Home Defence : First round

[rugerman13]

I would like to know about other state laws regarding the first shot fired in self defence. Here, If someone breaks into my home at 03:30, and I shoot him, by law, my first round MUST be " less than lethal " or I can be charged with assualt with intent. I have a CCP, but if I keep a round chamberd, by law I am no longer defencive. To me these laws are really FUBAR.

 

[dasmi]

Shoot him with real rounds first, then something less than lethal once he's down.

 

[vitesse9]

Are you sure about that? I'd like to see the Alabama self-defense statute. Where'd you hear this?

 

[rugerman13]

I thought about that but it would be hard to explain how a 12 ga. bean bag took his head off.

 

[dasmi]

You shoot him in the head with the regular 12 guage, then in the chest with the bean bag. Or vice versa.
What I mean is, how is anyone going to know if you release 12 gague fury upon him, and then reload a bean bag, and shoot him in an undamaged area?

 

[rugerman13]

vetesse,
I was told this by one of Montgomerys Finest, ( ha ha ), after calling MPD about someone thring to break into my home.

 

[Blind Tree Frog]

Your first shot needs to non-lethal? that's not what i'm reading

Section 13A-3-23
Use of force in defense of a person.
(a) A person is justified in using physical force upon another person in order to defend himself or a third person from what he reasonably believes to be the use or imminent use of unlawful physical force by that other person, and he may use a degree of force which he reasonably believes to be necessary for the purpose. A person may use deadly physical force if the actor reasonably believes that such other person is:

(1) Using or about to use unlawful deadly physical force; or

(2) Using or about to use physical force against an occupant of a dwelling while committing or attempting to commit a burglary of such dwelling; or

(3) Committing or about to commit a kidnapping in any degree, assault in the first or second degree, burglary in any degree, robbery in any degree, forcible rape or forcible sodomy.

(b) Notwithstanding the provisions of subsection (a), a person is not justified in using deadly physical force upon another person if it reasonably appears or he knows that he can avoid the necessity of using such force with complete safety:

(1) By retreating, except that the actor is not required to retreat:

a. If he is in his dwelling or at his place of work and was not the original aggressor; or

b. If he is a peace officer or a private person lawfully assisting a peace officer at his direction.

(2), (3) Repealed by Acts 1979, No. 79-599, p. 1060, §1.

(c) Notwithstanding the provisions of subsection (a), a person is not justified in using physical force if:

(1) With intent to cause physical injury or death to another person, he provoked the use of unlawful physical force by such other person; or

(2) He was the initial aggressor, except that his use of physical force upon another person under the circumstances is justifiable if he withdraws from the encounter and effectively communicates to the other person his intent to do so, but the latter nevertheless continues or threatens the use of unlawful physical force; or

(3) The physical force involved was the product of a combat by agreement not specifically authorized by law

 

[rugerman13]

You know, it's really sad that other states know our laws better than our own LE

 

[chris in va]

Interesting you can use deadly force for kidnapping, robbery and assault.

I didn't read anywhere in there about using a 'less than lethal' method first either, although it's probably highly recommended by the LEO's.

 

[thelast2]

my first round MUST be " less than lethal "

That definitely dont sound right, and though you talked to LEO I would definitely read the state regulations and ask some other folks. The use of a firearm is considered deadly force in these cases. So a less than lethal shot, dont exactly jive well. Not to mention how the hell are you gonna be 100% sure you dont kill the guy even with a round not intended to kill there is to many variables ie. where you hit him, and does he have a preexisting medical condition. Perfect example was the person that got killed after the world series this past year during the celebration and the police were trying to control the crowd and a whats considered nonlethal shell was fired and still killed the person.

 

[seb5]

rugerman, it's not that we know your states laws. Google!! anyway, the average cop went to the academy for a few months and is not an attorney.

 

[JohnKSa]

With all due respect to LEOs

They are not generally a good source of legal advice.

 

[DrSpock]

So true...like the LEO that said its perfectly legal to own dozens of suppressors.

He just wanted to up his quota!

 

[Tamara]

o true...like the LEO that said its perfectly legal to own dozens of suppressors.

It's legal to own a million zillion jillion suppressors, as long as you have Form 4's for all of them.

 

[Guy B. Meredith]

Blind Tree Frog

Is there a location for links to such legislation for each state?

 

[accordingtome]

dasmi the more i read your post the more i like your ideas..

((Shoot him with real rounds first, then something less than lethal once he's down.)) hahahahaaa i ditto that thought

 

[Troponin]

I believe that LEO training is based upon using equal force to the threat, it's their job. No one can expect an officer to know ALL of the laws, they just should know how to do their job right and effectively. How many times do you think a judge has to go in a chamber and look up laws in his book? I went to traffic court last year as a witness and the judge had to pull out the book to find out the exact offense in puling out in front of an ambulance. Sounds simple, but it's specific.

I think my question is, can someone break into your home and without anything further, can you just shoot him? I have read stories that the police asked if the person threatened them in anyway to justify the shooting. What if they didn't threaten you, you just saw him walk through the door?

 

[dasmi]

In my book, if someone walks through my door with out my permission, that is a threat.

 

[Tamara]

It's hard to give cut 'n' dried yes-or-no answers to what are, essentially, situationally dependant questions.

Who walked through your door?
When did he (or she) walk through your door?
How did they walk through your door?
Can you articulate why the act of that person or persons walking through your door put you in fear of death or grave bodily harm to yourself or another?

Defending yourself against a stranger forcing a door at 11:30 PM will probably be easy to explain. Sparking the UPS lady walking through an open side door at 3:00 PM will probably land you in hot water.

Your home is not a Free Fire Zone.

 

[dasmi]

Ok, right, I didn't mean that I would gun down ANYONE who walked through my door, just that anyone who walks through my door uninvited is considered a threat until I determine they are not.