New Orleans would be robber takes flight after being disarmed. Legality questions

[Plumbnut]

It has been the opinion of the court here that a man does not have to be in fear of his life to defend his life.

A man was being questioned here about a self defense shooting in which he killed a teenager had stole a bike and was fleeing....teenager was known to have a gun and there had been reports that week of this kid waving a gun at people.

The police asked him if he was in fear of his life.....his answer.....'No i wasn't in fear for my life because I had my pistol and I know how to use it"

Case went to grand jury and they ruled it a justifed shootning.

law or no law thats the way it is.

Thats the way it has ALWAYS been here........the general public wants the crime to stop and people get out of jail and re offend.

The cops are tired of it....the D.A> is tired of it and the general population in south Alabama is well armed and they will use their guns. Its a known fact.

One sheriff here owns a gun store for Gods sake....very pro gun here.

I had a police officer a few years ago come out to ake a report....I was complaining about a neighbor who had about 10 dogs that barked all the time ...day and night.....want to know wht he told me???
"Well we cant do anthing but go talk to him.....but if I was you I would wait until the guy wasn't home and go poison the dogs" "We cant do anything"

I was SHOCKED at that comment from the police.

 

[Frank Ettin]

...I'm not advising anyone....just stating what i've been told by the very people who enforce the laws in my county.......

And I'm simply pointing out that no one should take you seriously. If they do so, it could get them in a lot of trouble. You really don't know what you're talking about.

That's okay for you, but I'd hate to see someone listen to you and wind up in sorry circumstances because of doing so.

...I heard of one case where the police told the homeowner..."dont answer anyones questions....call your lawyer"
Now what do you think about that?

What do I think about that?

Well, as soon as I hear someone say, "I heard of one case...." I stop paying attention because I know from over thirty years practicing law that the kind of uncorroborated, unsupported, third hand information that will follow is completely worthless.

 

[Frank Ettin]

It has been the opinion of the court here that a man does not have to be in fear of his life to defend his life.

Provide a proper citation to the case.

...A man was being questioned here about a self defense shooting in which he killed a teenager had stole a bike and was fleeing....teenager was known to have a gun and there had been reports that week of this kid waving a gun at people.

The police asked him if he was in fear of his life.....his answer.....'No i wasn't in fear for my life because I had my pistol and I know how to use it"

Case went to grand jury and they ruled it a justifed shootning...

Provide documentation.

...Thats the way it has ALWAYS been here........the general public wants the crime to stop and people get out of jail and re offend.

The cops are tired of it....the D.A> is tired of it and the general population in south Alabama is well armed and they will use their guns. Its a known fact.

One sheriff here owns a gun store for Gods sake....very pro gun here.

And all that is irrelevant drivel.

 

[Plumbnut]

In Alabama your car while parked on your property is n extension of your home.

You can protect it just the same as your home. Just like you lawnmower shed...its your home.

If you walk out and your being robbed you can shoot the person.

I will find some cases for you to look at. Be patient while I research for you.

I know of one case right now that a man was shot THROUGH the door because he was banging on it wanting thehomeowner to come outside and fight. No charges filed.

I knew the guy who was shot and killed.

Here ya go.....No charges ever filed and never will be.
http://blog.al.com/live/2011/02/man_shot_to_death_while_trying.html

 

[Frank Ettin]

In Alabama your car while parked on your property is n extension of your home.

You can protect it just the same as your home. Just like you lawnmower shed...its your home.

If you walk out and your being robbed you can shoot the person....

Understand that you need to provide proper legal authority for your claims. Newspaper articles tend to be incomplete and are of very limited value. And "so-and-so said" is of absolutely no value.

 

[Plumbnut]

Here is another case where the robber was shot at by a customer AS THE ROBBER WAS RUNNING AWAY.

Notice their not charging the customer who did the shooting but missed.

http://blog.al.com/live/2013/01/mobile_police_customer_shot_at.html

Mr Ettin,

I live here sir....I know what goes on here. With all due respect...you do not


Here ya go again...this is a fresh one. Just happened and talkaround town is the store owner is a hero.......everyone talking about it.

Guy robs the store and he store owner takes a shot at him.....then as the guy is running away the store owner follows him out the door and continues to FIRE AT THE ROBBER RUNNING AWAY.

Here read for yourself.
http://beforeitsnews.com/alternativ...labama-shoots-armed-robber-video-2635898.html

I'm not making it up Mr frank in California.

 

[Frank Ettin]

...Here ya go.....No charges ever filed and never will be.
http://blog.al.com/live/2011/02/man_shot_to_death_while_trying.html

Note exactly what the article says:

A 24-year-old man was shot to death early this morning after he tried to kick in the door of a man...

Under the laws of most States, including the law of California, if someone is in the act of trying to violently and forceably enter your home it is legally presumed that the homeowner is reasonably in fear of death and that therefore lethal force would be justified.

 

[manta49]

Here is another case where the robber was shot at by a customer AS THE ROBBER WAS RUNNING AWAY.

