DGU Attempted Arson

I’m up in Maine today, and I just heard this story on the news:

A 14-year-old boy was shot at a Gorham home in connection with an attempted arson around 11:45 p.m. Friday.

Gorham police said Saturday that the male teen, whose identity is being withheld, is being treated for what they believe to be non-life threatening injuries after being shot at a residence at 8 Mountview Drive.

Police said the homeowner and another person interrupted the teen as he attempted to set a fire at the home, which was occupied at the time. Police did not say who shot the juvenile.

The light-green two-story, colonial-style home was slightly damaged.

Police said the boy was taken to Maine Medical Center in Portland. No charges have been filed, but the incident is still being investigated.

A 14 year old boy doesn’t look so much like a “little Kid” when he’s trying to burn down the home your family is sleeping in.

Also arson is a violent felony, one can’t assume an arsonist of an occupied home to be unarmed or non-violent when confronted.

Glad all the good guys are safe!

This entry was posted in DGU, Safety, Self Defense. Bookmark the permalink.

0 Responses to DGU Attempted Arson

  1. RobertM says:

    I can’t speak to Maine, but in Alabama arson of an occupied dwelling is justification for lethal force in and of itself.

  2. Ben says:

    In Colorado, we are justified in using deadly force to defend against arson (as defined in our statutes), we have no requirement to confirm occupancy.

  3. Old NFO says:

    Yep, they done good! 14 or 40, if you’re trying to burn an occupied dwelling, that is attempted murder!

  4. Greg Camp says:

    But you know that this will show up on Kid Shootings. There will be some whiny comment about how a poor, misunderstood child got shot by a fat, white man. Since the identity of the child is being withheld, there isn’t even any pesky evidence to get in the way.

  5. Linoge says:

    This is a fine example of some of the irritation I have with Trayvon exploiters…

    They keep repeating the line that Zimmerman killed an “unarmed teenager”. That is strictly true, but they say that like no one has ever been beaten to death by an “unarmed teenager”, which is decidedly not true.

    In this case, yes, he was “just” a teenager… but one attempting to murder everyone in the house and perpetrate a not-insignificant amount of property damage. Using any and all means to stop him is not only recommended, it is encouraged.

    • Weerd Beard says:

      The worst are the people who point to the Doctor reports and point out that, yes Zimmerman did had multiple head wounds, he did not suffer a concussion or other brain injury.

      Remember its only a legit DGU if you let them Concuss you first!

      I guess if Trayvon had a knife it would be required for Zimmerman to have allowed him to cut him….just a little bit.

      • Rob Crawford says:

        It’s amazing how utterly… stupid… some people are on self-defense. I saw one loser claiming that: 1) Zimmerman should have had a means of non-lethal self-defense, 2) Zimmerman should have drawn BEFORE Martin attacked him, and 3) Zimmerman should have fired a warning shot.

        Never mind that “non-lethal” weapons often are lethal and are more often useless, points 2 and 3 would have been criminal acts!

  6. Roadkill says:

    There is not a single firearm in history that can match the potential for death and mayhem that can be born with a single flame. The kid is lucky to be alive. The alternative would have been well deserved.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *