Suspect jailed after Mill Valley woman foils break-in

Wish he would come into my house when I am there.
Depending on where he comes in, he gets either a Smith&Willy .40 or 12 guage.

Why do I have to obey law wrote:

Wish he would come into my house when I am there.
Depending on where he comes in, he gets either a Smith&Willy .40 or 12 guage.

In my case a baseball bat, just as affective. Marcedes?(miss-spelling intentional). Must have been a foreclosure...Punk A** Marin....

I hope it turns out to be a third strike and this guy goes to the pen for 25 years. Piece of sh1t

Agreed -- hopefully he isn't let out this time..

shoot him...society doesn't need animals like this

I would have let him in and then split him in his tracks with a 9mm.

Paul Kersey wrote:

I would have let him in and then split him in his tracks with a 9mm.

Amen to that. If anyone tries to break into my house, I will happily await for them to enter and then shoot to kill. Your defense isn't as good if they're just outside the house.

Paul Kersey wrote:

I would have let him in and then split him in his tracks with a 9mm.

.....anyone know if it's legal to shoot and kill an intruder in the back if they're in your home?

Jen wrote:

<quoted text>
Amen to that. If anyone tries to break into my house, I will happily await for them to enter and then shoot to kill. Your defense isn't as good if they're just outside the house.

When the police arrive say these five words and nothing else.

"I feared for my life".

Paul: important advice. And those five words would be the truth. When someone like this piece of scum is breaking in to your home you cannot help but be in fear of your life. This guy probably has a lengthy criminal record. Too bad the resident did not shoot & kill him, though. It would save taxpayers lot$ of money in incarceration costs. Let's hope that one of Marin's soft-on-crime judges does not let this dangerous felon off easy.

Amicita Wuss wrote:

Let's not jump to conclusions. Once, my wife thought that a burglar was breaking into our house but it was just my lover Jay trying to sneak in for a quickie. HERMIT POWER!

Hate to say it, but it sounds like Jim to me...encognito

Oh, marijuana is so harmless. It doesn't lead to burglary, larceny, child abuse, animal cruelty, welfare fraud (county, state and federal). It definitely doesn't lead to a living like a non productive, lazy, long haired, reggae listening, hemp wearing, unemployed vermin. I mean, it's just a little weed, right?

Pot Smoking Moronite wrote:

Oh, marijuana is so harmless. It doesn't lead to burglary, larceny, child abuse, animal cruelty, welfare fraud (county, state and federal). It definitely doesn't lead to a living like a non productive, lazy, long haired, reggae listening, hemp wearing, unemployed vermin. I mean, it's just a little weed, right?

It certainly is less harmful than the "War on Drugs"! There is no recorded case of a death from marijuana toxicity. Evan water is more dangerous - note the jury verdict regarding the Sacramento radio station contest that lead to the woman's death from acute water intoxication" in their "Wee for a Wii" contest. I quote that notorious "Liberal" :) William F. Buckley from the 2-26-1996 issue of the National Review "So what has the war done? It has made a mockery of an anti-drug law that is simply ignored by millions; it has induced violent felonies in pursuit of drug profits; and it is self-evidently powerless to do anything about the recent increase in marijuana use by reckless adolescents.It is a pity that men and women of the moral and intellectual character of William Bennett treat drug legalization as the moral equivalent of moral acquiescence in drug abuse, when other reasons for repealing our stupid laws are so clearly articulated, primary among them to relieve NON-drug users from the heavy load they bear in the phony and ineffective war."

Off With Their Heads wrote:

<quoted text>
It certainly is less harmful than the "War on Drugs"! There is no recorded case of a death from marijuana toxicity. Evan water is more dangerous - note the jury verdict regarding the Sacramento radio station contest that lead to the woman's death from acute water intoxication" in their "Wee for a Wii" contest. I quote that notorious "Liberal" :) William F. Buckley from the 2-26-1996 issue of the National Review "So what has the war done? It has made a mockery of an anti-drug law that is simply ignored by millions; it has induced violent felonies in pursuit of drug profits; and it is self-evidently powerless to do anything about the recent increase in marijuana use by reckless adolescents.It is a pity that men and women of the moral and intellectual character of William Bennett treat drug legalization as the moral equivalent of moral acquiescence in drug abuse, when other reasons for repealing our stupid laws are so clearly articulated, primary among them to relieve NON-drug users from the heavy load they bear in the phony and ineffective war."

Sorry anything in excess is injury to the body...nice try.

Off With Their Heads wrote:

<quoted text>
It certainly is less harmful than the "War on Drugs"! There is no recorded case of a death from marijuana toxicity. Evan water is more dangerous - note the jury verdict regarding the Sacramento radio station contest that lead to the woman's death from acute water intoxication" in their "Wee for a Wii" contest. I quote that notorious "Liberal" :) William F. Buckley from the 2-26-1996 issue of the National Review "So what has the war done? It has made a mockery of an anti-drug law that is simply ignored by millions; it has induced violent felonies in pursuit of drug profits; and it is self-evidently powerless to do anything about the recent increase in marijuana use by reckless adolescents.It is a pity that men and women of the moral and intellectual character of William Bennett treat drug legalization as the moral equivalent of moral acquiescence in drug abuse, when other reasons for repealing our stupid laws are so clearly articulated, primary among them to relieve NON-drug users from the heavy load they bear in the phony and ineffective war."

Enough said, case proven, I rest my case. Good evening to you sir!

I hate to be a nit picker but I just can't stand it when the IU distorts the facts and prints contradicting headlines. A burglary suspect was apprehended the sheriff's office said. Why is the sheriff responding if the incident is supposed to be in Mill Valley ? Because Lavern Ave. is not in Mill Valley at all, it is unincorporated Marin known as Homestead Valley.
It seems like the IU loves to sensationalize Mill Valley, and has reported many crimes and other things as being in Mill Valley when they are not. The IU is a Novato paper and their staff live up in other counties. They seem very out of touch with Marin now. I can understand that Marin is very complicated and it is hard to know what is going on unless one has lived here for decades, so I am politely asking that the Independent Journal staff please do a little research before posting headlines. When inaccurate information is printed, it scares people who should not be scared, and confuses people up north because some believe the IJ is the gospel truth

Relax.

If the article said Suspect jailed after "Homestead Valley" woman foils break-in,
most people would say, "where's that?"

Mill Valley is close enough, less than a minute drive to the Mill Valley/County line.

I'd say facts are hardly distorted here.

Nit picker.

Pulipaca wrote:

I hate to be a nit picker but I just can't stand it when the IU distorts the facts and prints contradicting headlines. A burglary suspect was apprehended the sheriff's office said. Why is the sheriff responding if the incident is supposed to be in Mill Valley ? Because Lavern Ave. is not in Mill Valley at all, it is unincorporated Marin known as Homestead Valley.
It seems like the IU loves to sensationalize Mill Valley, and has reported many crimes and other things as being in Mill Valley when they are not. The IU is a Novato paper and their staff live up in other counties. They seem very out of touch with Marin now. I can understand that Marin is very complicated and it is hard to know what is going on unless one has lived here for decades, so I am politely asking that the Independent Journal staff please do a little research before posting headlines. When inaccurate information is printed, it scares people who should not be scared, and confuses people up north because some believe the IJ is the gospel truth

I agreed with the above nitpicker writer. The Independent Yourinal constantly makes mistakes like this. I think the IY intentionally tries to denigrade Mill Valley and its residence. We tend to be a different breed and live in a tight nit community. I am not saying we don't have crime, we do, but it is just exhippies living in the hills and not bothering no one.

I'm gonna talk about a place that's got a hold on me
A little place where life feels very fine and free
Where people aren't afraid to smile
And stop and talk with you a while
And you can be as friendly as you want to be
Talkin''bout Mill Valley, that's my home

close enough wrote:

Relax.
If the article said Suspect jailed after "Homestead Valley" woman foils break-in,
most people would say, "where's that?"
Mill Valley is close enough, less than a minute drive to the Mill Valley/County line.
I'd say facts are hardly distorted here.
Nit picker.
<quoted text>

I think what the poster was trying to point out that I 'Homestead
Valley' is considered un-incorperated..it just means that it should have been the Marin
County Sherrif Dept. that should have handled the call...simply put.(forgive my mispellings).

Death N Taxes wrote:

<quoted text>.....anyone know if it's legal to shoot and kill an intruder in the back if they're in your home?

The short answer is - Yes! I took a day long course in handgun use through a local gun club, and the trainer was a well qualified instructor who also trains police SWAT police officers. He brought up this subject in the class, and said that you DO have this right. HOWEVER - these caveats apply! The perp must have broken into your premises. This is to say, if you open the door to - say - a solicitor - and they then force their way into your home - your case is dramatically diminished - because you opened the door to them! There really must be evidence of forced entry - a broken door or window. Also - you only have a right to stop - not to kill or to wound. The most effective way to do this is to place a shot in the center of mass - the center of the chest.(which most likely will kill them - effectively stopping them) You have NO right to shoot to wound! If they are not enough of a threat to stop completely - they are not enough of a threat to shoot at all - do not aim for a leg or arm. DO NOT fire a "warning" shot - legally that means that you fired first - and missed! If they have forcibly entered your home - you have every right to expect that they will turn and injure you at any moment - and so - YES - you can shoot them in the back. This advice does NOT mean that you will not have to face a trial in court. I hope that this helps!