Justified in shooting?

Modern states do not allow the use of deadly force to defend chattel (personal property). This would include New York and California. Other states with laws closer to the common law allow it. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think Nevada allows for deadly force to retake chattel.

OK you pull on a guy breaking into your car and tell him to get on the ground. He tells you to pound sand. Now what?? Its not as simple as it sounds. Pulling a weapon is a very serious thing.
Click to expand...

Given the above scenario, in a modern state like California or New York you cannot use deadly force. Now, if the suspect told you to pound sand and then approached in a manner a reasonably prudent person would interpret as threatening to life and body, then it becomes a matter of self-defense.

However, if the suspect says, "pound sand," and then walks away, in the more modern states, the best you can do is take pictures, call 9-11 and hope the popo captures the miscreants.
 
Did an interesting FOF with Steve Moses once and a variant at the NTI.

With Steve, you went into the dwelling and find two burglars. With your firearm you challenge them. One decides (simulated) to urinate on your couch.
That was to see if you were outraged enough to shoot him.

Another walked slowly towards you with hands up and saying he doesn't understand English (in Spanish - which you might understand).

Would you shoot the guy as he came close? Should you just flee your house?

At the NTI, you find a guy vandalizing your car - you challenge and then he urinates in the gas tank (no lock). What to do?

Preferred solution in both - get out of Dodge and call the law.
 
So what happens if your holding someone at gunpoint, and they turn around and walk (or run) away?
Click to expand...
In some jurisdictions, but not in all, if you have just witnessed their commission of an extremely heinous crime of violence, and if their departure would create an immediate and very serious risk to others, and if you have no other way to stop them, you might be justified in doing something about it.

Othersise, no.

In some places, you must have been requested by a sworn officer to stop the man. You had better be able to prove it.

But suppose the perp does stay? Your risk may be just beginning.
  • You are liable for whatever harm or illness may befall him while you are detaining him or as a result of your having done so, and you are not indemnified by the community;
  • your having held him may later be judged unlawful;
  • and/or, you may be ambushed by an accomplice while you are preoccupied with him.

And, of course, he may somehow get the upper hand and kill you. Massad relates the story of how that happened to an FBI agent.

Not for me, thanks.
 
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think Nevada allows for deadly force to retake chattel.
Click to expand...

To my knowledge, there is no general right to defense of chattel in Nevada. There is, however, a refutable assumption that if someone is in or attempting to force entry to your residence(interesting side note: the statute includes semi-trailers if you happen to live in one), is there to do you harm, and the statute does cover burglary. Although I do not think it has been tested in the form of burglar carrying a tv(or something) inside a house but making their way out and being shot. The statute specifies in the residence, case law indicates that the act of forcing entry can be construed as the same.

NRS 41.095
 
Steve - scenario.

You came home and entered your house. As went into into the living room which was immediately visible from the door, you saw two guys. They were towards the back of the room and a decent distance away from you. You had a gun (blue gun, IIRC) - that's it.

What to do?

When you challenge them - one pees on the couch, grinning at you and the other slowly approaches with hands up, saying he doesn't speak English. So he doesn't respond to commands but keeps on coming. You have the door to your back - so you could flee.

The idea of the urination was to so outrage you that you didn't just run. I didn't think about it then, but maybe it was to see if another male was marking your turf - you would bark at him. :D

I didn't flee - I told them that I called the police on my cell (which I didn't have) and they should cease and behave. They didn't. As the bad guy who was approaching got to close - approaching a leveled gun - I 'shot' him.

Analysis: Could have fled. Shooting the gun before he got to close was ok. One instructor said that I didn't have a phone so what was that about. I said - they don't know that. I lied to hustle them out.

The fun in the scenario is that we are assuming that with the gun, we have the staff of power and all will obey. Not so.

Interesting choice - which makes the wife happiest? Urinated on couch or blood soaked couch and rug? Guess I'm buying a new couch and carpet.

One after shooting fact, in some cases the family won't stay in the house and will pressure you to move.
 
I can only speak to Florida on this
we have 2 particular laws that apply here
1. Castle Doctrine which states I can use deadly force to protect my home and possessions. This is further extended to my vehicle ie in a parking lot etc I can defend it and myself with deadly force legally.

