Should you let an intruder escape?

[conw]

It clicks with me. Rifle here, rifle by bed. rifle in truck, many rifles in safe. Maybe you need some rifles.

True, but if I'm walking around town with some coffee and don't have any (of my) rifles near me, it doesn't ring true. I feel safer inside my house anyway, and my CCW piece is more likely to be used outside the house, hence the advantage of the pistol is also its weakness...

But I guess the quote makes sense, I just never found it very compelling.

That's okay though, to each his own.

 

[dalepres]

The mental exercises I go through say that if a BG comes in my home, he gets shot. If, somehow, circumstances end up that I don't shoot or that I miss and he hits the deck, I would not shoot. If he crawled on his belly - backwards - and left the house, I'd let him go. if he tried to get up, I think I'd shoot. The law and good sense both say that an intruder in your house, simply by virtue of having forcibly entered your home, represents a threat to your life.

 

[dalepres]

What is the legal climate where you & the intruder are located?

jfruser, if you can even consider the legal climate in making an immediate decision then you really don't have a life threatening choice to make. In life or death, legal ramifications don't matter.

 

[Jeff White]

dalepres said;

jfruser, if you can even consider the legal climate in making an immediate decision then you really don't have a life threatening choice to make. In life or death, legal ramifications don't matter.

If you don't consider the legal climate and put it into your decision loop before you need to make that life or death decision then you are making a big mistake. Legal ramifications do matter. If you decide to shoot the intruder to prevent his escape and end up getting charged for it, then the tens of thousands of dollars you will spend in what may be a futile attempt to stay out of jail might make you wish you'd have let him run out the door.

It's easy to say they don't matter when you are sitting comfortably behind your monitor, but I bet you'll be thinking they do matter when they are booking you on murder or manslaughter charges. When the officers are walking you through the sally port at the jail and the CO is laying out the orange jumpsuit and flip flops on the counter is not the time to be thinking, I wish I'd had researched what kinds of defensive shootings are prosecuted around here.

Jeff

 

[dalepres]

If you don't consider the legal climate and put it into your decision loop before you need to make that life or death decision then you are making a big mistake. Legal ramifications do matter. If you decide to shoot the intruder to prevent his escape and end up getting charged for it, then the tens of thousands of dollars you will spend in what may be a futile attempt to stay out of jail might make you wish you'd have let him run out the door.

I said if you can consider legal ramifications you don't have a life or death matter. I didn't comment on catching a bad guy or preventing him from escaping.

{edit}
In fact, I think my post clearly goes against shooting... unless it is truly life or death. And when it is life or death, you shoot and at least you're alive to go to trial. As others here have said, better to be tried by 12 than carried by 6.

 

[roo_ster]

What is the legal climate where you & the intruder are located?

jfruser, if you can even consider the legal climate in making an immediate decision then you really don't have a life threatening choice to make. In life or death, legal ramifications don't matter.

Why would I wait until the event to give legal climate some thought? Why can I not open the Dallas Morning News and read, consult local LEOs & attorneys and the like?

That plus knowing the likely scenarios of my life can help me develop courses of action (COA) for when things get hinky. It is the civilian version of what I learned playing foolish ranger games for Uncle Sam.

Very similar to react to contact drills: near ambush, far ambush, incoming arty, etc. Develop COAs for the most likely scenarios so you don't have to think about it when it occurs and you can (hopefully) climb out of the hole/get ahead of the power curve/etc.

[I expect LEOs do something similar, as they have several likely scenarios for which they can prepare stock COAs.]

Knowledge of the environment is part of developing such COAs and the legal climate is part of the environment, just as your house's building materials, proximity of neighbors, location of your children at night, etc.

Now, your COAs will not account for all/every possible scenario or legal wrinkle, so some on-the-spot cogitation might be required. In my life, however, I am trying to tilt the filed in my favor by minimizing such.

 

[GatorDude]

IMO, I think the answer is - Yes.

You can't shoot someone who is running away from you. You can only shoot someone to stop an imminent threat to life.

If you try to physically restrain an intruder, you could find yourself in a struggle over your firearm. So, if an intruder decides to run for it, let him go.

 

[Byron Quick]

You can't shoot someone who is running away from you. You can only shoot someone to stop an imminent threat to life.

GatorDude,

Not only is this statement not true for all states, it's not true for the state of Georgia...the state you have listed as your home location.

