MisterMike
Member
Occasionally we see a story with headlines along these lines: "Pistol-Wielding Granny Defends Home, Holds Intruder for Police." We talk a lot here about the legal standards relating to self-defense, but not so much about what you do with the bad guy if he surrenders to you.
It strikes me as something that's a little tricky, and I'd like to hear your thoughts on it. Most states permit the use of deadly force to defend yourself or another from death or serious bodily harm. Others adopt the right to use deadly force to defend against the commission of a "forcible felony" or otherwise confer the right to use deadly force in the face of certain criminal acts.
Where it gets dicey is in the situation where the bad guy has surrendered. He tries to mug you, you pull your gun, and he throws up his hands in surrender. What do you do then? There's a part of me that suggests it would be a good idea to tell the guy to "Run, as fast as you can!" But, there's another part of me that tells me that it would be good for society if this guy is arrested and jailed.
The problem is that you may be dealing with different legal standards telling you how much force you can use in detaining the bad guy. For instance, in defending yourself from possible death or serious bodily harm, you're likely to be permitted the use of "deadly force," but in executing a citizen's arrest, you may be held to the standard of using "justifiable force." Most jurisdictions prohibit the use of "unnecessary force" in a citizen's arrest.
Ultimately, it comes down to this: You've got the bad guy at a gunpoint. You've satisfied the requirements of a citizens arrest (e.g., you saw a felony committed in your presence and you've told the guy he's under citizen's arrest). He gets nervous and decides to try to flee . . .
What do you do then?
It strikes me as something that's a little tricky, and I'd like to hear your thoughts on it. Most states permit the use of deadly force to defend yourself or another from death or serious bodily harm. Others adopt the right to use deadly force to defend against the commission of a "forcible felony" or otherwise confer the right to use deadly force in the face of certain criminal acts.
Where it gets dicey is in the situation where the bad guy has surrendered. He tries to mug you, you pull your gun, and he throws up his hands in surrender. What do you do then? There's a part of me that suggests it would be a good idea to tell the guy to "Run, as fast as you can!" But, there's another part of me that tells me that it would be good for society if this guy is arrested and jailed.
The problem is that you may be dealing with different legal standards telling you how much force you can use in detaining the bad guy. For instance, in defending yourself from possible death or serious bodily harm, you're likely to be permitted the use of "deadly force," but in executing a citizen's arrest, you may be held to the standard of using "justifiable force." Most jurisdictions prohibit the use of "unnecessary force" in a citizen's arrest.
Ultimately, it comes down to this: You've got the bad guy at a gunpoint. You've satisfied the requirements of a citizens arrest (e.g., you saw a felony committed in your presence and you've told the guy he's under citizen's arrest). He gets nervous and decides to try to flee . . .
What do you do then?