• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Police: Man Shoots Cellphone Tower Worker

Simon W. Moon

DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 20, 2005
Messages
30,531
Reaction score
14,765
Political Leaning
Conservative
Police: Man Shoots Cellphone Tower Worker KHBS NW Arkansas
When the man saw the crew, he believed they were trespassers and shot at them with a .22 rifle, police said.
Police said it was not clear if the man will be arrested or if charges will be filed.​
Oh, the land I love, the land where I live. LOL.
These weren't people in his house. There was no threat to him. And, what's more the people were on land that they had a legal right to be on--either via ownership or easement.
But, the police don't know if they will file charges.

I would be willing to bet that the work crew and the guy who were shot are from out of town and that the shooter has lived in town for quite some time. There're some difference in how the law works in theory and how it works in practice.
 
Arkansas has Castle Laws...

(c) As used in this section, “curtilage” means the land adjoining a dwelling that is convenient for family purposes and habitually used for family purposes, but not necessarily enclosed, and includes an outbuilding that is directly and intimately connected with the dwelling and in close proximity to the dwelling.

(b) There is a legal presumption that any force or means used to accomplish a purpose described in subsection (a) of this section was exercised in a lawful and necessary manner, unless the presumption is overcome by clear and convincing evidence to the contrary.

Arkansas Castle Doctrine

This ought to make states rethink their Castle Laws...That it is legal for someone to shoot a person merely for setting foot on his property is insane.
 
Arkansas has Castle Laws...
Arkansas Castle Doctrine
This ought to make states rethink their Castle Laws...That it is legal for someone to shoot a person merely for setting foot on his property is insane.
The law you reference does not apply at for several reasons.
The law you reference doesn't give you the right to shoot someone merely for setting foot on your property.
 
Castle law does not give you the right to shoot simple tresspassers. It simply means that you have no duty to retreat in the face of a threat while upon your curtilage, and may use such force as is necessary to deal with the situation.

This man could not possibly articulate why he was threatened by the crew, based on what information I've found. Therefore this is NOT an allowed shooting under castle doctrine.

Details, however, are scant.... one story stays he has indeed been charged.

Siloam Springs Man Charged after Shooting Cell Tower Worker - Local News - Little Rock, AR - msnbc.com

Another story says the man was drunk and didn't KNOW the workers were in the celltower...

Two Cell Phone Company Workers Shot Near Siloam Springs - KFSM

... so we're short on facts that don't contradict each other. One thing we can be fairly sure of is that the shooter is either careless or an idiot.
 
I am glad the police figured whether or not to file charges. lol

Good on them for doing the right thing.
 
It's clear to me the shooter needs some jail time, snd some time in a mental facility.

Satle Law is clear, and in part says:
5-2-607. Use of deadly physical force in defense of a person.

(a) A person is justified in using deadly physical force upon another person if the person reasonably believes that the other person is:

(1) Committing or about to commit a felony involving force or violence;

(2) Using or about to use unlawful deadly physical force; or

(3)

(A) Imminently endangering the person's life or imminently about to victimize the person as described in § 9-15-103 from the continuation of a pattern of domestic abuse.

Being on or near a Cell Tower is no threat.
 
It's clear to me the shooter needs some jail time, snd some time in a mental facility.
Satle Law is clear, and in part says:
Being on or near a Cell Tower is no threat.
You are quite right. If you will notice, the version of events has been changed. The charges of criminal mischief are not appropriate for the original story--somethin akin to attempted murder or assault w/ deadly weapon. But somehow the story is now different.
The charges are appropriate for the new story I s'pose.
Things like this are the way of the world.
 
Back
Top Bottom