In Georgia you can use lethal force to stop a forcible felony. By statute, the definition of a forcible felony in Georgia is any felony where force is used or the threat of force is given. There is no requirement in the statute for being in fear of your life, the life of another, or of grave bodily injury.

You also need to examine the law governing the use of lethal force in this state with forcible entries. No requirement to be in imminent danger, fear of your life, or even that the intruder be armed. In fact, the sole requirement in the statute for using lethal force is that the shooter feels that it is necessary to prevent the intruder from committing another felony. Another couple of requirements in the intruder law: the intruder must not be a current resident of the home and the entry must be forcible, i.e, you can't leave your doors open and take potshots at whoever wanders in.

You really need to study Georgia law if you are carrying. You either are recently from another state or get your information solely from talk with people who don't know Georgia law. Please, the Georgia code is on line. Print out the relevant statutes and discuss them with a criminal defense attorney.

Many years ago, a friend of mine worked at a jewelry store on Broad Street in Augusta. One day a local thug gave her a choice. She could either have sex with him or he would mutilate her face. No weapons were visible. If she had been armed, under Georgia law, she could have shot him dead on the spot. Schoolboy was killed a few weeks later. A GI from Fort Gordon cut his throat on his own doorstep. The GI was found guilty and given five years first offender probation The mayor was upset he couldn't give the GI an award.

 

[LongRider]

You can't shoot someone who is running away from you. You can only shoot someone to stop an imminent threat to life.

I need to co sign Byron Quick. Remember that the laws of your state may not apply in other states. For instance in Washington State in addition to shooting in defense of self or others you may also shoot to stop a felony being committed against people or property, or fleeing from a violent felony or attempted violent felony.
When posting about laws in your own state it is often helpful to verify before posting

 

[Templar223]

The smart guy: Tells the intruder to leave while having him covered. No brains or bowels to clean up. No trips to jail. No heartburn. No legal bills. Insurance covers damages, minus deductible.

The stupid guy - a 'man card' holder who doesn't need anyone to tell him how to handle an intruder: Shoots the guy dead without asking any questions - because, after all, it's "MY" house and intruders will be shot dead. Discovers Mr. Intruder is unarmed, and assuming it's not his daughter's boyfriend (or maybe because he is daughter's boyfriend), plants a knife in his hand and claims he was being attacked by a crazed intruder to police. Coppers figure it out and Stupid guy pays good money for a defense which leaves him penniless, a pretty ulcer he's named Paula (after his first wife), unemployed as he missed too much work for court dates and police investigative interviews, effectively shunned at church and looking at jail time. Oh yeah, and none of his old "friends" will have anything to do with him.

The Internet-Bravado guy - Oooh yeah! Finally! Locks the bad guy in the house and proceeds to smoke him then lights a cigarette before posting on THR/Arfcom/TFL about his 'draw down' on an intruder.

Gee, whatcha gonna do when BG is in your living room at oh-dark-hundred?

You tell me which option works best for you.

I know what I tell my students.

John

 

[Fast Frank]

Wow. Just wow.

I don't want to shoot ANYBODY.

I especially don't want to shoot anybody in my living room.

Wanna talk about an ugly mess? Try putting a load of buckshot in a man's chest right there between the couch and the TV. THAT is an ugly mess.

If I can convince the bad guys to just go away, I will consider it a major victory.

Hopefully, I will do that before they can get inside. At least that's the plan.

Hey, if the bad guys won't go for that, then I'll have to do whatever it is that looks like the best way to keep myself and my family alive.

If that involves a firefight, then I hope I'm found worthy.

 

[Fred Fuller]

Great Grandmother Demonstrates One Way To Do It...

http://www.wpxi.com/news/17223812/detail.html

Elderly Woman Grabs Gun, Holds Would-Be Burglar At Bay

POSTED: 3:33 pm EDT August 18, 2008
UPDATED: 5:58 pm EDT August 18, 2008

LAKE LYNN, Pa. -- An 85-year-old great-grandmother from Lake Lynn, Fayette County kept an alleged burglar at bay using a .22-caliber pistol.

According to police, a 17-year-old suspect was attempting to burglarize Leda Smith overnight.

That's when Smith grabbed her gun and told the teen that she would shoot him if he moved, police said.

"I had the gun on him before he turned around and said, 'you've had it,' " Smith told Channel 11-News.

According to police, Smith ordered the boy to dial 911 and then gave him some advice.
"Dial 911 and don't attempt to throw the phone at me, or do anything bad or i'll just shoot you," Smith said.

When police arrived, they took the teen into custody.

Charges have been filed against the boy and an alleged accomplice

 

[FourTeeFive]

if you can even consider the legal climate in making an immediate decision then you really don't have a life threatening choice to make. In life or death, legal ramifications don't matter.

Agreed. Your are saving your life, or that of someone you love. If not, why are you taking another person's life?

Wanna talk about an ugly mess? Try putting a load of buckshot in a man's chest right there between the couch and the TV. THAT is an ugly mess.

I think a lot of people think gunshots look like the movies. Ever see a real gun suicide or the remnants of a gunshot murder in a home? Fun things like dried brain matter in the carpeting and bits of skull embedded in the wall. Mess doesn't even begin to describe it.

 

[shdwfx]

I thought the OP's question concerned the legalities of a citizen's arrest, not good vs bad shoots.

 

[blackcash88]

If he's still in my house I'm still legal to shoot.

What if you hit him in the back...or the ass as he's trying to get away? Remember, unless he drops right on the spot, they can tell which way a bleeding person was moving from blood drops. As they fall, they will move in the direction of the person, either toward or AWAY from you.

I'd be seriously worried about criminal/civil charges at that point.

 

[dalepres]

The OP never mentions the word arrest. He is asking whether you let the person run or not.

Even if the question was about arrest, anytime a gun is involved in an "arrest" you have to consider the possibility of using it. If you use it to arrest and you're bluffing, you may end up dead. If you draw your gun, you had better be prepared to use it.

 

[Travlin]

Thanks to all responders

My thanks to all who responded to my original post.

I would not want to seek a confrontation with an intruder. But I was puzzled by comments on other threads where people discussed situations where they had the intruder in their sights, yet would be happy to let them run out of the house. I wondered if they had considered the dangers I listed in my OP. Other dangers that posters brought up was that they could be turning towards the door to mask the drawing of their own gun, or as a diversion while their unseen partner attacked. What appeared to be a retreat could be another form of attack.

In most places is it illegal to shoot someone fleeing. So if you say freeze and they don't, you would have to be prepared to shoot instantly. If they obey a command to get on the floor then you could wait for the cops. And you hope a second intruder is not lurking. It is all very complicated and our imagination can't compare to having to do it for real. So there's lots to think about and this thread has helped.

Frankly I am rather overwhelmed by the number of postings. Many excellent thoughts were presented with good reasons for widely divergent views It's going to take me a while to consider them all with the depth they deserve. This forum has a lot of smart members who are willing to help out.

 

[Thernlund]

I stand by my previous response (post #2), but I just had a thought...

This is sort of like a woman and her purse, eh? Alot of women might think, "Oh just let him have it. Thank God I'm ok!" when someone tries to snatch it. But what might not immediately occur to people is that once he has it, he has all the intel it contains. DL, keys, ect. This may inspire him to use said intel to commit a burglary, or worse.

The connection in my mind comes in where, if this guy gets away, he now has some intel of his own. Maybe he spotted that 62" plasma on the wall and the two laptops sitting on the counter. He also knows you have a gun. So instead of being deterred, he decided that the high-dollar items he spied in your home are worth it if he arms himself and gets the drop on you. To him, your stuff is worth more than you are, and he saw some good stuff. When his adrenaline goes down and his courage returns, he might decide that trying again is doable.

I'm not saying shoot the intruder outright, or even give chase necessarily. But, a blanket pre-decision to flat out let an intruder escape might not be the best end-game plan, yeah?


-T.

 

[Fred Fuller]

OK, folks- let's be crystal clear here.

It isn't as if you have a CHOICE over whether you shoot someone or not, like choosing what entree you want for dinner at a restaurant.

Circumstances will dictate whether you shoot or don't shoot. Either you can clearly enunciate why you found it absolutely necessary to pull the trigger at the moment you do so- or you cannot. If you cannot absolutely define the things which convinced you your life or that of another was in such dire danger that you had no choice but to shoot- you likely have no business shooting.

Among George S. Patton's many remarks was the dictum: "Do not take counsel of your fears." There is no reason to take precipitous action in the present because you are concerned 'he might come back' in the future. The blackletter law in my state requires two standards of conduct in self defense- first, that of a reasonable person, and second, that of a person of ordinary firmness. