My home invasion last night. What are the odds?

Discussion in 'Strategies, Tactics, and Training' started by BigBore44, Apr 30, 2021.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Good Ol' Boy

    Good Ol' Boy Member

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2016
    Messages:
    2,462
    Location:
    Mechanicsville, VA


    I posted my statement the way I did because I was trying to stay within the guidelines of the forum.

    If I had said that if I come across a stranger that somehow got into house they're getting "deaded" that would likely be frowned upon.
     
  2. old lady new shooter

    old lady new shooter Member

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2015
    Messages:
    21,109
    I personally don't have the skillset for that, there's a lot more to it than just holding the gun, as long as I exit the incident alive I'm happy. But for someone like maybe an off-duty or retired LEO, I guess there could be appropriate situations. I remember a video from a few years ago, from Arizona but before I moved here, of an armed citizen basically tying up a BG on the ground and holding a gun on him until police arrived. I'm sorry I don't remember anything about the circumstances now but watching it I did think the armed citizen did a very professional job.
     
  3. BigBore44

    BigBore44 Member

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2013
    Messages:
    4,252
    Location:
    Oklahoma
    I’m not sure of the legalities of such a situation. If the person “trespassing” on the property was simply trying to get directions back to the main road or something innocuous of the sort, and you held them at gun point, refusing to allow them to leave, that might even be considered false imprisonment or kidnapping. I haven’t read the statute.

    But, we don’t know the exact scenario. I think there would be a few determining factors like location. If he had found the guy in his house, he could probably get away with holding him. If he was outside, and expressed a desire to leave, he’d probably be best served to let him leave.

    Despite the technological advances of the last 10 years, people still knock on doors to ask directions. I’ve done it. I’ve had GPS send me to BFE and then some. And it’s sad that we have gotten to the point of locking our doors at all times and drawing firearms on someone just because they enter your yard. And I’m so thankful I don’t have to live that way. That’s not being free.
     
  4. old lady new shooter

    old lady new shooter Member

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2015
    Messages:
    21,109
    It was not a home invasion situation, nor in a residence at all. I think maybe it was an armed robbery, maybe on the street because that's where BG got tied up.

    I have security doors over all my exterior doors (and also did in my L.A. house), I can open the wood door and talk to whomever is outside with no chance of them getting in. I did once give someone directions through the door, in my old house. In Spanish. Whether they really wanted the directions or were just checking whether anyone was home I have no idea.
     
  5. Kleanbore

    Kleanbore Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2008
    Messages:
    13,468
    That can get one locked up for a while.

    "Brandishing", and "When Can I Draw"?

    Depending upon the jurisdiction, one must be justified in they use of deadly force or at least non-deadly physical force to defend against charges in such an instance.

    No one should believe that the "on my property" idea will help much.
     
    BigBore44 likes this.
  6. Kleanbore

    Kleanbore Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2008
    Messages:
    13,468
    It is not a good idea to try being "cute" an any kind of correspondence involving things serious.

    There have been cases--one of which involved a high executive whom I knew--where weasel words led to charges, conviction, and imprisonment..
     
  7. BigBore44

    BigBore44 Member

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2013
    Messages:
    4,252
    Location:
    Oklahoma
    I’m sorry, I didn’t make it clear what scenario. I meant Goo Ol Boys scenario posted above about if he came around the corner and had someone on his property.
     
  8. BigBore44

    BigBore44 Member

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2013
    Messages:
    4,252
    Location:
    Oklahoma
    It makes a difference. But it is still limited. It doesn’t give you free reign to do as you wish with regards to other people on your property.

    1. "Defensive force" includes, but shall not be limited to, pointing a weapon at a perpetrator in self-defense or in order to thwart, stop or deter a forcible felony or attempted forcible felony;
    J. A person pointing a weapon at a perpetrator in self-defense or in order to thwart, stop or deter a forcible felony or attempted forcible felony shall not be deemed guilty of committing a criminal act.

    F. A person who uses defensive force, as permitted pursuant to the provisions of subsections A, B, D and E of this section, is justified in using such defensive force and is immune from criminal prosecution and civil action for the use of such defensive force. As used in this subsection, the term "criminal prosecution" includes charging or prosecuting the defendant.

