Dealing with generator thieves

Status
Not open for further replies.
30 cal slob said: let's throw another hypothetical twist into this situation.

say the generator is used to power a ventilator (life-sustaining medical device) for a dependent person in the house. without which said person would die.

would this be a more clearcut case for using deadly force to protect property and life?

Somebody so sick should, and likely would, be moved to some kind of managed care facility.

I know of a man with Crohn's that lives in the Pacific NW from this storm. Nearly all but a few feet of his intestines have been removed from the disease, and has been on permanent TPN for the past several years as his only means of nourishment. He called the local emergency preparedness center, and he gets ice delivered.

Its uncomfortable, but people do adapt and manage to live through these temporary disasters. Some even without generators.
 
I'm all for restraint in the face of a theft, or attempted theft.
I'd set up the video cam if possible, flip on the lights, have the wife call police from a safe location, and yell at the miscreant to get out of dodge.

Of course if it got ugly and he decides against leaving, you absolutely started everything off in the right manner, and it was the miscreant that brought it down the "bad road".
 
sam1952 said: I am curious how this scenario is different then the shop owners with their AR’s defending their business’s from roof tops during the LA riots ?

Because its a riot.


With all the thought and effort put into pondering over how we'd confront them, when we're gonna shoot 'em, and how to do it. . . . I'd imagine with the same amount of effort someone probably could have told us a way by now to make it more difficult to steal, or attempt to steal, the thing in the first place.

The neighborhood watch story was the first one I saw that went that route.


I agree with Jeff on this one. Imagining and creating elaborate circumstances by which the only way to resolve them is through the use of a gun seems to be a common occurance on gun forums. I don't see it much outside of such gatherings. I certainly don't hear it discussed as often at my gun club. I don't know what it is, but its certainly a commonality in on-line communities. I would like to think its not because people are anxious to find a circumstance to use one. I have met folks like this, and we ask them not to practice with us at the range.
 
Agreed. Best place to send rounds is straight up, since they lose much of their energy and return to earth at terminal velocity (which is peanuts compared to muzzle velocity) in a more controlled manner than at any shallower angle.

Actually, the best place to send bullets is down into the dirt, but if you're somewhere paved or aren't equpped for getting sand/dirt/pebble shrapnel in the face it's not practical.
 
Because its a riot.


Both are defending personal property. Both are not immediately life threatening.

Is there a little more to the difference then Because its a riot?
 
Generator theft isn't just a hypothetical problem. This is from Florida:

...
The Highlands last season had two car burglaries, three home burglaries, a theft and a grand theft where suspects posed as Florida Power & Light workers. Two home burglaries and a generator theft were reported this season...

Source.
 
after andrew in '92 a guy 2 houses down from me shotgunned a couple of guys trying to steal his gennie from his backyard. unfortunately he was using .410 bird shot, it was all he had.

he did have them on the ground (they were bleeding pretty good but survived) when the police showed up.

ambulance picked up scumbags, police took his statement, police told him he was perfectly within his rights to defend his property due to the circumstances created by the storm.
 
"Preacher, don't the Bible have some pretty specific things to say about killing?"

"Quite specific. It is, however, somewhat fuzzier on the subject of kneecaps."
 
I'm still hearing that people are getting sick and dieing due to improper indoor heating appliances. The nothwest as I understand it was hit by a unusual storm.What is the problem with contemplating the possibility that goblins will be trying to steal and possibly do harm during a time of disaster or unrest?
The notion that stealing an emergency power supply or any other survival item is undefendable. At its base the fact that the original poster required power to operate his furnace fan shows the need to defend compound that with food preservation and as mentioned the posibility of medical requirements and I certainly would not give it up without a fight.

As far as the physical act of defending property I think its an individual choice. In this situation the home owner could be armed but maintain cover and have a backup remaining in the house. If the theft continued then notification of intent and the fact that you are armed along with the fact that the need of the emergency generator is required for your familys well being should be impressed to the thieves. The presence and use of a video recorder from inside the house would be very valuable about this time.
If the situation elevated to the point that deadly force was used by either party the film and fact that you stated the need for the generator would help in any court case as well as documenting any threatening behavior.

Our government tells us to be prepared and we join these sites to aid in the preperation. Lets try to be constructive and also keep our eyes open to the fact that disasters, riots, attacks all happen in real life as we have all seen and firearms are part of that preperation or we wouldn't be here.
 
