Shoot, let go, or detain

[#shooter]

Mugging - keep a watchful eye operate at condition yellow.
Even at condition yellow you (or child/spouse) may be "surprised" attacked. Comply within reason; look for opportunity to resist, then retreat and call the police.

Home intruder - Entry upon the premises (exterior perimeter) will be meet with deadly force. If they manage to get in the house, I would retreat to a interior perimeter to defend (bed room) and call the police. Let the police clear the house. If the intruder violates your perimeter, shoot for maximum effectiveness. Don’t try to detain them. Don't pursue them if they leave your home.

 

[ndh87]

not visibly armed (possible conceled weapon) 2 warnings: shotgun slide racking followed by "get out or be carried out"

visibly armed (gun, knife, etc.) 1 warning: shotgun slide racking

thinking of a home intruder in this case, not mugging. If the intruder poses no immidiate threat or turns and runs after getting his warning, hes free to leave, the cops can pick himi up later. The nice men in blue uniforms have enough guns without having to take mine as evidence...besides, i dont like going to court.

 

[tango3065]

If someone breaks in my home I will shoot because if they have broke my door down or knocked out the window they are not there to borrow some sugar or a friendly chat. Also I live in the great state of Kentucky and the law and courts are on my side since the just passed a law saying that if someone breaks in my home I can use deadly force without having to worry about legal matters afterwards wheter the assailant has a weapon or not, and I am not at will to run or hide in my own home.

Gotta love Kentucky

 

[Jeff White]

mastinson said;

If someone breaks in my home I will shoot because if they have broke my door down or knocked out the window they are not there to borrow some sugar or a friendly chat. Also I live in the great state of Kentucky and the law and courts are on my side since the just passed a law saying that if someone breaks in my home I can use deadly force without having to worry about legal matters afterwards wheter the assailant has a weapon or not, and I am not at will to run or hide in my own home.

First off you should read the law. It may not mean what you think it means. Then you should read this thread:
http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=212920

The new castle doctrine law isn't protecting James Adam Clem in Fayette County.

Jeff

 

[hso]

All the "castle doctrin" laws do is discard the goofy idea that you actually are required to retreat within your own home to the point of no escape to justify the use of deadly force. It doesn't mean that if they set foot in your house they're fair game. All the rules about means, intents and opportunity still apply.

 

[B yond]

my $0.02

Personally, I don't want to shoot anyone. If a mugger on the street demands my wallet, I'd give it to him and let him run off with it. I would only shoot a mugger if it was necessary to protect myself or another person from immediate harm.

A home invasion is a whole different problem. If I knew someone was in my home I'd gather up the family and barricade us in a room. If I came face to face with an unarmed BG In my own home I wouldn't hesitate to draw my weapon, and I would order the BG to the ground while my wife calls for help. I keep a pair of cuffs in the gunsafe, so i could have my wife open the safe and toss the cuffs to the BG while I keep him covered, hopefully he'd comply and put them on, if not he can just stay face down until help arrives.

If the BG has some kind of death wish and comes at me while I've got a gun on him then I have no choice but put three rounds in his pelvis, if possible (any damage to the pelvic bone and he won't be able to come at me).

Of course if he had a weapon when I first encountered him he'd be well ventilated. I can't allow any chance of an intruder incapacitating me because my primary concern is always the safety of my family, and I need to be alive and conscious to protect them.

The only reason I'd try to detain an unarmed BG after an encounter in my home is that I'd have most likely pulled a gun on him, and if he gets away there's not much to stop him from coming back when there's no one home in search of my guns. If any of my weapons were stolen and misused I couldn't help but feel bad about it.

 

[michaelbane]

A quandry

The problem with muggings is that you really can never be sure that you won't get whacked even if you do cooperate. When I was the victim of an attempted mugging, the perps didn't even give me a chance to give up my stuff. I was walking down the street, and two guys jumped me from an alleyway, pulled me in and started beating on me.

 

[glummer]

Clarification & confusion

One thing I don't see touched on in these "hold 'em?" scenarios. In some (many?) jurisdictions, I believe, you do have the right to use deadly force (or the threat of same) to stop a fleeing violent,armed felon. A mugger with, say, a knife, is a violent felon. If he flees, there could be a legal basis for stopping him.
Any thoughts?

 

[Jeff White]

glummer said;

In some (many?) jurisdictions, I believe, you do have the right to use deadly force (or the threat of same) to stop a fleeing violent,armed felon. A mugger with, say, a knife, is a violent felon. If he flees, there could be a legal basis for stopping him.