    As was somewhat discussed in the sticky. Though I didn’t read all 4 pages. Basically you cannot brandish a weapon as a threat. But you may to thwart a threat.
     
  9. Kleanbore

    Kleanbore Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2008
    Messages:
    13,468
    Some time ago, when an increasing number of Arizonans were being jailed for long periods after having brought the threat of a firearm into play after having been physically threatened, but without being justified in shooting, the Arizona legislature passed a law permitting the lawful "Defensive Display" of a Firearm". "Defensive display" could involve patting one's pocket to imply the presence of a firearm. The threshold for justification was lowered very significantly.

    More and more states have followed suit. with variations on the theme.

    Andrew Branca recently had an LoSD blog post on the subject The code section quoted above were mentioned.

    The words sound great, but it is important to understand that deciding whether it had been reasonably necessary do something overt to prevent a forcible felony is not up to the actor.

    It is up to the court. And so the matter of the determination of immunity.

    In the case of the latter, procedures vary a bit among jurisdictions, but in general, the defendant must prove, by a preponderance of the evidence, that his action had been reasonable and immediately necessary.

    His evidence will be balanced against that produced by the state.
     
    BigBore44 likes this.
  10. GEM

    GEM Moderator Emeritus

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2004
    Messages:
    9,886
    Location:
    WNY
    How are folks going to 'detain' someone. That's BS. I will say that I am leaving your house. You say : NO. Going to wrestle or shoot me? You can use force, threaten force to stop a crime (depending on nuances as discussed above). Stopping some one from fleeing - nope (unless we get into Tennessee, Garner issues).

    Police detain by going hands on for the most part. Think this through.
     
    Jeff White, JeffG and BigBore44 like this.
  11. Kleanbore

    Kleanbore Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2008
    Messages:
    13,468
    Glenn nailed it. The only thing I would add is that even if the person should comply, the detainer will be extremely vulnerable to ambush by an accomplice.

    We do have a sticky on this.
     
  12. BigBore44

    BigBore44 Member

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2013
    Messages:
    4,252
    Location:
    Oklahoma
    There are cases every year in NRA magazine section “The Armed Citizen” where people detain an offender, inside their house, at gun point, until LE arrives.

    It is not outside the realm of possibility that you can do it. It’s up to the specific individual, in the specific scenario, to decide if it’s the right idea for them or not. And since there are an infinite number of scenarios, you CAN make a blanket statement about detaining someone in your home. But that doesn’t make it correct all the time. It also doesn’t make it wrong all the time.

    When I first saw Jimmy and recognized he was a mental patient, I stated I was about to put hands on him when I heard/saw the deputy. Had Jimmy been alone, I would have detained him, physically if necessary, until LE arrived. I not only have the training, I have the first hand experience on how to do such things. Jimmy was not physically threat to me. But I also could not, in good conscience, let Jimmy leave my home without being in police custody. His mental state was a threat to his safety and possibly other residents of other homes. My detention of Jimmy could possibly have saved his life.
     
    old lady new shooter likes this.
  13. Kleanbore

    Kleanbore Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2008
    Messages:
    13,468
    And for some reason, the perps comply.

    Why?

    And if the homeowner were shot by an accomplice, or surprised and overpowered by the detainee, or if the homeowner shot a detainee trying to escapes, the incident would not appear in "The Armed Citizen". They only report good outcomes.
     
  14. GEM

    GEM Moderator Emeritus

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2004
    Messages:
    9,886
    Location:
    WNY
    Detaining someone at gun point assumes they would cooperate. In the NRA stories, I am sure the detainee doesn't know if the homeowner will shoot them, even though it is probably not legal. If you think that you want to physically engage someone and will 'win' the conflict, that is your decision. As you grapple a Jimmy, you could easily find yourself in a knife fight for instance.

    Again, the detainee decided to stay. If they didn't and you shot or even engaged in a damaging physical entanglement. Saving Jimmy at risk to yourself is your call.
     
    BigBore44 likes this.
  15. scaatylobo

    scaatylobo Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2010
    Messages:
    2,512
    Location:
    Western NYS
    This retired cop agrees = PERFECT STORM.

    And you did act accordingly and I commend you for your hindsight and actions/reactions.

    You went to the proper color code at all times,never lost your cool.

    But my question is,are you sorry you did not lock the door as you entered.

    As that would have stopped the deputy and any other from coming up on your '6' ?.