Florida made it easy. Just put your generator on your lanai. It's a screened porch so ventilation is not a concern and they also made the lanai part of your home.

Meaning that someone on your lania is breaking and entering and shooting them is acceptable.
 
Meaning that someone on your lania is breaking and entering and shooting them is acceptable.

You beat me to it. After the 2004 hurricanes, many of us in Palm Beach County were without power for over a month. I have a well... no power means no heat, light, running water, or sanitation. A common tactic for the thieves was to break into sheds and garages and steal lawn mowers. They would then use the motor of the lawnmower to cover the fact that they were powering the generator down while everyone in the house slept.

Many neighborhoods down here organized themselves to institute round-the-clock neighborhood watches. Since most phones were out, police response was almost non-existant. Since my wife is a light sleeper, we would shut the generator down and bring it indoors during those hours we slept. If I had caught anyone trying to burglarize my or any of my neighbors' yards, or tool sheds, they would have more than likely been confronted, and ordered to leave. If they refused orders to leave, delivered by an armed person, then I would have probably seen that as an escalation, and taken whatever steps seemed reasonable at the time.

In my mind, any state of emergency (hurricane, blizzard, or whatever else you can think of) is in the same league as a Rodney King-type riot. Well-meaning neighbors band together to care for each other. Threats get dealt with, depending on the severity of the threat.
 
BullfrogKen said:
Somebody so sick should, and likely would, be moved to some kind of managed care facility.

I know of a man with Crohn's that lives in the Pacific NW from this storm. Nearly all but a few feet of his intestines have been removed from the disease, and has been on permanent TPN for the past several years as his only means of nourishment. He called the local emergency preparedness center, and he gets ice delivered.

Its uncomfortable, but people do adapt and manage to live through these temporary disasters. Some even without generators.

Bullfrog, unfortunately the truth is that the man with Crohn's disease is in a whole different situation than someone who is ventilator dependent. The man you described was able to get ice delivered to keep his TPN cool and avoid spoilage.

Now, in the case of ventilator dependent patiens in nursing home, adult foster homes, and private residences, that is a whole different ballgame. Let's assume that the Skilled Nursing Facilities (SNF's; nursing homes) are able to remain there due to permanently installed backup generators. No problem there, and not an unreasonable assumption.

For sake of argument, let's assume that in the Portland Metro area (where I dispatch for) there are 100 ventilator dependent patients who would need to be transported to a facility with appropriate backup power in the event of a massive power failure. (BTW, there are considerably more than that.) Let's also assume that these vents have an average of 2 hours of battery backup, and that said power outage happens at my company's peak staffing of approx 25 units on duty. Each transport takes approximately 1 hour, between responding, packaging the patient for transport, transporting them to a hospital, transferring care, filling out state mandated paperwork relating to the transport, etc.

Now, just for the sake of argument, let's make the situation even more favorable and assume that not one single 911 call requiring an ambulance comes in during this time (which won't happen). Let's further sweeten the situation by assuming that I can dispatch each and every single one of my ambulances to transport these ventilator patients (which I can't).

So, 25 transports per hour. 2 hours. 50 transports. That means that fully half of the vent dependent patients will die given the most ideal conditions possible. So transporting all the vent dependent patients to a managed care facility is not even remotely plausible. Getting assistance from neighboring counties won't work either, they're gonna be too busy dealing with their vent patients.

This is why any residential care facility that houses patients that are ventilator dependent has to have some type of sustained backup power (other than the units built in backup batteries).
 
I would defenitly confront them.......with my pistola hidden,ready for use if needed. To me there is nothing worse than a friggin Theif. Especially knowing you busted ass to get what ya got.
I hope you confronted them, sometimes all it takes is a little forceful yelling to get them running.......if they wanna try to Attack you,well read up on your laws in your state what justifies using deadly force.:fire:
 
Yell "Smile" and hit your flash on your camera. Your voice, and the camera flash will scare them away. That don't work. Kill them. Bury the bodies. You get a new truck.:evil: :evil:
 
Methinks Kevin was mischievously pointing out both ends of this thread's spectrum.

Or else he's a nut... ;)
 
what i would do is simple...
I would have a rifle, first round a blank. I would stand someplace defensively "correct" (preferably from my window). I would call to the theives and tell them to leave, if they continued, I would shoot a blank, and be ready for their response.
I know nobody who would approach a gun when they didnt know where it went off exactly... and if they DID approach, I most definitely would feel threatened as there is a group, at night approaching ME while being "sneaky" on my property. I cannot believe anybody in their right mind would do so. Most likely they would leave, and if the police were called, its obvious they COULDNT get there anyway, and when they finally did arrive...ignorance...
As earlier posters have stated, who in their right mind would go to the police after attempting to steal a generator, and, talk about a FUTURE deterant.
 
You beat me to it. After the 2004 hurricanes, many of us in Palm Beach County were without power for over a month. I have a well... no power means no heat, light, running water, or sanitation. A common tactic for the thieves was to break into sheds and garages and steal lawn mowers. They would then use the motor of the lawnmower to cover the fact that they were powering the generator down while everyone in the house slept.

Many neighborhoods down here organized themselves to institute round-the-clock neighborhood watches. Since most phones were out, police response was almost non-existant. Since my wife is a light sleeper, we would shut the generator down and bring it indoors during those hours we slept. If I had caught anyone trying to burglarize my or any of my neighbors' yards, or tool sheds, they would have more than likely been confronted, and ordered to leave. If they refused orders to leave, delivered by an armed person, then I would have probably seen that as an escalation, and taken whatever steps seemed reasonable at the time.

In my mind, any state of emergency (hurricane, blizzard, or whatever else you can think of) is in the same league as a Rodney King-type riot. Well-meaning neighbors band together to care for each other. Threats get dealt with, depending on the severity of the threat.

Yep. I ran my generator 24 hours a day, as did most people in my neighbor hood. Most of my neighbors are elderly and needed AC to keep from dying and I have young kids that were overheating so the AC in their room was run at night.

When the generator quit in the middle of the night it would immediately wake me up. Loud noises don't bother me when I sleep unless they stop. I would go outside with two things a gas can and a gun because the generator only quit running unless someone stopped it or it ran out of gas.
 
Ambulance driver is correct. When tshtf as is speculated often here you are on your own until the officials can catch up at which point we may not want them (think New Orleans and Katrina) but order will come and if bad things have happened it would be best to have it on tape, of course only if you are in the right. The point is again to prepare for the worst, be ready to work with your neighbors, and know that at some point the dust will settle and you will have to look at what you have done and be at peace with it.

What would the charge be if theives were caught stealing a generator from a hospital? Would it be a matter of life and death?
 
When the generator quit in the middle of the night it would immediately wake me up...

I know of a couple people that woke up and found somebody's cheap lawnmower where their generator used to be...
 
We've had a few cases here in the Upper Left of people dying or ending up in hyperbaric chambers because they ran their generators too close to the house. Carbon Monoxide is insidious and deadly.
 
XDKingslayer said;
Florida made it easy. Just put your generator on your lanai. It's a screened porch so ventilation is not a concern and they also made the lanai part of your home.

Meaning that someone on your lania is breaking and entering and shooting them is acceptable.

Maybe you could post the Florida statute that says you can shoot someone for breaking and entering? I looked on the Florida Legislature's website and I can't find it.

This is what it Florida law says about use of force:
http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&URL=Ch0776/ch0776.htm
Title XLVI
CRIMES

Chapter 776
JUSTIFIABLE USE OF FORCE



776.012 Use of force in defense of person.--A person is justified in using force, except deadly force, against another when and to the extent that the person reasonably believes that such conduct is necessary to defend himself or herself or another against the other's imminent use of unlawful force. However, a person is justified in the use of deadly force and does not have a duty to retreat if:

(1) He or she reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the imminent commission of a forcible felony; or

(2) Under those circumstances permitted pursuant to s. 776.013.

Looks to me like in Florida you can only use deadly force if you reasonably believe that such force is necessary to to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to yourself or another.

All the next chapter does is give a homeowner the presumtion that the use of deadly force was justified.

776.013 Home protection; use of deadly force; presumption of fear of death or great bodily harm.--

(1) A person is presumed to have held a reasonable fear of imminent peril of death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another when using defensive force that is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm to another if:

(a) The person against whom the defensive force was used was in the process of unlawfully and forcefully entering, or had unlawfully and forcibly entered, a dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle, or if that person had removed or was attempting to remove another against that person's will from the dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle; and

(b) The person who uses defensive force knew or had reason to believe that an unlawful and forcible entry or unlawful and forcible act was occurring or had occurred.

(2) The presumption set forth in subsection (1) 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, lessee, or titleholder, and there is not an injunction for protection from domestic violence or a written pretrial supervision order of no contact against that person; or

(b) The person or persons 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; or

(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, as defined in s. 943.10(14), who enters or attempts to enter a dwelling, residence, or vehicle in the performance of his or her official duties and the officer identified himself or herself in accordance with any applicable law or the person using force knew or reasonably should have known that the person entering or attempting to enter was a law enforcement officer.

(3) A person who is not engaged in an unlawful activity and who is attacked in any other place where he or she has a right to be has no duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground and meet force with force, including deadly force if he or she reasonably believes it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.

(4) A person who unlawfully and by force enters or attempts to enter a person's dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle is presumed to be doing so with the intent to commit an unlawful act involving force or violence.

(5) As used in this section, the term:

(a) "Dwelling" means a building or conveyance of any kind, including any attached porch, whether the building or conveyance is temporary or permanent, mobile or immobile, which has a roof over it, including a tent, and is designed to be occupied by people lodging therein at night.

(b) "Residence" means a dwelling in which a person resides either temporarily or permanently or is visiting as an invited guest.

(c) "Vehicle" means a conveyance of any kind, whether or not motorized, which is designed to transport people or property.

History.--s. 1, ch. 2005-27.

What does that mean? The American Heritage Dictionary here on my desk defines presumption this way:

pre-sump-tion (pri-zump'shan) n 1. Behavior or language that is boldly arrogant or offensive; effrontery. 2. The act of assuming or accepting as true. 3. Acceptance or belief based on reasonable evidence; assumption or supposition. 4. A condition or basis for accepting or presuming. 5. Law. An inferance as to the truth of an allegation or proposition , based on probable reasoning in the absence of or prior to actual proof or disproof. [ME presumpcion <OFr. <LLat. praesumptia < praesu'nere, to presume]

If you look at the section on immunity to prosecution for the use of force you will find:

776.032 Immunity from criminal prosecution and civil action for justifiable use of force.--

(1) A person who uses force as permitted in s. 776.012, s. 776.013, or s. 776.031 is justified in using such force and is immune from criminal prosecution and civil action for the use of such force, unless the person against whom force was used is a law enforcement officer, as defined in s. 943.10(14), who was acting in the performance of his or her official duties and the officer identified himself or herself in accordance with any applicable law or the person using force knew or reasonably should have known that the person was a law enforcement officer. As used in this subsection, the term "criminal prosecution" includes arresting, detaining in custody, and charging or prosecuting the defendant.

(2) A law enforcement agency may use standard procedures for investigating the use of force as described in subsection (1), but the agency may not arrest the person for using force unless it determines that there is probable cause that the force that was used was unlawful.

(3) The court shall award reasonable attorney's fees, court costs, compensation for loss of income, and all expenses incurred by the defendant in defense of any civil action brought by a plaintiff if the court finds that the defendant is immune from prosecution as provided in subsection (1).


The way the law actually reads, if you shoot someone in your dwelling, you are presumed to be justified. If you look at the definition of presumed as it's used in law, you will find that it's made in the absence of the facts.

Section 776.032 doesn't give you blanket immunity. All it does is forbid the police from arresting you on the spot before the investigation is completed. Section 2 gives the police the right to investigate the using standard investigative procedures. And if there is probable cause to believe that your use of force was not justified in Florida law, you might be a guest at the graybar motel.

All the castle law does is protect you from an overzealous prosecutor who may want to arrest everyone involved to send a message about using violence. It is not as the anti-gunners and apparently many gunowners believe, carte blanche to shoot anyone in your home. I think if you shoot someone without the reasonable assumption that it's necessary to use deadly force to prevent imminent use of such force against you or another, you can still go to jail and face civil judgements.

Statements that Florida law solved the problem by giving you the legal right to shoot someone for breaking and entering are not true. There is the law as it is written. Show me the part that says you can shoot someone for breaking and entering.

Jeff
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top