Passive Non-Compliance

Don't compare with police officers.
They are entirely different.
At some point a police officer can take you down (really hard) for not complying with commands because the BG is then resisting arrest.
 
The anti theft device in robo cop is what every car should have factory.

Lob a small package of c4 into the car. close the doors, run and ignite.

The tactical chimp would need the trunk to be opened as that is where mine is most of the time.

A cat that poops when thrown could come in handy here.

Ben the rat and his friends come out of the sewers and do their job?

No I will whip out the mighty cell phone and dial that majical number 911 and report a guy is getting tore up by a dog in my car. Make sure you can hose it out later.

No reason for gun play here.......
 
:mad:I believe I would retreat to the house, collect my wife's ONE MILLION VOLT stun gun. :D If several jolt of that didn't change his mind, I
might just let him have the car.:rolleyes:

Walter
 
GOOD thread!

I had a similar experience last year, someone was trying to steal my lights off of my garage (don't ask me why). i came outside after i heard some scratching against the house ( around 2am) and there was a guy standing there with a screwdriver trying to get our decorative lights off of our garage! i was dumbfounded and told the guy to leave - they guy said "not until i get my lights" "you stole em' " at that point it was clear he was on something so i call local pd. he was mad at this and dropped the screwdriver and tried to tackle me! long story short he ended up in the hospital trying to convince the cops that he was going to press charges on me for stealing his lights - weird stuff out there
 
If they are already inside my truck and have already got my stereo, hell I know they would have found at least one gun in there. My girlfriend would have released the dogs and been on the 2nd story deck with shotgun without instruction. I think I would have a hard time making a lot of rational decisions with the guy actually laughing. I would not be able to handle that. It would have already have gotten to the face stomping, unless of course he wanted to try and draw that smokewagon he was trying to steal...
 
You slip to a window and tell a family member what's happening and to call 911. When you return, you decide to confront Carl Carthief to prevent further damage to your car.
Click to expand...

Fail. Once you walk away, you don't really have a right to walk back over to the guy. Lethal force should only be used to protect yourself and your family, IMO. Your car stereo shouldn't be worth killing for, no matter how insecure you feel about your manhood. The fact that you have time to walk past the criminal, knock on a window, wake someone up and talk to them about calling the police means that you did not feel that you were in danger. Returning to the place where the crime is happening means that YOU are escalating the situation, and if you then shoot the person you are at least partially at fault.

Not being required to retreat doesn't give you the right to advance and engage.
 
Not being required to retreat doesn't give you the right to advance and engage.
Click to expand...

That's true as far as self-defense goes, but the owner or lawful occupant of real property also has the right to use reasonable force to eject a trespasser (and to protect personal property), at least in CA. See the initial (and currently only) post in the thread on "California law on self-defense, defense of property, etc." that I started. Therefore an owner or lawful occupant does have the right to advance and engage a trespasser and use reasonable force to make him leave.

If the trespasser then raises the stakes to where the owner or lawful occupant reasonably fears death or great bodily injury, and the owner or lawful occupant has to use deadly force to defend himself, he would be privileged to do so.

This situation differs from the typical bar fight where the aggressor loses his right to self-defense. The trespasser has no right to be where he is and the owner or lawful occupant has every right to try to make him leave. That doesn't make the owner or lawful occupant the aggressor.

The risk that one runs in this scenario is that the facts get jumbled and the owner or lawful occupant is deemed to have used deadly force to eject a trespasser or to protect property.

A more serious risk is that the owner or lawful occupant gets seriously injured or killed by the thief.
 
In Texas, the rules change as soon as the sun goes down. You are not bound by the reasonable expectation that the bad guy will kill you once it gets dark. You may defend your property as needed. Daytime in Texas.....it is clearly not a shooting situation. Night time.....you may get a pat on the back from authorities as long as a stray slug doesn't hit your neighbor.

What I can not understand in these posts is why we gag on the lethal force issue when there are so many other ways we could defend our property? Make no mistake, I would NOT shoot this thief. At 6'1" and 260 pounds, that guy would beg me to shoot him after I got done correcting his behavior.

How about a bucket of cold water? That is using NON lethal force to protect my property. Make it so darned unpleasant for him to continue, that he will change what he's doing. If he had enough and came at me with a weapon, it is time to pop a cap and no court would convict me.

I worked for several years in the Texas prison system. There are lots of hard a-- guys who could whip me in there. For behavior correction, you find what hurts them and use that. If a guy is immune to physical pain, take away visitation with his children and he will cry like a baby. Use whatever works .................and .......it isn't always violence. Same goes with lethal force.