    Kudo's on your actions,and not having to pull your dog off and get you,the dog,or the deputy hurt.
     
  16. BigBore44

    BigBore44 Member

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2013
    Messages:
    4,252
    Location:
    Oklahoma
    2E3AAD36-711C-42C0-9CBC-1C3B5C35522C.jpeg Another circumstance where you can use force authorized by the individual state inside the home.
    Again, the shooting of a detained person trying to flee depends on the state. I’m not advocating for it. I’m simply stating that every state and situation is different.

    “And if”..... There are a million “And ifs” and they don’t all end negatively. Everything has a risk. There will always be unknowns. It’s an individual choice. If you would let them go, then that’s fine. But even that carries a risk.
     
  17. Kleanbore

    Kleanbore Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2008
    Messages:
    13,468
    No, it doesn't.

    There was once the "fleeing felon rule", but SCOTUS eliminated that in 1986 or 1987. Things had changed since the days of the origins of the English Common Law. Felons cannot outrun radio waves.

    Glenn mentioned that: Garner v Tennessee

    A police officer may use deadly force to stop a fleeing felon if and only if
    • The person is attempting to escape immediately after having committed a particularly heinous crime
    • The officer actually witnessed that person committing the crime
    • It is evident that the escape would pose an immediate threat of harm or serious injury to others if his apprehension is momentarily delayed AND
    • There is no other way to prevent the escape.
    I have never heard of a state law that justifies the use of deadly force to stop an escape.

    There is one exception, if a person has taken movable tangible property under certain limited circumstances, if the property cannot be recovered in any way, deadly force may be used to prevent the person from escaping with the property.

    There are so many nuances in that that it is never a win win proposition.
     
  18. BigBore44

    BigBore44 Member

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2013
    Messages:
    4,252
    Location:
    Oklahoma
    When I first started working psych, I had to fight a guy who said he was going to “F me up if I didn’t open the doors and let him out”. I hadn’t been in an actual fight in years. The adrenaline was insane and lasted well after the fight was over. You could even say it was “fun”. But after 8 years it wasn’t even a little “fun” anymore. It became a burden almost because I knew how it was going to end and we wouldn’t even be in the position if they would have just listened. I always spoke calmly to them and tried my dead level best to de-escalate the situation before hand by talking to them. But sometimes, you simply don’t have a choice if you want to protect your coworkers or other patients. The facility actually started having me train new hires in takedown and control techniques. In our spare time I would take the newbies into the day room and we would practice both the verbal and physical techniques for ending a bad situation. Having been in so many “fights” with so many people, I no longer get adrenaline dumps. My head is always in the game. My girlfriend doesn’t understand it. She says I never get worked up about anything. And I tell her it’s because if you’re worked up, you’re using brain power that could be used for finding the solution to the problem, and you’re wasting it on...basically nothing. But I might as well be speaking Aramaic to her.

    I do not regret not locking my doors. My doors are not locked now as I type this. My kids rode their bikes in the road the next day. They went to neighbor kids houses 3 streets over. And neighbor kids came over here. We aren’t going to live in fear. Risk is apart of life. My family isn’t living if we’re shut behind locked doors all the time. Again, if I lived in a city (I never will) then it would be different.

    I have enormous respect for LE. And I wanted the best possible outcome for all involved.
     
    old lady new shooter likes this.
  19. BigBore44

    BigBore44 Member

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2013
    Messages:
    4,252
    Location:
    Oklahoma
    Seriously? I didn’t say police officer. Read the 3rd paragraph of my screenshot response. And I said it depends on the state. Which it does. Some states allow it with minor stipulations. Others are more stringent. And others are a “no way Josè”.

    You literally said “No it doesn’t” and then provided circumstances where it actually does for LE. And I showed where, in some states, under the right circumstances, a citizen can. You can place an intruder/burglar inside your home under citizens arrest can you not?
    Now how would a person know if that property CANNOT be recovered in any way? That seems like a legal trap for an attorney to have a field day with.
     
    old lady new shooter likes this.
  20. Kleanbore

    Kleanbore Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2008
    Messages:
    13,468
    How can anyone in his right mind serious believe that if a police officer sworn to uphold the law may not shoot a fleeing felon, an act which pertains only to law enforcent, that a private citizen would be permitted to do so?

