Dewhitewolf
New member
NJ's law on citizen's arrest requires the arrester to have witnessed an indictable offense. The arrestee is under no obligation to submit to an order for citizen's arrest, but by clearly asserting "citizen's arrest," the arrester reduces (does not eliminate) liability. It becomes a liability on the arrestee if the arrestee resists arrest or assaults the arrester. The arrester still acts at his own peril and must be willing to defend his actions in court. Both the police, as well as the courts, will be quite curious as to why you initiated a citizen's arrest, and why you didn't use other options (such as contact police or flee the scene). They will also inquire as to your knowledge about the application of law regarding citizen's arrest. As far as drawing a weapon on somebody, as a civilian you are guilty until proven innocent.
The arrester must also use restraints that will not cause harm to the arrestee. The arrester must also transport the arrestee to a magistrate (the law is quite outdated; if it were to happen today, it would be to a county jail). However, I cannot imagine how jail officers will react to a civilian bringing in an arrested individual.
Police departments (and even private security) have specific regulations they have to follow regarding arrest procedure; some are state requirements, some are department requirements. All requirements are in place for a reason; to prevent the police from acting in a "Dirty Harry" fashion. What's to stop an armed citizen trying to make a citizen's arrest from acting in such a way?
A carry permit (whether here or anywhere else) does not give power of arrest. It only gives you the right to carry in public. Using it, whether to defend yourself against an armed threat, brandishing it to scare someone, or drawing it to try to arrest someone, becomes an action that you must be able to defend in court. Assuming that the law will be on your side is foolish.
I think the only reason that citizen's arrest existed in the first place was because of a lack of law enforcement earlier in history. I further think that NJ's current law assumes that the arrester is a former or retired police officer, and that is the only reason that it is not outlawed altogether. Just my opinions, though.
My advice is this--don't try to make a citizen's arrest unless you are willing to accept all consequences for your actions.
The arrester must also use restraints that will not cause harm to the arrestee. The arrester must also transport the arrestee to a magistrate (the law is quite outdated; if it were to happen today, it would be to a county jail). However, I cannot imagine how jail officers will react to a civilian bringing in an arrested individual.
Police departments (and even private security) have specific regulations they have to follow regarding arrest procedure; some are state requirements, some are department requirements. All requirements are in place for a reason; to prevent the police from acting in a "Dirty Harry" fashion. What's to stop an armed citizen trying to make a citizen's arrest from acting in such a way?
A carry permit (whether here or anywhere else) does not give power of arrest. It only gives you the right to carry in public. Using it, whether to defend yourself against an armed threat, brandishing it to scare someone, or drawing it to try to arrest someone, becomes an action that you must be able to defend in court. Assuming that the law will be on your side is foolish.
I think the only reason that citizen's arrest existed in the first place was because of a lack of law enforcement earlier in history. I further think that NJ's current law assumes that the arrester is a former or retired police officer, and that is the only reason that it is not outlawed altogether. Just my opinions, though.
My advice is this--don't try to make a citizen's arrest unless you are willing to accept all consequences for your actions.