Do a search over in Legal on Garner v. Tennesee. Then look at findlaw or some other legal site and read the actual decision and some other cases where Garner v. Tennesee was cited.

The days where you could shoot a fleeing felon have been over with for a long time.

Jeff

 

[glummer]

The days where you could shoot a fleeing felon have been over with for a long time.

A fleeing, ARMED, VIOLENT, felon. Does that make no difference?

 

[Jeff White]

It makes very little difference. Read Garner v. Tennesee and some decisions that have been made since then that reference Garner v. Tennesee and you'll see what I mean. You pretty much have to be able to articulate that your use of deadly force to prevent the escape of the violent felon was necessary because the escape of that person would place others in immediate, imminent danger of death or great bodily harm. The standard is pretty high. If the guy who just mugged you took your personal defensive can of sarin nerve agent and was heading for a populated area to release it, shooting to prevent his escape would probably be justified. But unless you had first hand knowledge of a specific immediate threat he posed to another, you probably better not shoot to prevent his escape.

The court makes an exception for forcible felonies. Some states define forcible felonies in their statutes and some don't. Do you know criminal law well enough to make a split second decision that all of elements of the crime as defined in your state's criminal code are present to make what just occurred a forcible felony? Will the police and the states attorney agree with your split second legal analysis? It's better to err on the side of caution and not shoot once the attack is over then to walk into that legal minefield and trust you won't step on a mine that will put you in jail or ruin you financially defending yourself.

Jeff

 

[glummer]

jeff

The court makes an exception for forcible felonies. Some states define forcible felonies in their statutes and some don't. Do you know criminal law well enough to make a split second decision that all of elements of the crime as defined in your state's criminal code are present to make what just occurred a forcible felony?

Some mugger tries to stick me with a knife, and that might NOT be a forcible felony?

 

[Jeff White]

Some mugger tries to stick you with a knife, and he breaks off the attack and runs when you present your handgun, the danger to you has ended at that point. You have no specific knowledge that his escape will place others in immediate, imminent danger of death or great bodily harm.

Depending on the exact circumstances of your encounter with the mugger, the applicable charge could be anything from Aggravated Assault, Unlawful Use of Weapons, Attempted Armed Robbery, Attempted Murder of those four choices, two of them aren't forcible felonies. If he displayed the knife and you drew before he asked for your wallet, we're looking at aggravated assault. Do you want to try to memorize all the elements of all the forcible felonies in the criminal code and decide if it is or isn't in a split second? The police and states attorney aren't going to have to decide if you were right in a split second. They are going to take the forensic evidence, your statement, the bad guy's statement (if he's able to give one) and the statements of any witnesses and make up their mind in the comfort of their office chair.

The best advice I can give is don't shoot anyone who is running away unless you have specific knowledge that his escape will place others in immediate imminent danger of death or great bodily harm. It's just not worth it.

Jeff

 

[XDKingslayer]

Do you feel any obligation to go further than self/family-preservation?

Nope.

If you have ended the threat to your life(or the lives of others), is the situation over for you?

Yep.

Or would you go beyond that and keep the BG there under the barrel until the Police arrive?

Nope.

I'm not a big fan of holding a criminal at my gun point, especially in my home, waiting for police to show. There is a slim chance that will happen. Most of the time, an encounter like this ends one of two ways, either the criminal being shot, or the criminal fleeing. I personally don't want that person in my home with my family while we wait for the police to show up. I'm even less of a big fan of doing it in public simply because holding your attention on that person and also being aware of your surroundings, i.e., watching your back, is NOT an easy thing to do. You could be putting yourself at even MORE risk by detaining the person.

I also feel the same way about a wounded criminal. I personally don't see the point in offering first aid of any type to a criminal I just wounded. You just shot the guy to keep him away from you, now you're going to get within arms reach of the very same person? Again, that is putting yourself at more risk, blood infections aside.

 

[MadMercS55]

If drawing my sidearm sends the mugger running, then I have no problem letting him run as I call the Police and give them the most detailed descriptiong I can. I'm not going to shoot the guy in the back if he had a knife and is fleeing. If he has a firearm, and decides to shoot over his shoulder at me while fleeing, then situation pending, I may return fire.
When it comes to my home, well, somewhat different story for me. First, my home is pretty darn secure, so it would take planning and force to gain access to the interior. If someone broke into my residence and ran as soon as confronted, no I wouldn't shoot him. If they were armed, crowbar, knife, hammer, gun, etc,etc. And they escalated the situation in any way, the outcome will be vastly different for them.