    You said so in error.

    Why? I have no idea what that is. Do not believe it.

    [QUOTE="BigBore44, post: 1192148? Too much television?

    And--that does not mean that you can shoot him if he chooses to leave.
     
  21. Kleanbore

    Kleanbore Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2008
    Messages:
    13,468
    We never locked our doors when I was a kid. Perhaps at night, butI do not remember.

    My aunts and uncles on farms never locked the doors.

    Many peopleOI knew left the doors unlocked after having left the house. The milkman would come in, put the milk in the fridge, take the money from the kitchen table, and depart.

    When we were first married, we locked the doors when leaving the house, and when going to bed.

    At some point, we started keeping them locked. That was a simple matter of prudent risk management.

    Now, based on my current fitness situation and analysis of the payout of the house and the number and locations of points of ingress, I have started carrying a firearm at home.

    There are those on this board who have characterized that as "living in fear".

    But in point of fact, I am not in fear at all.

    I'm just prepared

    I have a phone in my pocket, motion sensors outdoors, and fire extinguishers within reach.
     
  22. 230RN
    • Contributing Member

    230RN Member

    Joined:
    May 27, 2006
    Messages:
    7,007
    Location:
    Colorado
    I've often wondered what would happen if you posted a restraining order on a target board and shot at it.

    Would the bullet bounce off? Would it leave a dent? Would it go through?
     
    BigBore44 likes this.
  23. Jeff White

    Jeff White Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    31,517
    Location:
    Alma Illinois
    I missed the part where you get qualified immunity when you use force as a private citizen. Could you point it out for me?

    That is the problem with trying to be a peace officer when you aren’t. The law may give you the same powers under certain circumstances but it gives you none of the same protections.

    No the standard is the same nationwide. Look up Tennessee v. Garner 1986. If you think that it doesn’t apply to you because you aren’t a peace officer you’re wrong. The three private citizens, one being a retired police officer who shot the jogger thinking he was an escaping burglar have been charged federally with violating his civil rights.

    You don’t get to claim that the state has empowered you to act as a peace officer in certain circumstances but the rules that they have to follow don’t apply to you because you’re a private citizen. It simply doesn’t work out that way.

    No states allow anyone to shoot a fleeing felon except under the circumstances the USSC said were permissible in Tennessee v. Garner. While some of the old “fleeing felon” laws might still be on the books in some states (I doubt that as it’s been 36 years since that decision) they are invalid after the Supreme Court ruled.

    Peace officer or private citizen, if you shoot a fleeing felon you better be able to prove that his escape would have placed someone or the public in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm. That’s a pretty high bar.
     
    GEM likes this.
  24. BigBore44

    BigBore44 Member

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2013
    Messages:
    4,252
    Location:
    Oklahoma
    You cannot say “No it doesn’t.” And then in the next breath say you can under certain circumstances. That’s exactly what you, and Kleanbore have both done. It is a contradiction. Did I say under any and all circumstances you can? No. I didn’t. Did I say was acting as a peace officer or aiding or assisting by direction? No. I didn’t.

    For goodness sake Kleanbore said you could shoot someone if they took property you couldn’t in any other way recover. That’s explicitly against the Garner ruling. You cannot shoot a fleeing suspect over a property crime. Here is the exact quote he used.
    He said nothing about protecting the public from a threat of serious physical harm or death. He said “to recover the property”.
    Yes! Although in certain circumstances, a reasonable and prudent person could certainly make the case that if, during a home invasion that the suspect used or attempted to use deadly force, and upon you entering and confronting the suspect, he flees, that shooting him as he was fleeing could be seen as protecting the public from serious physical harm or death.

    Here, I’ll make this easy for you. You come home from shooting at the range and find your family murdered. Upon seeing this you see the suspect attempt to leave the home and you shoot and kill him. Is it a good shooting? It’s rhetorical really. Because the answer is yes.
     
    Last edited: May 4, 2021
  25. BigBore44

    BigBore44 Member

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2013
    Messages:
    4,252
    Location:
    Oklahoma
    How are those protections working out for LE nowadays?

    And actually it does give you protection. I guess I have to post this AGAIN.
    Oklahoma Title 21 Section 1289.5 #9
    This applies to dwellings, residences, occupied vehicles, or places of business.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice