Can deadly force be used to recover property?

[GJSchulze]

Nonetheless, the laws relating to the use of force are what they are.

I agree with you. Reading these posts, I can see that we are discussing two different things:

1) What is the correct legal action to take if someone has already taken your property
2) "It's my property and I have the moral right to stop someone from taking it anyway I can"

The OP was asking about #1. At some time or other, we have all thought about #2, fantasized what we would do if it happened to us, replayed various scenarios, and probably realized how easy it is to get very angry when someone violates us by stealing our property.

All I can say is that if you want to stay out of jail, think about #1 and forget about #2. This is complicated because there is such a thin line between justifiably shooting someone vs. it being a felony. Just pointing a gun at someone is usually considered assault. You have as little as milliseconds to decide what to do and act. The jury will have hours to dissect your actions and will wonder why you didn't behave the way they have decided you should have. Shoot someone in the leg? Just wound them? No instructor will tell you to do that. If you shoot at someone, you shoot center mass until the threat they pose is stopped, that's what they teach because if you shoot to wound, you will probably miss.

Laws generally say that you are justified in using deadly force to stop imminent grave bodily harm or death. Many states say you can use force to stop certain felonies like robbery and arson. What happens if after you shoot someone the police or jury decides they weren't committing such a felony?

 

[blarby]

starts to walk away. Unbeknownst to the thug you are carrying concealed. You draw your weapon and demand the thug stop and return you property. He keeps walking, totally ignoring you. Are you justified if you shoot

No.

Its a great fantasy.

You could relive it over and over in the slammer.

Lets look at this another way.......

thug comes up behind you, punches you in the back of the head

And you turn, alarmed, and see a shiny object in his hand.

you shoot

Thats at least defensible.

The scenario you presented is not.


The only property on my person even approaching this level of force is my wedding ring- and if you are trying to take it off my hand, that is not the scenario you are describing. We would be engaged in a very serious physical encounter- one that I would likely consider life threatening.

 

[ranydl]

A little vague, and obviously a lot of detail has been omitted. And the detail is very important.

How about some citations or documentation so that we can look for the missing detail and verify the exact circumstances?

I knew someone would ask this....
OK, All the items I quoted were from the local newspaper in Olympia WA between 1990
and 1999. Also virtually all of the same stories were repeated on the Seattle WA TV
news stations on the same day with virtually the same quotes from the presiding law enforcement personnel and the district judges presiding the cases. Anyone with interest
in these cases will have no problem researching them in a matter on minutes.
I live in Oregon now and have a new set of laws to deal with....

 

[Frank Ettin]

....All the items I quoted were from the local newspaper in Olympia WA between 1990 and 1999. Also virtually all of the same stories were repeated on the Seattle WA TV news stations on the same day with virtually the same quotes from the presiding law enforcement personnel and the district judges presiding the cases....

Stories from the news media are not really all that helpful in understanding the law and its application. They are written by reporters who seldom have an in depth understanding of the law and legal issues. Therefore, they often omit information which is the most legally significant.

All of us here understand the deficiencies of the mainstream media when it comes to gun issues. Similar deficiencies exist with regard to the law. A media story might accurately report a result, but it is unlikely to include enough detailed information to help one understand in depth how the legal process reached that result.

...Anyone with interest in these cases will have no problem researching them in a matter on minutes...

No, that's not how it works. If you make a claim, it's up to you to support it. We should not have to go looking for the evidence to support your claims.

 

[Kleanbore]

Since the subject of the use of force in Seattle has been raised, here's an account of what happens when one goes too far. Happened around five years ago.

Douglas C. Sheets shot and killed one Jhovany Hernandez outside an apartment complex in the 9700 block of Fifth Avenue NE in the Northgate area on Sept. 24, 2008.

According to the statement of probable cause, Sheets was inside his first-floor apartment, which sits directly above his car port, when he heard what sounded like someone breaking into his car just before 7 p.m.

Sheets said he stepped out onto his balcony and saw men breaking into his car, a 2001 Toyota Camry. He then retreated into his apartment and grabbed his Russian-made Mosin-Nagant file Model 9145 M44.

The suspected car prowlers spotted Sheets and his firearm. Three of them took off in the car, turned a corner and waited for two others to catch up.

Sheets told detectives one of the two was carrying a 27-pound subwoofer he had taken from his car.

Sheets ordered the men to the ground, but they did not comply and one reached toward his waistband.

Sheets said he then pointed his rifle and fired while standing some 60 to 70 feet away from the victim, who was facing away.

The bullet went through the victim's head.

The surviving car prowler hopped into the waiting getaway car and fled, according to the document.

Sheets yelled for someone to call 911. When officers arrived, they searched the victim's clothing, as well the street and the area surrounding the apartment building, but did not find a gun.

Sheets told investigators he did not mean to kill the victim, but when he saw the victim reach for his waist band, "he wasn't going to take any chances," court documents said.

Sheets pleaded guilty to the charge of manslaughter, in exchange for a recommended sentence of 9 months work release - an exceptionally reduced term for the crime.

Prosecutors said Sheets' manslaughter charge is based on negligence for using more force than the law allows to recover property.

While the penalty was exceptionally light considering the severity of the crime, Sheets is barred from owning firearm for life.

The news links have disappeared. The above account is from a thread here on THR.

 

[Frank Ettin]

...The news links have disappeared. The above account is from a thread here on THR.

Here's the THR thread. Some news media accounts are still available here, here and here.

 

[mgkdrgn]

Deadly force to "protect" property .... maybe ... in Texas.

Deadly force to RECOVER property? No way in hell, not even in Texas.

 

[Black Butte]

"Can deadly force be used to recover property?"

Not legally.