KHTS Radio Santa Clarita Radio – Santa Clarita News
A shooting that took place in Canyon Country on Friday appears to have been caused by a man defending himself and his eight-month-old baby, officials said.
Sponsored Articles
“The individual was home with his son,” said Lt. John Corina with the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department, “when the other individual began banging on his door, trying to get into his house.”
The homeowner called 9-1-1 and was on the line with a dispatcher when the man outside attempted to break in through a window, Corina said.
The homeowner, fearing for the life of himself and his son, fatally shot the person attempting to enter.
Get live news updates about Santa Clarita by following KHTS on Facebook and KHTS on Twitter“He was not arrested,” Corina said.
He added that the case has been passed to the District Attorney, who will decide whether the shooting was justified.
The suspect suffered multiple gunshot wounds and was transported to a local hospital where he was pronounced dead.
Do you have a news tip? Call us at (661) 298-1220, or drop us a line at community@hometownstation.com.
This is why the right to bear arms is a good thing. Armed citizens are a deterrent to crime. The criminal in this case is deterred forever from additional criminal acts and that cannot be argued by any intelligent rational person.
Mark you are absolutely correct. This is a perfect example of law enforcement can’t be everywhere. From the article it appears the would be intruder was not going to be deterred when unable to enter through the door he moved to the window despite it being obvious that someone was home. I am afraid that had this man not been armed the police may have been writing up the report of two fatalities including an innocent child.
Agreed. An armed society is a polite society.
Great job by the man protecting his own we all should bear arms!
Good for him! The Second Amendment is important and more citizens should be prepared like this.
The District Attorney, who will decide whether the shooting was justified? Hmmm…. The law should be….. anyone breaking into a home for what ever reason should have the expectation of being killed. That would save a lot of time tax dollars. The victim should not have to worry about being charged for killing someone trying to break into their home.
Most rational people would agree with the reality that someone breaking into an occupied dwelling has bad intentions and might face very serious consequences for doing so. Sadly, in anti-2nd Amendment Kalifornia the inmates are running the asylum, and evil firearms are magically responsible for killing people without discretion. The criminal (usually a multiple repeat-offender) often has the law on his side when he is shot during the commission of a crime. That’s why one has to exercise very sober judgement when firing in self-defense: you have to be able to PROVE that you feared for your life and there is evidence of an imminent deadly threat to you or other innocents that could only be stopped by lethal force. Otherwise a jury can side with the inmates running the asylum…
Good for you mr. If it was my home someone was trying to break into I would definitely Want to protect my family and myself. If more law abiding citizens had guns for protection. A lot Of senseless murders in this country could have been avoided. This man should not be charged with anything.
I don’t in anyway condone the break-in but Why was it so important to shoot the robber multiple times?
Russell, if you are going to shoot an intruder you want to make sure you stop him/her. Many times they get right back up after being shot and keep coming at you. Someone is breaking into my house, one of us will be found dead and I don’t plan on it being me.
Homeowner murdered this man. He sounds like he was just intoxicated and now he is dead because of some crazy constitutionalist with a gun.
Chris Dougly,
Maybe he should have had the man take a breathalyzer first, then, once he determined he was sober, then he could shoot him. Of course, if he was drunk, he can do anything and get away with it, because he was drunk, right?
While we don’t know the whole story here, if the person who was trying to enter the home was acting aggressive (ie, not pleading for help or refuge from yet another unseen attacker) in trying to enter the home…and if there is no logical explanation as to why this individual was behaving in such a fashion (ie the home owner did not know the man and that the intruder had no previous connection or interactions with the home owner), then one can reasonably assume that the intruder could be under the influence of a controlled and/or illegal substance. That being the case, one shot that may otherwise prove instantly fatal may not slow or stop the threat. Even patrol officers are trained to fire multiple times if they have made the decision to use lethal force just for this reason.
Does banging on some door justify an outright gunning him down like a wild animal trying to break in in the backyard? A warning shot or perhaps a couple to disable him would have been sufficient. If the intruder responded (after the warning shot) with a gunfire, which we are not even sure if he was armed, could perhaps justify his action but still is no reason for ending one’s life.
This father is legally protecting himself for defending his family. Its sad enough someone can get put in jail for defending his infant son. Sadly, in his shoes I’d have done the same.
