http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2010/09/07/long-island-man-arrested-for-defending-home-with-ak-47/

I find the shotspotter references interesting. Never heard of it before. I guess that's how you know liberal firearm laws work, when they actually need sensors to report gunshots - and they go off all the time.

I read that, laughed, and then was sad...

All I can say is he showed more restraint than I possess and I won't be moving to NY anytime soon. First time hearing of ShotSpotter, and found it ironic that it goes off regularly too.

he did go out and approach them outside his house with a gun. he kinda put himself in the situation instead of waiting behind a locked door for the cops to come with his ak-47 locked and loaded.

Hmmm. "You're dead. I'm going to kill you, your family, your babies." Numerous gang members. I'd say that's life threatening in itself. The cops weren't there to protect him. I'd say he would have been justified taking out the front man. But, that's just me. NY is f'd up. In VA, he could have sprayed and prayed and not been convicted based on the story.

States like N.Y. and Commie Fornia have a shit list. When an incident occurs, they consult the shit list to see which has preference to be prosecuted......He used a gun???? That is numero uno. In a gang? That is way down on the list.
Sold Tobacco to a minor? Way up there. Sold pot to a minor? No a big deal.....nowhere on the list.
With all the liberal prosecutors and judges, good luck shooting in self defense in those states like that.

yeah but he went out onto the porch and put himseld in the confrontation

Self defense law across the country is an interesting subject. In this case, he would have had questionable justification on legal grounds in almost every State (now, lack of justification does not necessarily mean prosecution, that is up to the DA).

Castle doctrine does not extend to general land for the majority of the States that adopt it. Most require some form of roof to be over your person, and for it to be private property, or public property currently in private use (like a business - after hours or before they open). Common areas of apartments etc. generally do not apply. Lawns for sure, do not apply. So it does not fall under castle-doctrine style provisions. It also does not fall under the Texas property provisions (which honestly, I disagree with) because none of the suspects had any property on their person.

Obviously, nobody was shot, so this is under different laws anyway (potentially: felony menacing, illegal discharge of a firearm, reckless endangerment are the real possibilities) but because it was not under his roof, there really is no legal justification for it no matter where you are - but I am not speaking of "right or wrong" or moral implications, just the actual code of law - and again, it does not necessarily equate to prosecution everywhere.

If you were to be in a similar situation, recommended action: stay in or retreat into your house (where castle doctrine applies) get your family somewhere safe and on the phone with LEO and avoid doing anything to escalate, up until one of them actually attempts break in. Not because you have to play the part of the rabbit, but because escalating gang-related incidents never works out.

In terms of self-defense, most states define physical force as essentially everything other than deadly physical force. The old logic that you have to take a punch before you can defend yourself does not apply usually - if you can prove to a court that you had a reasonable belief of imminent serious bodily injury (defined in various ways across the States, but it means mostly what it sounds like it means) then you have a valid self defense claim, even if you made the first action. So, people standing on your lawn saying they are going to kill you and your family - yes, logically, you could fire first; but you would have to prove that you reasonably held that they were going to take imminent action that would have caused you or a loved one serious bodily injury (next week doesn't count).

This is not universal across the 50 States, but applies to the vast majority.

If a number of gang members show up on my property and threaten my family, there will be more than muzzles coming out the windows.

Indeed! And again - the critical element is usually a reasonable belief of imminent serious bodily injury. That means "I'm going to come back here with my friends and kill you" does not define "imminent" to the average Jury, while, "Im going to ****ing kill you and your family right now / where you stand / etc. would to most juries, even if no visual threat has been presented. All depends on your DA and the jury you would get too. And of course, the best recourse after a defense related shooting, or any line of police questioning:

Take the 5th Amendment. The 5th amendment does not give you the right to lie (people mistake this) it gives you the right to STFU. and being nothing you say can be used for your case when being interrogated (generally called interviewed by LEO) while anything you say maybe used against you - and you have hours to say something dumb, the best legal advice anyone can give a person is to shut your pie hole, no matter how awkward it seems.

Note: I don't necessarily recommend people STFU outside of getting interviewed. You might want to tell police many details (he tossed a gun in that bush) as they are on the scene. Obviously, common sense applies. People just don't realize how a line of questioning and even innocent responses of an innocent person can be used against them if something comes down to a court case.

I find there drooping drawers and flat brimmed decal hats threatening.

In some places, the verbal threat (with witnesses) is enough of a justification for the homeowner to fire on them. Warning shots are usually considered verboten. I, myself, would not have gone out onto the porch. I would have opened a window, crouched down and used the lower window sill as a shooting rest. When the police arrived, finding dead gang-bangers on my lawn would have been all the statement they would get from me. Of course the liberal left prosecutors of The People's Communist Republic Of Masachusetts would have a field day with all the SS109s they'd be collecting from the corpses and nearby structures. :) Then again, I wouldn't have been the only one pointing a rifle out of a window. There would have been two ARs and an M1 Carbine pointing out of them.