entire neighborhood should sue the family for all the shot up windows and other malicious intentional property damage. I think parents are still responsible for their minor children. That would be a small step to justice.
Don't hold your breath on that. Few cases are knocked out on summary judgement.
One reason that few cases are thrown out on summary judgment is that few lawyers will take a case that is a clear loser. The law is clear that they will lose on a justified shooting, so the plaintiff's attorney must see enough to argue the justification before taking the case. I would think that a case of a teenager pointing a BB gun at someone would justify the resultant shooting pretty clearly. For the police officer in the valley a few weeks ago, the courts seemed to accept this as justification, even though there were some reporters and the suspect's family were less accepting of the justification.