Pixiq

That’s some quality writing in that link there.

Did the camera crew enter private property with their cameras rolling? Maybe a personal family matter should stay that way….Good for G’ma, smack their asses and kick ‘em off your property.

Looked like it is a public housing development from the buildings and the sidewalk. I could be wrong. If this is a HUD property then she is guilty of aggravated assault because the tv shooter was on a common area when assaulted.

Even if HUD property doesn’t US have privacy laws? At least here people are protected where they live and the recreational areas around that no matter who owns the land.

[Edit] Here is Finland

You guys are missing the point. If I walk up and ring your doorbell, it doesn’t automatically give you the right to hit me with a ball bat. If you do, it’s a crime. The most you could legally do would be to order me to leave your property. If I refuse, call the sheriff and have me arrested for trespassing.

Grandma is guilty. The news crew did her a real favor by not filing charges.

Put if you’re there with a camera rolling you’re already commiting a crime? Grandma was acting in self-defense?
I’m not sure how it goes in US but here privacy laws are very solid and even preparation to violate them is considered a major offense.
Please correct me if I’m wrong, as I’m talking only based on the knowledge how the law here works.

JR. way different here.I am not a lawyer but the way it was explaned to me is that if I can see you from public property or you are in an area where you have no reasonable expectation of privacy then I can shoot/film you all day long. The woman could have simply closed her door and not been on camera but she stepped outside into public view so she was fair game.

Ok so the difference is that here the yard and adjecent recreational areas are also protected.
In here it’s so tight that even public figures are protected and also vehicles where you can live are included.
Good to know the difference

JR,

I suspect that even if somebody violated your local privacy laws, that would not justify you assaulting them, much less using deadly force. Does the camera place you in imminent danger of physical harm? Would you be further harmed by the delay inherent in calling the police rather than initiating a physical confrontation? Would the Finnish authorities charge you with a crime if you injured or killed someone with a weapon because that person was violating your privacy?

Good point, in here even if you use force against a rapist commiting a crime you’ll be charged. Also if you defend yourself you’re likely going to be charged.
I’d think that the grandma was commiting an assault of some degree but I doubt that it would be considered deadly force coming from a senior citizen.