Notice their not charging the customer who did the shooting but missed.

All incidents are different don't think because one person was not charged that another in a similar situation won't be. If he had hit him would the outcome have being the same.

 

[Plumbnut]

Look Frank......the only guy still alive claims the guy was trying to kick the door down......I personally knew the man who was killed. If he wanted that door kicked in it would have been kicked in.

He was drunk and wanted to fight over a women.....the guy shot him through the door.

South Alabama is a little bit different than most places. Keep reading those articles....you will soon see that.

I like how in one post you say that news articles are of limited value.....then in the next post you quote what the article says in defense of your position on the subject. Nice.

 

[Frank Ettin]

...Here is another case where the robber was shot at by a customer AS THE ROBBER WAS RUNNING AWAY.

Notice their not charging the customer who did the shooting but missed.

http://blog.al.com/live/2013/01/mobile_police_customer_shot_at.html...

The article does not support your conclusions.

1. The description of the event in the article is sketchy at best. It provides insufficient information from which to conclude whether or not the person whom fired the shot could reasonably have concluded that the robber remained a potentially lethal threat.
   
   
2. The article doesn't say anything about whether the person who fired the shot was being charged or not being charged. It is completely silent on that point. The article does say that the matter continues to be investigated.
   
   
3. The article was published the day after the event. The investigation was ongoing at that time. It could take days of weeks before a decision is made about whether or not to charge the person who fired the shot.

...Guy robs the store and he store owner takes a shot at him.....then as the guy is running away the store owner follows him out the door and continues to FIRE AT THE ROBBER RUNNING AWAY.

Here read for yourself.
http://beforeitsnews.com/alternativ...labama-shoots-armed-robber-video-2635898.html...

Again, a news article with limited information. It's possible that there is evidence that the robber reasonably continued to be a lethal threat. Note also that the Sheriff said:

...the store owner will not likely face any charges, ...

So at the time a decision had not been finally made.

...Keep reading those articles....you will soon see that....

One should not rely on newspaper articles to learn and understand the law. That is not how professionals do things. Details matter a great deal, and those sources are too short on detail.

There are in fact many instances of people justifiably using lethal force in legitimate self defense. But to learn and understand what the applicable legal standard is for justification, one can not rely on newspaper articles.

 

[Frank Ettin]

...I like how in one post you say that news articles are of limited value.....then in the next post you quote what the article says in defense of your position on the subject...

Only to demonstrate that the article doesn't even support your conclusion.

 

[JimDandy]

I like how in one post you say that news articles are of limited value.....then in the next post you quote what the article says in defense of your position on the subject. Nice.

Was that the only documentation you provided? He's trying his best to debate with you with the citations you provide. If you go up a bunch of posts, you should find one where I argued a point with Vanya. I linked the Regulatory Code of Washington, and court cases. That's how you argue with a lawyer.

 

[Evan Thomas]

If you go up a bunch of posts, you should find one where I argued a point with Vanya. I linked the Regulatory Code of Washington, and court cases. That's how you argue with a lawyer.

Alas, no, it's not. If you're making claims about the laws in one state, it is completely irrelevant to cite the laws of a different state.

To prove a point about state law, you need to cite the law, or relevant court decisions, from the state you're discussing.

 

[Plumbnut]

Jimdandy,

I can only post what I can find....not everything is online but as I said in earlier posts I know the district attorney and I know a ton of cops.

Most news just gives the important details of an investigation...not the entire case file.

My point is this......if your on yor own property in south Alabama and another individul or party is on your property committing crimes they are subject to being shot. Its common knowledge here.....and no lawyer in San Francisco,Ca. can really believe that just because they find the Alabama law online thats just the way it really is.

As I said before...there are tons of laws on the books here but not enforced or they are applied very differenlty than the law actually reads.

I live here....I know the attitude here.....I've been advised by lawyers and the people who enforce the law. Hell I even work for half the judges in the county.

I'm not advising anyone to shoot or not shoot.....I am however advising would be criminals not to come to south alabama and expect the person to be prosceuted in south Alabama while you commit a crime agaisnt them or attempt to steal their property. It will never happen.

I know a smoothie shop owner who shot the neighboring shop owner over a dispute they were having about PARKING spots outside. The other shop owner went into the smoothie shop and tempers flared. The other shop owner verbally threatend to come over the counter and kick the smoothie onwers ass. The smoothie shop owner pulls out a .45 and shoots the guy in the chest. Charges were files and the case went to trial....smoothie owner had a past criminal history of dealing steroids. He ended up with probation and the guy who got shot almost died. Probation for shootng a man point blank in the chest over a verbal threat from a man half his size and 25 years older.
The reason he didn't go to prison is because he was in his store and the other shop owner came into it and started the altercation.

I dont believe the smoothie shop guy was suppose to even own a gun with his past criminal history...and that might have been what the probation was for...like 10 years probation.

Thats all for me....you guys believe what you want.

 

[JimDandy]

To prove a point about state law, you need to cite the law, or relevant court decisions, from the state you're discussing.

