civilian holding BG for police

[old lady new shooter]

This subject was raised in a different thread which has since been closed, and several people opined that it's usually not appropriate for a civilian to use a firearm to hold a BG for police. Here is a recent case from GA where an ex-Marine did just that, holding a BG who had just raped a woman in a grocery store bathroom stall. He drew and pointed his weapon but did not fire it. The news story makes no mention of the ex-Marine being charged with any offense. Interested to hear analysis of what differentiates this case from those deemed not appropriate.

 

[Good Ol' Boy]

What I want to say is not going to be tolerated here so I'll just say that a lot of that is optics.

While it does happen, there are numerous other videos you can find online of this same type of thing, its not really that common.

Out in public it's highly unlikely I'd ever be caught in that situation. I tend to stay out of anyone's business but my own.

 

[Kleanbore]

This subject was raised in a different thread which has since been closed, and several people opined that it's usually not appropriate for a civilian to use a firearm to hold a BG for police. Here is a recent case from GA where an ex-Marine did just that, holding a BG who had just raped a woman in a grocery store bathroom stall. He drew and pointed his weapon but did not fire it. The news story makes no mention of the ex-Marine being charged with any offense. Interested to hear analysis of what differentiates this case from those deemed not appropriate.

One: we have a sticky on that.

Two: whether there is mention of charge so far is meaningless. We have stickies on that, too.

According to the report, the perp chose to give up. had he elected to do otherwise, what do you thing the man with the gun might have done?

 

[Kleanbore]

What I want to say is not going to be tolerated here so I'll just say that a lot of that is optics.

While it does happen, there are numerous other videos you can find online of this same type of thing, its not really that common.

What are you trying to say?

 

[old lady new shooter]

One: we have a sticky on that.

Two: whether there is mention of charge so far is meaningless. We have stickies on that, too.

We have a sticky on this particular case?

 

[Jeff White]

This is all dependent on the laws where it happened. Many states have citizens arrest laws that empower private citizens with the same powers as a peace officer if they witness a crime (in almost all cases a felony crime) happen.

This usually causes no problem as long as the criminal being held for the police cooperates. If the criminal decides to run, you can’t shoot him anymore then a peace officer can.

Working in a rural area I picked up more then one criminal being held by a private citizen. Fortunately the private citizen never shot a criminal who was trying to escape. If he had then he would have been completely at the mercy of the prosecutor, grand jury and local community standards because the conditions under which anyone can legally use deadly force to prevent the escape of a fleeing felon are very limited.

If you detain someone you have no qualified immunity like a peace officer has.

In the case you brought up everything worked out and the man was called a hero, in a split second things could have gone the other way and he could be in jail, facing a civil action and having to go into hiding because of demonstrators outside his home.

 

[JohnKSa]

We have a sticky on this particular case?

No, but it is worth reading.

For one thing, it's not so much that it's always "inappropriate" for someone to try to hold a criminal for the police as it is that it's a risky proposition.

Why was this case "appropriate"? Largely because nothing went wrong.

 

[1942bull]

The former grunt did the right thing and he did the thing right. That is what matters.
Very few people ever can intervene in such matters. It is not about the will to do so, but more a bout the opportunity to do so. Being in that place at that time in rare. When you are there then the decision has to be spontaneous. Ii had. A similar situation in Camden, NJ decades go. A woman came running by me and screaming “he raped me.” I tied to calm her to get more info. She then screamed “that’s him.” A man was jogging toward the parking lot. I took off after him. He pulled a knife on me. He lost that fight and only ended up with fractured skull. The police came and took him away. I got a citation from the Camden police department. They spelled my name wrong. He was convicted as being the serial rapist of 19 women who identified him. He want to jail for a long time. I felt good.

 

[Kleanbore]

For one thing, it's not so much that it's always "inappropriate" for someone to try to hold a criminal for the police as it is that it's a risky proposition.

True, not always,

But deadly force is not appropriate--except in screen fiction.

 

[CoalCrackerAl]

I asked a state police officer about if i would hand cuff an intruder. If it was legal or not. He said as far as he's concerned, If they break in they mean harm. Shoot'em he said. But it's ok to cuff them too though.

 

[Jeff White]

I asked a state police officer about if i would hand cuff an intruder. If it was legal or not. He said as far as he's concerned, If they break in they mean harm. Shoot'em he said. But it's ok to cuff them too though.

Have you ever cuffed anyone who didn’t want to be cuffed?

 

[Kleanbore]

I asked a state police officer about if i would hand cuff an intruder. If it was legal or not. He said as far as he's concerned, If they break in they mean harm. Shoot'em he said. But it's ok to cuff them too though.

Never take what a deputy or policeman days as justification for the use of force.