I would never fire a WARNING SHOT, as this will inevitably be used against you later. At the very least you will be charged with reckless discharge of a firearm, if not worse. IF you pull your weapon it should only be to kill. Otherwise leave it holstered. You and you alone have to make that decision at the moment it occurs. The rest is conjecture. Can you take a life? Of course you can, will you? That is the real rub here isn't it?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Someone might as well be me will comment that you don't pull the weapon to kill. You pull the weapon to stop the BG from doing whatever the law allows you to use 'potentially' lethal force. But your goal is to stop, not kill.

It is assumed that the instrument used is potentially lethal and that is allowed by the appropriate law and that is an unfortunate and perhaps probable side effect of using that instrument.

There is a term for that - which I forget. Got it somewhere in a book. :confused:
 
Glen,I cant help but critique the analysis of your outcome.Where would you have fleed to?

I dont agree withshooting to kill, but I suspect dave9969's comment of the Castle law might come into play here.

Dave9969, in my state the castle doctrine only applies to your car if you are residing in it....
 
Posted by dave9969: I can only speak to Florida on this
we have 2 particular laws that apply here
Click to expand...
No. One law. 776.113.

1. Castle Doctrine which states I can use deadly force to protect my home and possessions.
Click to expand...
Nothing about possessions.

You are presumed to have a reason for fear or peril and may protect yourself and other occupants if someone enters or tries to enter your residence unlawfully and with force.

This is further extended to my vehicle ie in a parking lot etc I can defend it and myself with deadly force legally.
Click to expand...
You are presumed to have an immediate need to protect yourself and the occupants of your vehicle if someone tries to enter it unlawfully and with force while you are in it.

2. The "stand your ground law" ...
Click to expand...
That's part of the same law.
 
all of which have been to trial and precedent set.
I'm speaking for me, not you.
I said only you can make that call.
My dad once told me son any advice is worth exactly what you paid for it. As this is free, you can consider its worth what you like.

I am not here to argue with you, only to state my OPINION.
 
So what happens if your holding someone at gunpoint, and they turn around and walk (or run) away?
Click to expand...

Then the result is the same as if the guy was scared off by your alarm or your barking dog. The guy runs away.


Sgt Lumpy
 
I am not here to argue with you, only to state my OPINION.
Click to expand...
If your opinion differs in any material way from what is paraphrased in Post 51 and you are in Florida, do not rely on your opinion.

See this for a more in depth discussion.

A few Florida specifics for amplification:
  • No duty to retreat;
  • the castle doctine extends to an occupied vehicle, which can include a trailer;
  • the residence includes the porch and some other elements.
 
Last edited:
James K....right on! You know what they say about opinions and *******, everyone has one. Pretty scary what thoughts roll around in peoples heads.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I don't really see that we are saying anything different to the link you have provided. I really do not want to split hairs here.
I offered that they were laws as I understood them both castle doctrine and stand your ground allow me to use deadly force to protect myself in my home or in my vehicle. Now perhaps I should clarify my previous statement regarding parking lots, I did not say I would be in the car/truck I thought that should be implied as such. I regret leaving assumptions on the table for misconceptions as such, if I am in my car/truck I am allowed by law in FL to use deadly force to protect myself with no duty to retreat.

and again, with no law degree in my possession I can only say that these are my opinions as such, and should be regarded as that. (IE if you get in trouble don't point to me an say HE SAID I COULD) this is why I state it is my opinion.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Quote:
So what happens if your holding someone at gunpoint, and they turn around and walk (or run) away?
Then the result is the same as if the guy was scared off by your alarm or your barking dog. The guy runs away.
Click to expand...
Exactly. The whole idea of holding someone at gun point is... meaningless. At some point, it may even give the criminal a right to defend himself lawfully....
 
Koda94 - since I was at the theoretical front door - I could have run screaming into the night.

However, in some scenarios, the game makes you enter the bad place.

At the NTI, we had one where we arrived at a friend's house with pizza. Opening the door we saw blood and heard screaming, some participants said they would not enter. But you had to.
 
The whole idea of holding someone at gun point is... meaningless. At some point, it may even give the criminal a right to defend himself lawfully....
Click to expand...


The point of self defense is to DEFEND yourself.
It's not to arrest and restrain someone stealing your car stereo.


Sgt Lumpy
 
Sgt Lumpy, I think we are on the same page yes?

Glenn, I think I get the sentiment of that analysis. But it rubs me the wrong way to tell me I have to flee my own home from an intruder inside my home, especially one attacking me. I would think that if the attacker was persistent and pursued you would be putting yourself in more danger physically and legally by running out to the street. The way I see it is if you are on the street you have somewhere to retreat to, your home. When at home, you have no where to retreat to for your safety.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top