Here's an issue that occurred recently in Elk River:

Man points gun at ex-roomate and officer

The article makes it out to be very cut & dried with the 'gun guy' being the deranged goofball, but this situation could very easily be the opposite of what has been reported... Perhaps the two 'roommates' were the bad folks and were the aggressors and this guy was just protecting himself?

BB

Why didn't he call the cops then, when the two deranged ex roommates were calling, texting and knocking at the door?

It seems to me that the two did everything right.

That's a great shoot-don't shoot scenario for police training.

After being told to drop the gun. The owner swings the gun at the chest of the officer???????
Holy wads of restraint batman. That cop must have felt for some reason the guy wasn't going to use it?

Dingus musta never heard of changing the locks.

Seems like he was intent on creating a scene where the roomates broke in and he "defended" himself. Glad there was an officer there to mitigate that.. . . . sucks that the whole thing went down though. 'nother black eye for our community, glad though that he either didn't have a permit to carry or it was ommitted (given the usual media bias even though it isn't relevant in the dingus's home, can't imagine the media passing the opportunity to paint it like it mattered). Yuk

Didn't anyone see the part where they said his gun was only loaded with 2 rounds. 2 rounds = 2 roommates, i wonder what he was planing. im just saying that it really could have gotten ugly with out the cop being there

Yup, I think you read that the same way I did That is going to be very, very unhealthy for the Dingus come jury time. Hard to paint that any other way. I understand some folks having a thing about a round in the chamber, me personally, I have a thing about not having a round in the chamber (it makes me uncomfortable ) 'course I prefer a mag full under it. The idea of partly loading a gun. . . .

The story was certainly well painted against the owner with plenty of allegations. But...

If you are an ex-resident, presumably asked not to come back, do you really have the right to use a key that you happen to still possess to, with a LEOs assistance, enter a secured premises? Remember, that they claimed to want to get their cable box (a $20-$80 item) and return a key, which could be done easily by postal mail or some other non-confrontational manner. There is a legal process, alebeit and circuitus, expensive, and unreliable, for reclaiming property when a person fails to honor a simple request.

And so what if he didn't change his locks? Sure it'd make his home more secure. But, if he really did ask them not to return as can be inferred, it's not his fault the ex-roomates decided to force entry.

when someone gets a divorce and its a messy one its standard to have the sheriffs department there when one goes to get the stuff out.
I would still like to hear the homeowners side of things so that a fair judgment could be draw in

Thank you. You said it better than I was able to convey. Basically, I'm just throwing out the 'what-if' that maybe these two ex-roommates did not have a legal right to be trying to gain access. It could be interpreted as them 'breaking and entering'. The presence of the LEO doesn't make it any more or less legal than it would otherwise be. I can think of scenarios that fit with the owner being totally innocent: What if he was in the shower while all the knocking and phone calling was going on? Then he gets out, gets dressed, and suddenly hears his alarm going off. At this point he doesn't know the LEO is there but does know his previously hostile roommates (we have no facts about who the aggressor/instigator originally was) still have a key. I can see reasons why he may approach the door with the gun drawn at that point. Once he saw the officer he definitely should have lowered his weapon, but we don't know when that was. All we have are the reporter's version of the story. Would your heart be racing and adrenaline pumping in that scenario? Perhaps have a little tunnel vision going?

Now in all likelihood it is closer to how it was reported than not, but I'm just throwing out a what-if. This guy could be entirely in the right and the reporter may be in the wrong just because he got his facts from one party not both.

BB