HackerTube.runGood videos, with context.
The Shotgun Booby Trap (The Case Of)
About this video
LegalEagle analyzes Katko v. Briney, the Iowa case about a homeowner whose shotgun booby trap injured a burglar, and the limits on deadly force in defending property.
Why it appears in the archive
HN cites it as a source on the illegality of lethal booby traps, including in discussions of trapping hackers.
AI-generated summary and labels from the source dataset; verify important details against the video. Source & credits.
From the Hacker News discussion
It's also illegal to set a trap in your own home in the US as well, decided when a property owner, tired of people breaking into his property while he was away, set up a shotgun booby trap that injured a burglar. [VIDEO] I wasn't sure if it is the same or similar principle in Russia or a different one that requires active care for a burglar. Unlabeled chemicals causing liability for a burglar seems extreme to me
Read original comment ↗Depending on the jurisdiction you might end up paying quite a lot of money. Potentially lethal boobytraps left in derelict buildings are mostly illegal in the US[1] and in other western countries shooting a thief is generally illegal unless you can prove fear of bodily harm since you are escalating a situation from damage to property to damage to body. While the US is rife with stand your ground laws - most of the rest of the western world finds using potentially lethal force in response to property damage abhorrent. 1. [VIDEO]
Read original comment ↗As for the USA, it seems like it would be a similar case to the one of the shotgun booby trap. [0] [0] [VIDEO]
Read original comment ↗