Flash
 
Last edited:
Since he didn't want to comply in your gunpoint orders to stop dissasembly of your car I would put a shot through his ear and when he's daised put him on the ground until the cops show up.

And if he wasn't trying to harm me or my family I wouldn't try kill him, because you are probobly puttin him in hell for eternity.
 
I think automatic lights and loud alarms are a good idea, and would eliminate most situations where shooting someone would become necessary. Anyone who doesn't run away when a loud alarm and floodlights go off is someone who you probably wouldn't have to think once about shooting.

I liked ROGER4314's idea about a bucket of cold water for about 3 seconds, and then I thought about it. Then, it seemed like a TERRIBLE idea. All cold water will do is **** someone off, and make them more violent. Tasers and pepper spray might work better... although pepper spray in your car might linger, it can't be much worse that getting out blood and brains from the seats.
 
I'm not talking to "dirt bag" at all...yet.
Leg sticking out?...my body weight hard on the door...broken leg...now I'll talk.

We will wait for the police and medical transport. If he gets aggressive, we'll wait for the coroners wagon.

I've had five break-ins of vehicles. The last one broke a $700.00 window to get a $150.00 radio...it will get ugly quick if I catch the next one!

Mark
 
I think my statement would be gee officer I was reaching into my car to get a pack of smokes and spilled my coffee. I heard a sream and noticed there was someone in my car.:D
200 degree coffee to the groin may make him change his mind. Honestly the alarm on my truck would have gone off before that more than likely detering somone from attempting to steal something out of it.
 
I wonder what this guy had in mind when he went outside?

He had a gun, and went to confront what he thought was one man, who turned out to not have a gun but who did have a knife, near his trailer parked outside. He didn't go out alone, either.

The article doesn't include much detail about the initial encounter.

Do you suppose the homeowner told the man "not to move and to raise his hands slowly?" Do you suppose that the man looked over his shoulder and said "no?"

Well, even if it did happen to start out as passive non-compliance, it didn't stay that way.

What do you think the man intended to do with the gun, anyway?

All meaningless conjecture of course, but I somehow doubt that the homeowner was chuckling to himself about how he might use hot coffee, cold water, fireworks, zip ties, ammonia, brake cleaner, etc., and more importantly, I doubt that any of those things would have had a positive effect on the outcome.

A car up the street from me was burgled the other night (one of four or five in our peaceful community that night).

There were prints from two perps on the car, and the police believe that there may have been a third person in a car.

My neighbor was angry that he had not heard the commotion and gone outside to confront them. Normal reaction, I guess. Me? I'll stay inside.

One of the ideas behind the castle doctrine is that if you are in your home, you are supposed to be safe in it. That's usually true.

Not so when you venture out to confront someone in the dark.

Doctors had to amputate the arm of a Watauga, Texas homeowner Wednesday morning after he was injured in a fight with a crook. The man interrupted a robbery attempt in front of his house and ended up getting stabbed and then shot with his own gun, reports CBS station KTVT-TV in Dallas.

Debris – including the homeowner's shotgun – from the scuffle was scattered in the yards of several homes as police continued their investigation nearly seven hours after the man first interrupted the robbery, authorities said.

According to reports, the homeowner heard some noise near his portable trailer parked outside his house in the 6000 block of Sundown Drive and went outside. His wife called 911 and woke a friend who had stayed the night at the house.

The robber, who was armed with a knife, struggled with the homeowner and his guest in the driveway. During the scuffle the homeowner dropped his gun and as the men clamored for the weapon, it went off and hit the homeowner in the arm. The house guest was also stabbed during the altercation.

Officials later said doctors amputated the man's arm because his injuries were so severe. The injury is a detrimental loss for the victim, who works as a mechanic for American Airlines and was also a part-time contractor.

One neighbor heard the gunshot, but dismissed the noise because he did not suspect it would have been a gunshot in his neighborhood.

Police continue their search for the alleged thief/attacker. "Since daylight we found a few additional items that came out of the trailer," explained Watauga Police Det. Jason Babcock. "Apparently whoever broke in to this trailer took some items and stashed them along the way in between houses."

Residents in the neighborhood say they will now be more diligent about their personal safety, including Nancy Bennett, who usually works nights and comes home in the early morning hours. She thinks the man could have been searching for an easy target.

Police believe there may have been more than one suspect. There were security cameras set up on the garage but they weren't working.