This father was scared and defended his son. If he shoots and kills the intruder then there is no one to press charges. It’s unlikely this father will be taken away from his son, and put in jail if no one gets to hear the intruder’s side of the story.
I’m sure there was plenty of verbal exchange of that father telling the intruder to go away, leave him alone, this is not your house, etc. No one WANTS to kill anyone. This moron decided to break in through a window. What possible right or reason does ANYONE have to break in through another person’s window?
Opps my mistake?
I hope I never have to use my gun. If someone forces my hand, I will kill them, not wound them. I should not have to go to jail, just because someone thought they had a right to break into my house through my window.
“Gunning him down like a wild animal”? Seriously? Please, please learn something about guns first hand and not just what you read on a Brady Campaign poster. Handguns are very inefficient killers. 87% of people shot with a handgun survive. The man lives in an apartment. Where do you point the gun to fire a “warning shot” without potentially hitting an innocent neighbor? Shoot him in the arm or leg? Yeah, right. Home with your infant child, a person unknown beats on your door and then starts coming in the window, it’s panic time. Your adrenaline is dumping and you’re in fight or flight mode. Hitting an extremity is highly unlikely. You shoot at the biggest part of the target, right in the middle, and hope to stop the attack. Read about some real life military or police encounters. Even highly trained professionals lose track of time and events in a life or death situation. There are reports of a police officer returning fire at a guy that tried to kill him and he shot until his gun was empty (17 shots). He thought he’d only fired twice and that his gun had jammed, when in fact it was out of ammunition. I pray that the dad is OK and that he’s getting the emotional support he needs.
Response to Russ
You really must be a bad shooter if you missed a target with a twelve gauge Remington shotgun–a few feet away.
To be a part of the 87% survival statistics makes it even worse. And yes, I’m a seasoned hunter and I know something about guns.
This is just repeating a time worn cliche that says: “Guns don’t kill people–people kill people.” Yeah right!
You guys are all idiots! Don’t even have your story right. The media only says half the story. I’m all for “protecting” my home. This young man came home intoxicated and was trying to enter his parents home. Have you seen these apartments by Home Depot on Soledad canyon road? These apartments all look the same. Nothing fancy about them. He was entering the wrong apartment. The shooter should have called the police. There was no reason to shoot him 6 times. He should have yelled at him and told him he has a gun, but he never said anything. I hope the family files a civil law suit against this idiot!
Daniel, with these additional facts, if the homeowner didn’t announce himself and let the intruder know he was armed, then the intruder’s family probably does have a very good wrongful death case.
Someone mentioned a warning shot or shooting to injure. As was mentioned warning shots may put others in danger especially in a urban environment. Also, a warning shot sounds just like a shot aimed at them when the shooter and intended target cannot see one another and can cause the situation to escalate.
If you are choosing to shoot a firearm at someone, you have chosen to use deadly force because you feel your life is at risk. If you feel you can shoot to injure them then you don’t feel like your life is really threatened and you shouldn’t be firing the gun to begin with. Firing a gun at someone should only come when you feel like your life, or the life of someone else, is threatened by the intended target. At that point, you are shooting to stop the threat. Luck will determine if stopping them means their death or survival with a serious incapacitating wound, not your marksmanship. Shooting to wound will more than likely result in the threat still existing and the shooter left in a less than advantageous position.
How could it be safer to shoot someone behind your front door (and ultimately killing the person) than firing a warning shot. Whether you are aiming at the person or not– there is always the likelihood of innocent bystander getting struck by stray bullet.
Whether it is a verbal warning or a warning shot (as you’ve stated) could make a difference in arguing your case in the event a wrongful death case is launched against you.
It may not be a guarantee to an absolution but at least something for jurors to consider.
I stand that willfully killing the intruder is not the first choice.
Being too drunk to know which house is yours? and then breaking a window. I don’t know about you but thats pretty aggressive way to come “home” even when one is drunk. Perhaps the said individual should have put down his last few drinks and passed on them?
Thankfully this father was armed and was able to protect his baby, all while on the phone with 911.
If you are so drunk that you can’t find your way home and start doing criminal acts and get killed in the process then it may be what some people call chlorine in the gene pool.