The Castle Doctrine in Slinger: It's now a reasonable use of Deadly Force against noisy Teenagers!!!

It didn't take long for the Republicans gun crazy irresponsible castle doctrine law to take a life. The details of the Slinger shooting of 20 year old Bo Morrison is even more chilling than I imagined. And the cavalier way the police and DA Mark Bensen have approached this is astonishing. The Journal Sentinel headline offered up this jaw dropper: "Homeowner knew police, partyers were nearby before firing."

The shooter knew he wasn't being confronted by robbers or terrorists, just a bunch of noisy kids next door he got pissed off at. That's when the gun came out. 

Up for recall, Wanggaard may leave behind a deadly legacy. 

Less than five minutes before a Slinger homeowner shot and killed a man hiding in his back porch, he had been on the phone with nearby police about how they handled his earlier complaint about an underage drinking party next door, according to a prosecutor's decision that the shooting was justified under Wisconsin's new castle doctrine law.

The victim, 20-year-old Bo Morrison of West Bend, was one of about 20 people at the March 3 party. A report released by District Attorney Mark Bensen … It does raise the question of why Adam Kind chose to get a gun when officers familiar with the situation were less than 300 feet away … His attorney, Craig Mastantuono, said Kind's wife called 911 at the same time her husband went to investigate banging near his back door.

Here’s where “castle doctrine” rage, gripped Adam Kind:

The noisy gathering had awakened Kind, and he went to his neighbor's driveway about 1 a.m. to ask someone inside a car with very loud music to turn it down. After a verbal confrontation with someone else in the car, Kind returned home and called police … he heard "banging" from the back of his house. He later told police he was scared that someone from the party might be retaliating for calling the police. So instead of calling the officer back, he got his .45-caliber Colt revolver from a closet, loaded it and went to check out the noise.

All a perfectly natural and logical, reasonable response? What did he think the party goers were going to do to him, hold him hostage and kill off his family if they didn’t get safe passage out of the country? The B movie plot. He knew these were teenagers, and he was angry. They weren’t robbers, killers or terrorists.  

Morrison was on the right side of the porch, crouching between a refrigerator and a dresser. Friends said he had gone there to hide from police, not to go farther into Kind's house. Kind said … he took a couple steps toward the door to the exterior he noticed someone stand up in the dark. Kind told police he thought he said something like "Who are you," or "What are you doing," and then fired a single shot after the person raised a hand and took a step forward.

Kind didn't bother to wait for an answer.

When police arrived, they found Morrison still crouched between the dresser and refrigerator, Morrison had been shot through the heart and lung.

According to the report, Kind told police he thought he had locked the door from the porch to outside when he returned from next door after asking that the music be turned down. Bensen's analysis indicated simply opening the door would amount to a "forcible" entry by Morrison. Bensen also concluded that the late hour, the darkness, the expectation that the intruder had broken in through a locked door, the close quarters of the porch, and the fact that his wife and children were in the home all supported the castle doctrine's presumption that Kind acted reasonably in using deadly force.

Deadly force against noisy partiers next door? That's considered a reasonable use of deadly force? 

His attorney, Craig Mastantuono objected to his client's name being used in a news story, saying he's a private person.

How unfair.