 

[profshadow]

I know Spidey regretted letting the robber get away to kill his Uncle Ben, but I'd have to let him run while I dialed 911.

Threaten me or mine or [ ] and I'll have to act to stop, if possible. Maybe a gun, gas, blade or something....or maybe just jumping on his back.

Defense isn't offense, in this kind of thing, though standard "IMHO & IANL" disclaimers apply!

 

[Panthera Tigris]

I rack the shotgun and if the rack sound doesn't scare him into running away like some say it will, I immediately fire.

 

[meef]

I rack the shotgun and if the rack sound doesn't scare him into running away like some say it will, I immediately fire.

Start saving your lunch money now for a good lawyer instead of spending it on food, should that day ever come.

 

[B yond]

I know Spidey regretted letting the robber get away to kill his Uncle Ben, but I'd have to let him run while I dialed 911.

Spider-man reference. Sweet.

 

[David904]

Quote:
The only time you should shoot anyone is if they are presenting an IMMINENT and UNLAWFUL threat of DEADLY FORCE. Learn it, love it, live it.

If the guy drops his weapon and boldly runs away, LET HIM RUN. You are not a cop.

Quote:
If the criminal is so dangerous, why let him go? He may run away, and 20 minutes later, end up knifing some poor sap who was unarmed, unlike me.

So what? You have no duty or right to protect unknown third parties who MIGHT be endangered if the nut HAPPENS to attack them. More to the point, you have no right to use deadly force to detain bupkus. An LEO generally does, and they're trained on the limits of this force. But civilians should not mess with it.


AMEN!!!

 

[LightningJoe]

Obviously, do whatever it takes to defend yourself (i.e. minimum force up to and including deadly force if necessary). But having taken care of yourself, are you morally obligated to apprehend a fleeing attacker or to assist the police in doing so? Well, perhaps once upon a time. But the whole system is set up to get you nowadays. You're probably justified in being thankful for a satisfactory outcome and in walking away. It's not that you lack moral fiber, it's just that we're not living in a society that has or will tolerate common sense. If you're not a good victim, you're a troublemaker.

 

[10-Ring]

I would be more than happy to become a great witness and help the system ID a suspect and maintain my family's safety vs. shooting first & sorting it out afterwards.

 

[thexrayboy]

Whether to attempt to hold a bad guy for the police is a real tricky question and one with no hard and fast answer. Like so many real life situations the
variables make it hard to come up with definite rules. However....

If someone with a weapon of some kind gives me cause to fear enough to draw he is likely to get shot. If I draw I am unlikely to wait and see how he intends to react. If I am justified in drawing I will be justified in shooting and I will commence to do so in an expedient fashion. If before I shoot the perp drops whatever weapon he was holding things change. If he drops and runs
he gets a free pass till the cops catch him. Even if he doesn't drop the weapon but just turns and books I wouldn't shoot. If he drops his weapon and just stands there I will tell him to assume an intimate contact with the ground. If he does he gets to stay that way till the police arrive. If he refuses he will be considered a threat. He may have another weapon so I may still need to shoot. Even if he has dropped the weapon but chooses to charge me I will shoot. My assumption will be he thinks he can take me.
So many variables make things complicated. However if you have a general idea how to react and train that way it helps.

And I have made citizens arrests on more than one occasion. When the subject came up in a CCW class about 10 years ago someone in the class asked " How do I make a citizens arrest?" I made the comment, "Very carefully". A citizen has that right but the person you arrest has the right to sue you if your evidence to hold them is too weak to get a conviction. Generally it's more expedient if you witness something to just sign a criminal complaint with LEO, let them arrest the person and sort it all out in court as a witness. The times I made the arrest I felt that waiting would endanger the lives of others and I felt I was in a position to effect the arrest without
having to resort to deadly force. But thats just my way of dealing with things. May not be your way and may not even be the smart way.

 

[Double Naught Spy]

From my view, either the bad guy is supposed to be shot or is allowed to get away. Either way, my goal is to NOT remain in close proximity to the threat for very long. Detaining a person means I must remain close to the threat and that is a situation that has too many immediate potential shortcomings to my health to be a good idea.

 

[meef]

shooting time:

Well if someone is in my house without me letting them in they are going down because they sure ain't there to tuck me in. And they will be armed when the po po finds them.

Way to go there fella.

Do you have any real idea of what you just said?

:banghead: