I'm just curious, in a situation someone is breaking into your home and you shoot at them say it doesn't kill them and they are on the ground incapacitated? I have heard a few people say to "shoot again" because if they are still alive they can and will sue you for everything you have? At the same time, i'm curious if this is technically murder if the person is already incapacitated? Any suggestions? Thanks.
Shoot to kill?
- Thread starter PILMAN
- Start date
- Status
You stop shooting when the target is no longer a threat. To go further will get you a sleeping place between Lamar and Bubba. Think of it: Long, hot showers together, lazy Sunday mornings, toasting each other with Pruno on New Years Eve, exchanging Snickers bars and Marlboros on Christmas morning...
Biker
Biker
Following any shooting there will be an investigation. If that turns up evidence that you excuted someone you'll find out what a real murder charge is.
I see. In Florida, can a home intruder sue me if I were to shoot them and they lived? Everyone keeps telling me "You better hope your first shot kills him or they'll sue you for everything" however I thought Floridas "stand your ground" law would protect a person from such thing?
1911 guy
Member
Shoot to stop the threat.
No more, no less. If the BG happens to die in the process, so be it. If he survives and ceases to be a threat, he goes to prison for the crime he committed against you causing you to shoot him. If he's down but still trying to point a weapon at you, he's still a threat. If not, you'd best stop shooting. Investigations these days are nothing if not thorough, in most cases. Murder isn't something I'd want on my record. Besides, I never liked Pruno and I'm trying to give up Marlboros.
Stand your ground laws are not always protection from civil action, but many states are passing laws to protect justified shooters from shootees and lawyers. I don't know about Fl., you'd be best served by someone from Fl. answering here or going online to your states AG site and finding any applicable legal opinions.
No more, no less. If the BG happens to die in the process, so be it. If he survives and ceases to be a threat, he goes to prison for the crime he committed against you causing you to shoot him. If he's down but still trying to point a weapon at you, he's still a threat. If not, you'd best stop shooting. Investigations these days are nothing if not thorough, in most cases. Murder isn't something I'd want on my record. Besides, I never liked Pruno and I'm trying to give up Marlboros.
Stand your ground laws are not always protection from civil action, but many states are passing laws to protect justified shooters from shootees and lawyers. I don't know about Fl., you'd be best served by someone from Fl. answering here or going online to your states AG site and finding any applicable legal opinions.
armoredman
Member
This is why AZ has a "no civil liability" law for justified use of force.
The most helpful phrase to remember is, "Officer, I shot to stop his felonious assault, I need to speak to my lawyer now."
Using deadly physical force against a person who is NOT attacking you is a great way to discover the wonders of prison living.
The most helpful phrase to remember is, "Officer, I shot to stop his felonious assault, I need to speak to my lawyer now."
Using deadly physical force against a person who is NOT attacking you is a great way to discover the wonders of prison living.
Three places you need to visit:
http://www.useofforce.us/
http://www.corneredcat.com/Legal/AOJ.htm
and
http://www.corneredcat.com/Legal/myths.htm
After you've read those articles, bring your questions back here.
Oh, and if you want to know about Florida's specific laws, check out www.handgunlaw.us and www.gunlaws.com
pax
http://www.useofforce.us/
http://www.corneredcat.com/Legal/AOJ.htm
and
http://www.corneredcat.com/Legal/myths.htm
After you've read those articles, bring your questions back here.
Oh, and if you want to know about Florida's specific laws, check out www.handgunlaw.us and www.gunlaws.com
pax
gdvan01
Member
The ability to properly articulate the facts of an incident are very important as well. That is, why you did what you did.
Another thing to think about with respect to the ammunition used for personal defense. It may be a better idea to use standard factory ammo as opposed to handloads. If you pop someone using handloads there may be a potential issue with someone trying to say you purposely designed those loads to inflict superior damage or to kill someone. Just a thought.
Another thing to think about with respect to the ammunition used for personal defense. It may be a better idea to use standard factory ammo as opposed to handloads. If you pop someone using handloads there may be a potential issue with someone trying to say you purposely designed those loads to inflict superior damage or to kill someone. Just a thought.
I'm up at work, i'll check those links when I get home thanks.
I'm using Federal premium Hydroshock hollowpoints in .45 acp , would this look bad? They are marked as defensive rounds. I don't reload.
I'm using Federal premium Hydroshock hollowpoints in .45 acp , would this look bad? They are marked as defensive rounds. I don't reload.
Shoot to stop.
I'm recently converted to the self defense using ball ammo persuasion... public (the population from which jurors are selected) perception of HP ammo is similar to the general perception of black rifles by non-shooters. Will it matter? Who knows?
A good example of the misconceptions of the public is my sister... when I told her last week that I would be driving out of state to visit Dad, and that I would take his levergun that I recently refinished, she asked, "Can you take that across state lines?"
I'm recently converted to the self defense using ball ammo persuasion... public (the population from which jurors are selected) perception of HP ammo is similar to the general perception of black rifles by non-shooters. Will it matter? Who knows?
A good example of the misconceptions of the public is my sister... when I told her last week that I would be driving out of state to visit Dad, and that I would take his levergun that I recently refinished, she asked, "Can you take that across state lines?"
BobTheTomato
Member
We are allowed to stop the threat. At the point that the suspect is not a threat we should stop shooting. A person who cannot handle this fact needs more training and range time to build his confidence.
The biggest mistake anyone can make after a shooting incident is to use words like "I told him to make my day" "I blew him away" "I tried to kill him".
Keep your mouth shut and ask for an attorney. Don't be rude to the police just ask for an attorney.
After a shooting you may likely be arrested. It may be a very clear case that you were justified for your actions but you could also be jailed until cleared by a district attorney or a grand jury. You will also be required to post a bond. Some states do not give a bond on an open count of murder charge so you may get a few days in jail.
The biggest mistake anyone can make after a shooting incident is to use words like "I told him to make my day" "I blew him away" "I tried to kill him".
Keep your mouth shut and ask for an attorney. Don't be rude to the police just ask for an attorney.
After a shooting you may likely be arrested. It may be a very clear case that you were justified for your actions but you could also be jailed until cleared by a district attorney or a grand jury. You will also be required to post a bond. Some states do not give a bond on an open count of murder charge so you may get a few days in jail.
So basically even if the cops were to ask what happened, don't tell them what happened just to say to get my attorney?
Also i'm a bit concerned about certain types of invasions. Would age have a factor if someone were robbing your house or what they were using in a court of law? I would figure if it were say someone over the age of 18 with a gun that it would be a justified shooting. On the other case what if it were someone under the age of 18 or armed with a knife or nothing at all? What do you do in a situation where someone has broken into your home and you don't know if they have a weapon or not?
PILMAN ~
Since this type of question interests you, I would strongly urge you to consider taking LFI-1 from Lethal Force Institute (Massad Ayoob's school). He covers these types of concerns in more exhaustive detail than anyone else out there, and the course is absolutely worthwhile.
Do check out those sites (which will give you the bare-bones basics of what you need to know), but if you really want to know this stuff, take the class. Don't bet your future on what some folks on the internet told you.
pax
Since this type of question interests you, I would strongly urge you to consider taking LFI-1 from Lethal Force Institute (Massad Ayoob's school). He covers these types of concerns in more exhaustive detail than anyone else out there, and the course is absolutely worthwhile.
Do check out those sites (which will give you the bare-bones basics of what you need to know), but if you really want to know this stuff, take the class. Don't bet your future on what some folks on the internet told you.
pax
As a general rule either a cop or "civilian" may only use enough force to stop the attack anything else is excessive use of force in the eyes of the law. Example shortly after midnight you hear class breaking and go to the source of the niose to find two thugs one armed with a baseball bat the other with a gun razing his weapon to firing position. Being the prepared citizen you are, using your trusty 1911, you double tap the guy with the gun in the chest who falls to the floor. Having to think fast as you don't know the intensions of the other fellow, who is holding a deadly weapon, you apply the Mozambique Technique (two to the chest one to the head) you then notice the first scumbag trying to raise his gun and pop him in the head (Yo Homeboy is that my briefcase?) Depending on your locality you will probably be charged with murder and depending on the jury convicted. Afterall you shot one guy when he was on the floor, mortally wounded, and you killed the other guy outright when all he wanted to do was play a friendly game of baseball! Then if the perps had any family at all they WILL sue you reagdless of any criminal charges! In the above example I would consider the actions of an armed citizen to be perfectly justified and reasonable since all of this would take place very quickly in many localities so would a grand jury, In other places the citizen would be cursified. If the citizen were white and the perps black Jessie and Al would crawl out from the baseboards to cry racisim. Bottom line is if possible the best course of action is to jus just enough force to stop the attack BUT knowing just how much that is is no easy task and you may likley face legal reprocussions even if your actions are perfect.
Right, I see what your saying.
I guess a logical situation for me would be around the middle of the night say 2 in the morning and I hear a bump at night. The house is generally pretty dark, my guess is to idenfity the person in the house before taking a shot (of course) and if I can clearly see they are unarmed do I do a citizens arrest at that point? What if they fail to comply or continue to come toward you even though you cannot clearly see a weapon? Although i'm sure it would be rather stupid for someone to keep walking toward you while you are the one with the gun in your hand.
Personally I live in a rather redneckish area (Panhandle of Florida), very republican, very Christian area. Not sure how they would handle something with home invasion however.
PILMAN,
You've moved from fairly complicated legal questions to fairly complicated tactical questions. Take Pax's advice. LFI-1 is an excellent class.
You've moved from fairly complicated legal questions to fairly complicated tactical questions. Take Pax's advice.
LFI-1 is an excellent class.Thats called murder
You shoot untill the threat is no longer present. If the guy is shot lying on the ground and tosses his weapon and surrenders, you should stop shooting. If he is still fighting, then you should be too. I know that nothing is that cut and dry, but that is the basic idea.
Criminal gives up = no shooting
Criminal is still a threat = shoot
You shoot untill the threat is no longer present. If the guy is shot lying on the ground and tosses his weapon and surrenders, you should stop shooting. If he is still fighting, then you should be too. I know that nothing is that cut and dry, but that is the basic idea.
Criminal gives up = no shooting
Criminal is still a threat = shoot
If you simply stop a thief you have no right or justification to shoot them if he is posing no threat to you at that moment. Just being in your house does not give you the right to shoot someone.
Any statement you make to the police before they advise you of your rights can still be used against you. They are not going to tell you they will just listen as long as you talk. Remember you do not have to answer questions without an attorney. Asking for an attorney does not make you guilty it is just your right just like self defence is a right.
I know of officers who have pressured people into making statements about events that the person very likely did not do just to clear a case. The unprofessional officer screaming threats and cursing does happen. Innocent people can and do go to prison. Yes I stand by the statement to not answer any question without an attorney.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