For one thing, they are not qualified to advise. For another , they will not be there to testify in your behalf.

Regarding handcuffing someone, there are a number of reasons to not do so. Some are addressed in the sticky.

See Jeff's comment.

BAD IDEA.

 

[Llew Taranau]

So much that can go wrong.

I had a jerk on a bicycle kick my car and dent it. I made him stay while the ol’ lady called the cops. (I was not packing at the time.) Cop told me he could have arrested me for “kidnapping,” took statements, refused to charge the dweeb with destruction of property.

 

[Phaedrus/69]

We have to deal with the world as it is, not as we wish it was. Same for the law. Sadly in the world we inhabit we must sometimes say to ourselves not my circus, not my monkeys. There are few situations where I would jump into someone else's fight and far fewer still where I'd attempt to hold a bad guy for the cops. I have no training for it nor qualified immunity if it goes south. There are a hundred ways it can go wrong for each way it could go right.

 

[jmorris]

it's not so much that it's always "inappropriate" for someone to try to hold a criminal for the police as it is that it's a risky proposition.

Most certainly more risk with any involvement. Getting out your phone to record the event would put you at more risk than walking away. Absolutely more risk in actually getting involved.

 

[old lady new shooter]

According to the report, the perp chose to give up

Jeff has posted many times about the importance of "presence". My guess as to why the perp didn't run away is that the good guy calmly but firmly displayed presence.

 

[old lady new shooter]

This is all dependent on the laws where it happened. Many states have citizens arrest laws that empower private citizens with the same powers as a peace officer if they witness a crime (in almost all cases a felony crime) happen.

This usually causes no problem as long as the criminal being held for the police cooperates. If the criminal decides to run, you can’t shoot him anymore then a peace officer can.

Working in a rural area I picked up more then one criminal being held by a private citizen. Fortunately the private citizen never shot a criminal who was trying to escape. If he had then he would have been completely at the mercy of the prosecutor, grand jury and local community standards because the conditions under which anyone can legally use deadly force to prevent the escape of a fleeing felon are very limited.

If you detain someone you have no qualified immunity like a peace officer has.

In the case you brought up everything worked out and the man was called a hero, in a split second things could have gone the other way and he could be in jail, facing a civil action and having to go into hiding because of demonstrators outside his home.

So, "detaining" can be part of a "citizen's arrest" in a jurisdiction which provides for such, and "detaining" does not include shooting a fleeing suspect. I'm starting to understand the boundaries now. Thank you very much.

Does the question of displaying (but not shooting) a firearm to assist in the "detaining" also vary from one jurisdiction to the next, or is that automatically included where citizen's arrest is recognized?

 

[Old Dog]

In a previous lifetime, I became involved in a situation where two college boys ran after, caught and held for police a man who'd just raped a college girl that lived in their building. When the police arrived, one officer asked, "Why does this guy still look so good? (In spite of obvious bruising to his face, two black eyes, bloodied lips and smashed nose, all of which must have occurred when he fell down.) It doesn't always turn out so well, but I can see both sides of the issue.

Personally, I'd rather hold someone at gunpoint than attempt combative cuffing (I have a part in one of my eyebrows, having been hit with the single-strand tip of an open cuff, the ratchet end, when my attempt to cuff a very large and very strong man failed due to his non-compliance and rather active resistance).

All I can say is, "Let your conscience be your guide" and be prepared to live with the consequences of your actions. Glad it turned out well for the guy in the story posted by the OP.

 

[twarr1]

There was a case in my area (central Texas) a few years ago where a guy killed two neighbors, LE responded, the bad guy had the LEO pinned down behind his vehicle with a semi-auto rifle. The LEO couldn't get to his rifle in the trunk. Another neighbor shot and killed the BG from ~80 yards with his .357 revolver. He was declared a hero (rightly so in my opinion) and the procecuter declined all charges. The LEO said the guy saved his life.
Not to get on a soap box, but the bad guys know the entire system is heavily stacked in their favor, and it emboldens them. It's a slippery slope than can only get worse for the law-abiding.

 

[old lady new shooter]

No, but it is worth reading.

For one thing, it's not so much that it's always "inappropriate" for someone to try to hold a criminal for the police as it is that it's a risky proposition.

Why was this case "appropriate"? Largely because nothing went wrong.

I personally do not have the skill set to try detaining a BG and in most situations I can think of I would not involve myself. I made my post because I am always interested to learn more and the last discussion did not leave me with a clear understanding.