Authorities urge residents to call police instead of confronting anyone at any time of the day.
Click to expand...


http://wjz.com/watercooler/texas.stabbing.burglary.2.852306.html
 
My wife's cousin had an alarm installed in his SUV that had tweeters inside the car. One under each front seat and one under the rear. He set them off one time as a joke when I was sitting in the car. Ear piercing doesn't even begin to describe it. Not only could I not hear for about an hour, I couldn't walk straight. But once I got my equilibrium back he quit laughing. Seems like that would be a good choice, though it would have to be already installed in the car. Hit the panic button and watch him squirm.
 
BikerRN said:
BTW: I know how to legally turn that 30 minute response time in to three minutes, and it's available for anyone to do, LEO or not.
Click to expand...
Well, that'd be to have the wife call 911 again and lie, "I think my husband just shot the guy; remember when you come that the guy with the gun is the good guy.:D

Personally, here I usually have a DVD camera handy and charged, so I'd probably slam the door on his legs, and then start filming his egress. Even if he simply fled, he'd be limping. If he wanted more than that, well....
 
Wow, looks like this party is over already, but felt compelled to add my .02:


State of Nevada allows for any person to make an arrest of a suspected criminal. State of Nevada also allows for defense of ones property, which I'm sure plays along with the "reasonable amount of force". I'm not one to shoot and ask questions later, but I wouldn't be able to sit and watch, hoping the police come. I'd be hands on somewhere, probably whooping some sort of hiney.

So I'm different from the primary example. I'm not going to be gun drawn when I walk out the door, so when he looks at me and says "no", I'm going to reply "um.... YES!" and proceed to yank him from out of my car by his exposed legs, mount him and hold him like a high school wrestler (familiar turf for me).




NRS 171.104 Arrest defined; by whom made. An arrest is the taking of a person into custody, in a case and in the manner authorized by law. An arrest may be made by a peace officer or by a private person.

NRS 171.126 Arrest by private person. A private person may arrest another:

1. For a public offense committed or attempted in his presence.

2. When the person arrested has committed a felony, although not in his presence.

3. When a felony has been in fact committed, and he has reasonable cause for believing the person arrested to have committed it.
 
State of Nevada allows for any person to make an arrest of a suspected criminal.
Click to expand...

I believe you will find that all states except North Carolina provide for citizen's arrests under at least some circumstances.

There are two problems: (1) you have to know what you are doing, and how, to avoid the risk of criminal prosecution, and (2) (probably much more serious) your civil liability may exceed your net worth by several fold.

When sworn officers make an arrest, they have approved procedures and rules of engagement to help ensure not only that their actions are proper but also that the evidence protects them to the greatest extent practical from charges of wrong-doing--and they are trained. Even so, a perp and his lawyer may allege that unlawful force was used.

Both the cost of the defense (which could be stratospherical) and the cost of any out-of-court settlement or civil judgment (either of which could be astronomical) are borne by the taxpayers.

Not so for the citizen.

Twist his arm to hold him, and listen to the experts whose fees you will probably end up paying describe afterward how said action on your part has impaired his earnings ability, prevented his spouse from enjoying consortium, etc.

Hold him and discover that he is having a seizure and see what develops.

Attorneys I know strongly advise against trying a citizens arrest. I won't even think about it.

Further, before the law here was changed to shield citizens from civil liability stemming from a legally justifiable use of deadly force, attorneys advised that while one who had lawfully defended himself against forcible home invasion, for example, might easily avoid criminal sanctions (his requirement is to show reasonable doubt), the invader's family might nonetheless become wealthy at the citizen's expense (their burden is a preponderance of the evidence).

It is said that the law was amended because that had been happening. Helps in a self defense case. Not when you are detaining someone.

I'm sure that many will think the laws are unreasonable--that they favor the "BG" over the "law abiding citizen".

But we found a long, long time ago that we have to have laws to prevent one person from violently attacking another in a dispute over property, for example, to keep gangs from running our neighborhoods, to keep the crooked sheriff and his co-conspirators from extorting money from the ranchers, and to keep bad policemen from doing bad things to the "good guys." That's why each and every one of us is guaranteed due process. That's why we have police departments, prosecutors, courts, and attorneys, both civil and criminal. That's why we have contracts, deeds of title, etc., not to mention laws about theft, robbery, rape, murder, counterfeiting---and justifiable homicide.

Sorry for the rant, but a lot of people seem to believe that if they have a gun, they are always the "GGs" and that everyone else is a "BG," and that any constraints on their behavior are unreasonable.

State of Nevada also allows for defense of ones property, which I'm sure plays along with the "reasonable amount of force".
Click to expand...

Do you know of anywhere in the country in which that is not true?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top