Armed Citizen catches arsonist in Florida fires

divemedic

New member
Local media is reporting that the arsonist ( a man named Brian Crowder- a man with a long criminal record) that is responsible for at least one of the fires has been caught- he was spotted by a citizen (that makes the citizen eligible for the large cash reward) while the arsonist was attempting to start a fire in a wooded area near the citizen's home. The citizen reportedly fired at least one shot at the suspect, who fled and was later caught by police K9 units.

The reporter is stating that charges may be pending against the citizen for firing the shots. I think the reporter is mistaken there. Florida Law specifically allows:

776.012 Use of force in defense of person.--A person is justified in using force, except deadly force, against another when and to the extent that the person reasonably believes that such conduct is necessary to defend himself or herself or another against the other's imminent use of unlawful force. However, a person is justified in the use of deadly force and does not have a duty to retreat if:

(1) He or she reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the imminent commission of a forcible felony; or

the law also defines forcible felony as:

776.08 Forcible felony.--"Forcible felony" means treason; murder; manslaughter; sexual battery; carjacking; home-invasion robbery; robbery; burglary; arson; kidnapping; aggravated assault; aggravated battery; aggravated stalking; aircraft piracy; unlawful throwing, placing, or discharging of a destructive device or bomb; and any other felony which involves the use or threat of physical force or violence against any individual.
 
I don't know any of the details, but Florida law notwithstanding, the citizen probably would have greatly simplified his life if he had not fired the shots. I have to wonder (again, with NO info available) if a cop would have fired. Anyway, I hope everything turns out okay.

Tim
 
Please find a jury of 12 in the charred Volusia County who will convict a citizen who fired on the arsonist responsible for the current situation even if they can charge him.
 
Please find a jury of 12 in the charred Volusia County who will convict a citizen who fired on the arsonist responsible for the current situation even if they can charge him.

No problem I will just find 12 old folks who retired to Florida, from NYC or North Jersey.:mad:

Its a shame the citizen missed, he could have saved the tax payers from paying room and board, or being the future victims of this turd.
 
And you could pay the hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal bills and damages for him. He'd have a difficult time proving 'imminent' threat of death or grave bodily injury.
 
Some of the locals were so upset about this arsonist, that they distributed "Wanted, Dead or Alive" posters everywhere. The arsonist will get no sympathy from the locals, and the shooter will probably not be prosecuted...certainly not convicted, if he is prosecuted.
 
The citizen should clearly be protected by the letter of the law here if the man is found guilty of starting the fire. The law is very specific in this matter and does not leave judges or overzealous prosecutors a lot of room to try and make a statement.

As for my own personal opinion, I woud not have cared if he had actually shot the guy instead of shooting at him. Arsonists, especially ones that burn wildlife habitat and people's homes, are particularly large scumbags in my opinion and the earth would not be less for their absence.
 
The law here does not require anyone to be in imminent danger, a good shoot can be for preventing the imminent commission of a forcible felony. Note that state law allows deadly force for treason or discharging of a destructive device or bomb. Throwing or placing a destructive device is also within the guidelines for employing deadly force.

A can of gasoline, or even a road flare (if thrown in such a manner to start a fire) can be considered a destructive device.

Arson is well within the law for deadly force.
 
Arson is a special crime. At least here in Colorado if you purposefully start a fire and anyone dies, whether you intended it or not, it's murder one, premeditated. And it doesn't mean if the person who dies is a firefighter or whomever.

No jury will convict him for firing those shots, not intelligent D.A. will make the case. And if they do, he has a good defense; he was trying to stop the loss of life that can ensue from a forest fire.
 
You are misreading the law. The Stand Your Ground law allows deadly force to prevent the imminent commission of a forcible felony. Arson is NOT a forcible felony. It is a crime against property and therefore not eligible for the special exemption previously mentioned.
 
Arson is NOT a forcible felony.
Really, I thought the fact that is specifically listed under the definition of "Forcible Felony" would mean exactly the opposite.

776.08 Forcible felony.--"Forcible felony" means treason; murder; manslaughter; sexual battery; carjacking; home-invasion robbery; robbery; burglary; arson; kidnapping; aggravated assault; aggravated battery; aggravated stalking; aircraft piracy; unlawful throwing, placing, or discharging of a destructive device or bomb; and any other felony which involves the use or threat of physical force or violence against any individual.
 
No problem I will just find 12 old folks who retired to Florida, from NYC or North Jersey.

The law is clear even in those "benighted" jurisdictions...the use of deadly physical force to prevent an arson is a complete defense.

No DA would ever even try to indict one of those.

WildsomuchforyourchildishslurAlaska ™
 
Do you have a source for the armed civilian bit? The best I could find online was a news article that said "police received assistance from residents".
 
776.08 Forcible felony.--"Forcible felony" means treason; murder; manslaughter; sexual battery; carjacking; home-invasion robbery; robbery; burglary; arson; kidnapping; aggravated assault; aggravated battery; aggravated stalking; aircraft piracy; unlawful throwing, placing, or discharging of a destructive device or bomb; and any other felony which involves the use or threat of physical force or violence against any individual.

How the heck are we supposed to stop treason and aircraft piracy with civilian-possessed handguns when we can't carry on planes or into government buildings? :p

I'd like to see a court case where stopping the forcible felony of treason was cited as a valid defense. And buy that guy a beer afterwards. :D
 
You are misreading the law. The Stand Your Ground law allows deadly force to prevent the imminent commission of a forcible felony. Arson is NOT a forcible felony. It is a crime against property and therefore not eligible for the special exemption previously mentioned.


Actually you're misreading it. The state of Florida defines arson as a forcible felony.
 
Deadly force is not just a gun. Deadly force has been held in some jurisdictions to include such things as kicking someone in the head.

Deadly force can be used ANYWHERE. Having a gun is not a prerequisite.
 
I'm through with this thread.

Glad there are plenty of folks that think he could kill the guy with impunity. Defense lawyers have kids who need their college educations financed! Good luck! I'm out of here! :D
 
Sorry if you disagree with the law but it is clear on the point in question. Don't get all in a tissy because someone pointed out the FL laws allow this action.

NY law allows deadly force to be used to prevent arson as well but only for an occupied structure. In NY such a shooting would NOT be legal.

State laws vary and getting in a huff because someone points out the correct law for the state in question is a waste of effort. Admitting error would be a better testament to one's character. Barring that silence. Anything else seems to be sour grapes on a cut and dried case like this.
 
Back
Top