HackerTube

The Shotgun Booby Trap (The Case Of)

LegalEagle0 HN recommenders · 2021–2023
1.9M views · explainer · evergreen · Uploaded 2019-11-14

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.

HN cites it as a source on the illegality of lethal booby traps, including in discussions of trapping hackers.

Law, policing & justice

Watch on YouTube

3 comments from Hacker News

@rendall2021 · in “20% of requests for Wikimedia Commons are for one image of a flower”

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

CitesView on HN
@munk-a2022 · in “Fake Dog for Home Security”

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]

CitesView on HN
@askiiart2023 · in “Ask HN: Best Way to Mess with Hackers?”

As for the USA, it seems like it would be a similar case to the one of the shotgun booby trap. [0] [0] [VIDEO]

CitesView on HN