And as has been covered, I was discussing Washington Law after Brian mentioned different states had different laws.

I can only post what I can find....not everything is online but as I said in earlier posts I know the district attorney and I know a ton of cops

Which doesn't matter to the people who don't know those same DA's and LEO's. I can tell them Eric Holder told me so, and they don't know if I mean the AG, my neighbor with the same name, or my imaginary friend, so they can't judge how knowledgeable and unbiased my source is.

I believe just about every State's laws are online for perusal. Between Justia and a few other websites SCOTUS rulings, and many State Court rulings can be found. You just have to google, read, follow links, and read.

 

[Brian Pfleuger]

I believe just about every State's laws are online for perusal.

Indeed it is, Jim.

If Plumbnut did a simple search, all the information would be at his finger tips. Ironically, the same kind of search that keeps turning up those news articles.

Alas, he appears unwilling, so I have done the work for him.

This is the relevant Alabama statute:

http://www.legislature.state.al.us/codeofalabama/1975/13a-3-23.htm
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 herself or a third person from what he or she reasonably believes to be the use or imminent use of unlawful physical force by that other person, and he or she may use a degree of force which he or she reasonably believes to be necessary for the purpose. A person may use deadly physical force, and is legally presumed to be justified in using deadly physical force in self-defense or the defense of another person pursuant to subdivision (4), if the person reasonably believes that another person is:

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

(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.

(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.

(4) In the process of unlawfully and forcefully entering, or has unlawfully and forcefully entered, a dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle, or federally licensed nuclear power facility, or is in the process of sabotaging or attempting to sabotage a federally licensed nuclear power facility, or is attempting to remove, or has forcefully removed, a person against his or her will from any dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle when the person has a legal right to be there, and provided that the person using the deadly physical force knows or has reason to believe that an unlawful and forcible entry or unlawful and forcible act is occurring. The legal presumption that a person using deadly physical force is justified to do so pursuant to this subdivision does not apply if:

a. The person against whom the defensive force is used has the right to be in or is a lawful resident of the dwelling, residence, or vehicle, such as an owner or lessee, and there is not an injunction for protection from domestic violence or a written pretrial supervision order of no contact against that person;

b. The person sought to be removed is a child or grandchild, or is otherwise in the lawful custody or under the lawful guardianship of, the person against whom the defensive force is used;

c. The person who uses defensive force is engaged in an unlawful activity or is using the dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle to further an unlawful activity; or

d. The person against whom the defensive force is used is a law enforcement officer acting in the performance of his or her official duties.

(b) A person who is justified under subsection (a) in using physical force, including deadly physical force, and who is not engaged in an unlawful activity and is in any place where he or she has the right to be has no duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground.

(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 or she provoked the use of unlawful physical force by such other person.

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

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

(d) A person who uses force, including deadly physical force, as justified and permitted in this section is immune from criminal prosecution and civil action for the use of such force, unless the force was determined to be unlawful.

(e) A law enforcement agency may use standard procedures for investigating the use of force described in subsection (a), but the agency may not arrest the person for using force unless it determines that there is probable cause that the force used was unlawful.

 

[Plumbnut]

This example has nothign to do with guns or self defense but here goes.

Everyone knows its against the law to operate a business without a license. Some trades require a state license for the trade and business licenses.

We can all agree on that I hope.

Ok well I called the local urban development head inspector about a list as long as my arm of people advertising in the local newspaper and craigslist for work that requires a license.

Wanna know what he told me? What he had the nerve to say?

We know its against the law but the D.A. and the judges refuse to prosceute any people we could arrest for it......they say its a waste of their time and they dont have room in court for kinda violation.

But if I operate ONE day without re-newing my business license they will fine me and set a court date.

They only enforce the law on people ho actually have a license and it expires.

I replied....."then why the hell am I buying a business license when your telling me its not even enforced"

He replied back...." I dont know"

I talked to the D.A, about it and they basically said the same thing.....they dont have time to deal with it and they are behind on what they have already.

 

[JimDandy]

but here goes.

I stopped there. Anecdotes and analogies are not legal cites.

 

[Plumbnut]

Simply put.

If I'm in my house and I hear my car window break,I'm going outside with my gun.

If the person is in my car and I order them to stop and they dont.

They are getting shot. Simple as that.

Thats the only point i was trying to make.

I'm not going to wait until I see a gun and possibly get myself killed.

 

[Plumbnut]

You guys who claim to conceal carry "just in case" Just in case of what?

You really think your that quick on the draw?

Some guy walks up and pulls a gun out on you and asks for your wallet....you really think you can pull your gun and pull the trigger before the perp can simply pull his trigger? yeah Ok sure

Then you say you cant shoot the guy if he is running away...

How many tim have you been robbed? After the guy got your money and your watch did they put their gun away andhave a chat?

Hell no they turn and run......so what good is it hat you carry your gun around with you? Security blanket...make you feel good?

You rob me you better be able to out run a .45 +P thunder ranch load because thats whats gonna be chasing you.