Less lethal shotgun rounds for "front yard" defense of property?

F

FirstFreedom

Moderator
In your home, in my state, the make my day law applies - BG will be eatin lead. But outside the home, it's not a free for all, of course, particularly if you move FROM inside where no one was a threat to you, TO outside, and particularly if there is no bodily injury threat, only an attempt to protect property. So in the case of BG-is-trying-to-steal-your-car-or-something-in-it, if I come out and blast them with bean bag rounds or similar less-lethals, I wonder what my criminal liability might be. Of course it depends on the particular DA and county and political climate and circumstances, but in general, are so-called "less-lethal" rounds considered to be using "deadly force", or a "dangerous weapon?", as in "assualt with dangerous weapon" charge, leveled for unjustified use, for defending property only? I should know this answer, being a lawyer, but I do not. They're not called "less-lethal" (as opposed to the old phrase "less-than-lethal") for nothing - the new phraseology implies that they CAN be lethal in some circumstances (hit in the eye perhaps etc.), but does "sometimes-lethal" or "less-lethal" amount to "deadly force"? I mean, a fork that I throw at someone *could* be lethal *sometimes*, if it hits them just right. Does that make the throwing of a fork "deadly force"? Of course, this is gonna depend on the exact type of round used, too. What are the LEAST lethal among the "less-lethal" rounds readily available to citizens (rubber balls, bean bags, what)? And, is your conclusion the same or different with paint balls? Are paintball guns LESS LETHAL STILL than even shotgun less-lethal rounds? Or the same? Because people have been killed by paintballs before too, so it's certainly possible. Bottom line, which to use for defense against car theft in front lawn/driveway - paintball gun or less-lethal shottie rounds, for minimizing legal liability yet maximizing the BG's pain experience?
 
less-leathal rounds are an option for police only for numerous reasons .Before you try to protect property make sure you know the laws in your state.Usually if you really are justified in shooting a BG you are justified in killing.
 
As I'm sure you are aware, indepedent of any criminal charges, homeowners are generally liable for any injuries that people sustain while on their property. If I go to your home, slip on your icy steps, and break my leg, you are liable much as a store would be in a similar situation. This once again would vary by state, county, etc.

Even if you were to miss completely, I would still think a BG would have cause to at least bring suit against you for "mental anguish," or some other such crap. If you hit them and they do suffer damages, then you'll be in a world of ****. I used to work in an insurance defense firm, and let's just say that many people got sued for much less innocuous things than shooting someone with a beanbag (BG or not). From a financial standpoint, you're probably best just letting them rob you. If it's pride or vengeance that is paramount to you, then let'em have it!

If you really want to shoot someone stealing your property, get a nice camera with a big telephoto lens and "shoot" them in the act. With some of the newer models you can even shoot them at full auto up to 8 shots per second! :p You won't have a body for the police to ID, but you will have their photograph, which is the next best thing.
 
Got car insurance? Got phone # of police? Stay inside & make a couple of phone calls. If you step outside & lob a "less-lethal" round at a BG, you may get a "more-lethal" round in return.
 
I would prefer to call the Police and possibly get in a defensive and protected position and let the BG know I have a gun,, I would think, more than likely he would run. If not and he shot at me, I would have no problem "terminating the threat". I hope I never get a chance to test this as the last thing I really want to do is kill someone, regardless of my "liability". But what I have in my gun will most certainly NOT be a "bean bag" round
 
Please space out your post a little bit. It would tremendously improve the readability, and more people would be inclined to reply if they weren't confronted with a giant wall of text.

Now then, if you fire a shotgun at someone, it doesn't matter if you are shooting confetti or 000 buck. It's using deadly force. However, in some states, you might be justified in using the 000 buck anyways.

The thing about less lethal ammo is that it can still be quite deadly at close range, and potentially even at front door to car distances. And then, some of it isn't intended for direct fire. For example, some of the rubber buckshot is intended to be bounced off the street and into the legs of rioters, not bounced off of the back of Charlie Crackhead's head at 12 feet.

Do you have a garage? Is it possible to park in it? That might be the best solution here.
 
They are less lethal but can be fatal. Their use is the same as any firearm and constitutes deadly force and as far as I know deadly force is not legal for the protection of property that you described anywhere in this country.

Police abide by an escalation of force continuum. Whatever force they are being confronted with they use the next higher, depending on what is available. Less lethal would be one step below lethal.
 
Not sure in your state, but we're not allowed to shoot someone over property where I live.

Granted if I'm stranded out in a blizzard and someone tries to take my car...well...
 
I forgot to mention but I'm from Boston, and there was an incident a few years ago during one of the sports riots where police fired a "less-lethal" projectile into a crowd and killed an innocent bystander. (I think an exploding pepper-spray type round hit her in the eye and exploded. Definitely not my preferred way to go).

Her family sued and got a huge settlement, and the Boston Police took a lot of flack for the incident. Granted Massachusetts is not the most welcoming place to excercise your right of self-defense, but if even the police, who are justified in using said force, have this kind of fallout, you will only fair much, much worse.
 
i'm surprised some of the "know it all tactiations" haven't railed you for saying less leathal, and talk of going outside. Truth is "tacticly" you have a better standpoint and chance for survival IF you stay in your house, and keep your shotgun loaded with standard pressure 00 buck, witch is THE best conventional anti-personal round made, hell even some germans moaned and groaned about the effectiveness of 00 in one of their wars. Alot of people will go outside, or say they will go outside and i think its fine if you have lights, it is light outside and you do your damndest to access the situation before you go trotting out there with your boom stick. No rounds short of rubber or beanbag rounds are less leathal, but there are muscled out, drugged out very large men who have taken on 00 buck to the mid region and lived long enough to do some serious damage, so what makes that beanbag any more likelier to stop the threat then say, good ole 00? Don't short yourself in a situation where gunplay comes involved, thats all i can really say.
 
Kinda what I thought; it's gonna be considered "deadly force", regardless of how much less lethal it is than a normal shotshell. I think paintball is the tool for the job.

As for staying in the house, yes, that's the best way to go, but I'm thinking of the situation where I can easily determine that it's just punk kids or unarmed thieves trying to steal the pickup or vandalize. Would be a rare occasion; daylight only. At night I'm stayin inside.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top