Ad Here

Man Charged With Gun Crime In Self Defense Shooting

Authorities ruled the year’s first homicide in Lawrence, Indiana, as self-defense, but prosecutors have charged the man who pulled the trigger with a gun crime.

Prosecutors charged Antonio Burse, 34, with one count of unlawful possession of a firearm by a serious violent felon, local media reported. Burse shot a man who brandished a weapon over a tax dispute at Burse’s tax preparation shop on March 6.

According to reports, the disgruntled client threatened to shoot Burse’s wife because she was displeased with how long it took to complete her taxes. Burse’s wife told him about the woman’s frustration and that she had threatened her before leaving the shop.

Burse told police he retrieved a pistol from his wife’s desk, one of two she kept there, and sat in a chair by the front window.

Sometime later, a masked man — Antonio Bertram, 25 — entered the business and lifted up his sweatshirt to reveal two handguns. When the man attempted to lift one of the guns, Burse opened fire, striking the man, who later died.

Even though authorities rule the shooting self-defense, but Burse had been convictions including narcotics possession and aggravated battery and criminal confinement. If convicted of the firearms charge, Burse could face up to 12 years in prison.

source: guns.com

32 Comments

  • attli

    Even a felon has the right to armed self defense. It isn’t as if he was carrying a firearm.

    Reply

  • Rodney

    Hmmmm, Burse has a right, if not a duty to protect his wife, but with his background…well I just hope he has a good lawyer. The legal owner of the weapon and the location in which said weapon was stored might be enough to exonerate him. Prosecutors can be nasty little creatures however.

    Reply

    • Voice of Reason

      Yes, because a prosecutor’s job, contrary to everything you were ever taught, is not about seeking justice. It’s about getting convictions. A(n ex)felon with a firearm, regardless of the circumstances, is a slam-dunk. Chalk up a win for the prosecution.

      Reply

      • Rodney

        Well, yes. I do believe there some grey area there however. He used a firearm that was not his, in a place that was not his home or place of business to defend against an armed person out to commit a serious felony/murder. I could see hitting him with a misdemeanor, but a felony with possibly 12 years in jail?

        Reply

    • rottenrollin

      Hope ha has a good lawyer..,……. AND A LOT OF MONEY…….

      Reply

      • Rodney

        A good lesson on keeping you past clean enough for your future. The article fails to mention how old those old convictions were and whether Indiana has a “Old Conviction Drop Off” Law. In other words, once a felony conviction gets old enough, it drops off your record.

        Reply

  • Vince

    This has the right to protect his home and or family… The person who was killed came there to die, he walked into a mans home with a gun and deserved to die.

    Reply

  • equestrian_colt

    You Nazi wannabe Power happy control freak morons thinking you have the right to take away someone’s Gun RIGHTS indefinitely You better think again. You can suspend someones Gun Rights for whatever they got in trouble for and only till they have completed their punishments PERIOD. Every Human on the planet has the RIGHT to defend themselves PERIOD and yes that means they have the Right to have a gun. But If they use that gun in an ACTUAL TRUE CRIME then you can suspend that Right. Sorry but you Fing job titled F Tards DO NOT have the RIGHT or POWER to take away a GOD GIVEN RIGHT INDEFINITELY PERIOD. The only people that choose to follow your Nazi wannabe power happy control freak stupidity are sheeple.

    Reply

  • Joseph Morgan

    Defending his wife and anyone else in the office, as well as himself from a threat of grievous harm possibility of death. it was self defense that was already proven.

    Reply

  • KC

    I MENT, MY WIFE SHOT HIM ,,,,,

    Reply

  • Houmid

    That’s one of the reasons why once a criminal’s prison time is completed, ALL duties, responsibilities, AND benefits of full citizenship should, and must be, restored as soon as they walk out of that prison/jail. Including gun ownership and possession.

    Reply

    • TJC

      I would have to agree, but with one stipulation – violent felons must successfully finish their probation time first. Non-violent felons should have ALL rights returned after completion of their sentence.

      Reply

  • Ronald Hagler

    This is but one more example of what many of us have been saying these past 20 years: Gun control is not about justice or public safety. It is all about disarming a nation so the socialist movement will be unhindered in its quest for power, absolute power.

    Reply

    • Ronney

      Your exactly right the district attorney should be shot.

      Reply

      • Steve Harper

        Well maybe kicked out of office not shot!

        Reply

      • Christikido

        Now you can’t blame the District Attorney for doing his job and following the Law, if more actually did that Hillary would be in GITMO, along with most of the Establishment Elites! I’m sure they will plea this down to Probation, after the Public pressure hits the fan!

        Reply

        • Ronney

          Your right I’m wrong

          Reply

          • Christikido

            Thanks Ronney! We won’t know right, or wrong until all the sensationalism is gone and the facts come out, to show us the Truth! Also I like you am sick and tired of being told what to think, by Saul Alinski Acolytes and Communist Insurgents in the Media! So I understand your frustration, Have a Blessed Day:)

        • Ronald Hagler

          I agree, but if the representation is complete, he did not shoot HIS gun….it belonged to his wife. That being the case, the DA should let this one slide: after all, justice was served. When you weigh the outcome of this incident, had he not retrieved his wife’s gun, he could be lawfully mourning the loss of his wife or, perhaps, dead himself!

          Reply

    • wes

      You are exactly right. Not about gun control. IT’S ABOUT CONTROL. Never give up your weapons.

      Reply

    • Christikido

      Amen! But do agree this time that if this man was a Felon, he had no right to own the firearm he used! However that would have probably left him and his wife dead, since when seconds mattered, the very Police that arrested him were minutes away! Guess he should have had his wife shoot the perp, but she probably wasn’t handy to do so!! Great comment!

      Reply

  • frankmrpb

    Over zealous prosecutors trying to make a name for themselves .

    Reply

  • Chainsaw McGerk

    As a convicted felon from Watergate, radio host G. Gordon Liddy always said, “I no longer am allowed to possess firearms….however, Mrs. Liddy has an extensive collection.”

    Reply

  • Chainsaw McGerk

    The Lawrence, Indiana DA would do well to read the opinion in United States v. Gomez, 92 F.3d 770, 772 (9th Cir. 1996)…

    Exceptions to 18 USC§ 922(g):
    (1) he was under unlawful and present threat of death or serious bodily injury; (2) he did not recklessly place himself in a situation where he would be forced to engage in criminal conduct; (3) he had no reasonable legal alternative; and (4) there was a direct causal relationship between the criminal action and the avoidance of the threatened harm.”

    Reply

  • Steve Harper

    Being in his own place of business he should have the right to protect himself, Prosecutor is wrong here!

    Reply

  • Leon Barber

    This is the most stupid thing I have read in a long time. These prosecutors should be overruled by someone. A person should have the right to defend themselves.

    Reply

  • rottenrollin

    Burse should not be penalized for illegalities exposed during a righteous act of self defense.

    But the person responsible for editing this article should be hung by the neck until dead. That last paragraph was deplorable. NOT to be confused with HagHillary’s “deplorable.”

    Just my humble opinions, Cheers!

    Reply

  • Charles O McVey Sr.

    Colorado has a statute that even if your a convicted felon, self defense is an affirmative defense for the use by a convicted felon for the use of a firearm. Maybe Indiana should enact the same law.

    Reply

Leave a Reply