Um...probably not. Primarily because I don't think I have the skill to hit a moving vehicle without sending rounds to dangerous places (i.e. anyplace but that vehicle).Ok,for giggles, lets say in Oregon you can. Would you shoot at a fleeing car with thugs (having just stolen cell phones) towards a BUS STOP?
You don't shoot to stop people fleeing unless in their fleeing they are likely to kill or seriously injure someone.
Maybe I'm reading it wrong, but looks as though one can use force or deadly force to stop a burglary or to attempt to stop the criminals from fleeing. In Texas...
[I said] "I hope neither of you believes that you can (or should) shoot a thief unless they present an imminent threat to life or limb."
[Nalioth said:]. . . speaking of (presumably) Washington state law. This isn't the case in all states.
It's called "justice", and it's been practiced that way for millennia (Don't believe me? Read your old religious texts).rainbowbob said:Does anyone here know if there are there other states besides Texas that allow for the summarry execution of fleeing thieves?
You don't have to pass a shooting test in Oregon?Added in the fellow's return home.
I hate to say it, but maybe we need a Range competency test for CCW holders here. If nothing else force people to socialize more, get a dose of reality.
I don't know of any state where an armed citizen can use deadly force to stop a fleeing robber who no longer constitutes a danger to the citizen or anyone else.
Shooting out tires is like the old stories about shooting the gun out of the outlaw's hand. Movie nonsense!
"By Witter's own admission, he never felt that his life or anyone else's life was in danger," Sgt. Wilson said.
"...lead the fleeing car by at least two barrel widths per 10 mph..."You don't have to pass a shooting test in Oregon?
We have to pass one in Texas, albeit it is rather easy to pass. Still, people fail it from time to time simply because they wont follow the CHL instructor's direction...
Sgt. Wilson said Roger Witter, 48, had a concealed weapons permit but he was at fault for firing the shots in a public area, even though no one was injured in the shooting.
Wilson said Witter fired in the direction of a TriMet bus stop while trying to stop the robbers and that was a risky thing to do.
In an interview with KGW, Witter said he was sure he didn't put anyone in danger and he was trying to help.
“I felt it was the right thing to do, I never pointed my weapon at anybody. The shots were controlled shots at the car,” Witter said. "I would do it again."
Police arrested Witter on several charges, including unlawful use of a weapon and reckless endangerment. He was released from the Multnomah County Jail overnight on his own recognizance.
"By Witter's own admission, he never felt that his life or anyone else's life was in danger," Sgt. Wilson said. "He was just trying to detain the suspects for police... It is important to remember that no matter how frustrated one may be with crime and the criminal justice system, it is not permissible to use deadly force in this type of situation. Those two rounds could've gone anywhere... in fact, we're still not sure where they went."
lol, I wonder if they're in the bad guy's car Maybe one of the BGs will show up at the hospital with a GSW and can be arrested.Those two rounds could've gone anywhere... in fact, we're still not sure where they went.
Police believe the suspects are also responsible for another AT&T store theft at Mall 205 in Portland, which occurred about 30 minutes prior to the theft in Gresham. An AT&T representative said in a statement that the company is taking the matter very seriously and employees are cooperating with law enforcement.
This is why you never talk to the police! If you clear leather/Kydex, shut your mouth! They are not your friends, and they are not asking you questions to help you."By Witter's own admission, he never felt that his life or anyone else's life was in danger," Sgt. Wilson said.
Sadly, Ohio law does not appear to permit the use of deadly force to protect property, even your own:Did I tell you about the sheriff's deputy that fired at a getaway truck's tires, with $20,000 of Goodrich tires aboard, stolen from a bonded/sealed railroad area? The truck was eventually stopped, driver arrested (along with several others later), and the deputy later received a commendation (along with others) from the FBI for assisting in the arrest. My how times have changed (that was in 1975-76).
Defense of Property
There must be immediate threat of serious bodily harm or death in order to use deadly force. Protecting property alone does not allow for the use of deadly force. A property owner may use reasonable, but never deadly force, when he honestly believes that the force will protect his property from harm.If a person’s property is being attacked or threatened, he may not use deadly force unless he reasonably believes it was the only way to protect himself or another from being killed or receiving serious bodily harm. Deadly force can never be used solely to protect property no matter where the threat to the property occurs.