 

[old lady new shooter]

The former grunt did the right thing and he did the thing right. That is what matters.
Very few people ever can intervene in such matters. It is not about the will to do so, but more a bout the opportunity to do so. Being in that place at that time in rare. When you are there then the decision has to be spontaneous. Ii had. A similar situation in Camden, NJ decades go. A woman came running by me and screaming “he raped me.” I tied to calm her to get more info. She then screamed “that’s him.” A man was jogging toward the parking lot. I took off after him. He pulled a knife on me. He lost that fight and only ended up with fractured skull. The police came and took him away. I got a citation from the Camden police department. They spelled my name wrong. He was convicted as being the serial rapist of 19 women who identified him. He want to jail for a long time. I felt good.

Bravo to you.

 

[RickD427]

Private person's arrest laws vary by state so it's really hard to give a good answer.

My LEO experience is primarily from California, and I can say that in most cases where a private person attempts an arrest without LEO involvement, it generally turns out poorly. In many cases the suspect doesn't want to be arrested and the private person winds up on the losing side of the resulting physical confrontation. The other major issue is with the legalities of the private person's arrest statutes. California, like many other states, allows LEO's greater latitude in the making of arrests than it does private persons. At the risk of over-simplifying the statutes, a LEO can make a lawful arrest where there is reasonable cause to suspect that a crime has occurred, while the private person can only make an arrest where a crime has occurred. That's a big difference. Couple that with the understanding that the Kidnapping, False Imprisonment, Brandishing, Assault and Battery statutes all still apply when a private person's arrest is made. If it proves to be that no crime committed, then a private person making an unlawful arrest will likely have some criminal liability under one or more of these statutes.

This was illustrated by a case that I recently discussed on the Calguns forum. In that case a licensed land surveyor had climbed a chainlink fence to enter the backyard of a private residence. California law provides surveyors with a right of access to private property in order to perform surveying duties. The surveyor had knocked on the door of the residence to alert any occupants as to his entry, but the homeowner declined to answer. When the homeowner learned that the surveyor was in the backyard, he detained him at gunpoint while his wife summoned deputies. It was a textbook case of the homeowner acting reasonably, but incorrectly.

Guess who went to jail, and for what charges.

 

[Old Dog]

My LEO experience is primarily from California, and I can say that in most cases where a private person attempts an arrest without LEO involvement, it generally turns out poorly. In many cases the suspect doesn't want to be arrested and the private person winds up on the losing side of the resulting physical confrontation. The other major issue is with the legalities of the private person's arrest statutes. California, like many other states, allows LEO's greater latitude in the making of arrests than it does private persons. At the risk of over-simplifying the statutes, a LEO can make a lawful arrest where there is reasonable cause to suspect that a crime has occurred, while the private person can only make an arrest where a crime has occurred.

Ah, California (where I first worked in law enforcement) is an entirely different kettle of fish than at least forty other states. My gosh, it was so liberating to go work and live in a free state. Yeah, unless you've graduated from PC 832, just be a good witness...

 

[Jeff White]

Does the question of displaying (but not shooting) a firearm to assist in the "detaining" also vary from one jurisdiction to the next, or is that automatically included where citizen's arrest is recognized?

Yes it’s going to vary in different jurisdictions, as I’ve (and others) have pointed out a private citizen generally has to witness the crime happen. Where this gets problematic is where someone is running past you being chased by someone else shouting “stop him he’s a” rapist, thief etc. Being a good citizen you step in front of him and level your weapon and order him to the ground. The police arrive and investigate and discover you’re holding the wrong suspect at gunpoint. You explain yourself, apologize profusely but you’ve still opened yourself up to charges of assault with a deadly weapon, unlawful restraint and a nice fat civil suit. However if it turns out the guy you’re holding was the rapist, thief etc, you will probably be the hero even though you didn’t see the crime being committed. You pay your money and you take your chances. That’s why it’s almost never a good idea to jump into a situation.

And if the criminal you’re holding for the police gets tired of waiting and jumps up to run, you can’t shoot him. A police officer can’t either….

As to cuffing…..the cue to fight for many people is when the steel hits the wrist. I don’t know how many uneventful arrests suddenly became a fight when the cuffs started to go on. We trained in speed cuffing but sometimes you just aren’t fast enough. There is no reason to get that close to someone you are holding for the police.

 

[JohnKSa]

I personally do not have the skill set to try detaining a BG and in most situations I can think of I would not involve myself. I made my post because I am always interested to learn more and the last discussion did not leave me with a clear understanding.

Makes sense. There are certainly areas where I find pleasure in acquiring knowledge purely for its own sake. In this particular area, I decided many years ago that I was going to focus purely on the practical.

Therefore I haven't made any plans on how to use my firearm to keep a dangerous criminal from fleeing if that's what they are inclined to do. Not only is using a firearm to detain people legally risky, keeping dangerous criminals close to me is exactly the opposite of what I want.