Good shoot - bad shoot? Woman dragged down street by purse-snatcher

[ZeSpectre]

Here's where it gets fun... what if her gun was in her purse?!?

I thought about that too. It'd be a good reason for refusing to let go of the purse!

I've had this conversation with several females and a couple of corporate types who wanted to carry in their briefcases. Off body carry for self defense is a BAD idea.

They would point out that she had the ability to remove herself from the situation by letting go of the purse, and letting him escape.

I was a juror on a case not terribly different from this one though the woman stabbed the attacker/robber several times with a "hair spike" (it was like a set of chop sticks to hold her hair up) and drove him off. The opposing counsel's case being made was that the perp was trying to flee with her purse and presented no further threat to her so her "attack" (defense) was unwarranted as was the "pain and suffering she caused (she got the guy in an eye). This case was in NY by the way.

Well the reasonable jury jumped right on the "if he hadn't attacked her in the first place none of this would have happened" bandwagon and we came to a consensus pretty quickly. Felt extra good later when it came out that this guy had already done time for snatching purses and then hitting the houses later because he had the keys, addresses, etc!

 

[lacoochee]

As posted above would definitley be a good shoot in Florida by victim or bystander. Since she was being dragged against her will, wouldn't that constitute kidnapping as well? I am trying hard to imagine the state that would not rule this a good shoot (had it been one), you have assault, robbery, grand theft depending onthe contents of the purse, attempted kidnapping, and brandishing a deadly weapon for the purpose of robbery. Honestly all this guy forgot to do was kick a puppy, this guy is going to jail a loooong time, at least he would in Florida.

 

[Bailey Guns]

In Colorado, the Make My Day Law applies, but only when you are in your own home. In her home, an assailant with a weapon intent to to BODILY harm can be shot. Property that is endangered is not specifically a justification.

Not entirely true. The make my day law in CO has 3 criteria that have to be met:

1) There must be an uninvited or unlawful entry into a dwelling (not necessarily your own home).
2) You must have a reasonable belief that the intruder was committing, had committed or would commit a crime, in addition to the uninvited entry, against person OR PROPERTY.
3) You must have reasonable belief that the intruder MIGHT use any amount of force, no matter how slight, against any occupant of the dwelling.

If those criteria are met, any occupant of the dwelling is justified in using any degree of force, including deadly force, against the intruder.

Nothing in the make my day law requires forced entry or the presence or use of a weapon by the intruder.

Out on public property, I don't think you can simply draw and shoot.

Well, this situation was more than a mere theft, IMO. This evolved into a robbery. In CO a robbery is a violent felony. The victim would have to articulate that she felt a lesser degree of force was inadequate and she was in imminent danger of suffering death or serious bodily injury or she was the victim of a robbery:

18-1-704 Use Of Physical Force In Defense Of A Person

2. Deadly physical force may be used only if a person reasonably believes a lesser degree of force is inadequate and:

a) The actor has reasonable grounds to believe, and does believe, that he or another person is in imminent danger of being killed or of receiving great bodily injury; or

b) The other person is using or reasonably appears about to use physical force against an occupant of a dwelling or business establishment while committing or attempting to commit burglary as defined in sections 18-4-202 to 184-204; or

c) The other person is committing or reasonably appears about to commit kidnapping as defined in section 18-3-301 or 18-3-302, robbery as defined in section 184-301 or 184-302, sexual assault as set forth in section 18-3-402 or 18-3-403, or assault as defined in sections 18-3-202 or 18-3-203.

If she had a CCW permit would that change somewhat?

Probably not.

 

[JWarren]

Think about what that says about what we have permitted to be done to us in some states.

I thought I'd take this as an opportunity to let everyone know that there are still a lot of sane states out there-- a lot right here in the South.

We'd love to have people of the ilk of THR'ers as neighbors.

hint... hint.

-- John

 

[Black Knight]

Good shoot or not if I were on the criminal trial jury she would not have a thing to worry about. If on the civil trial jury the purse santcher (or estate) would be owing her big bucks for intentional infliction of mental stress. The purse snatcher, estate or family would need to go back to court for another proceeding (Bankruptcy).

 

[MiddleAgedKen]

I hear ya, JWarren. I am torn between taking you folks up on the hint and fighting a rearguard action (metaphorically, for any moles reading this), against odds, on behalf of free people, for 20% of the world's fresh water. I live near the southern shore of beautiful Lake Erie, in a state that's round at the ends and high in the middle.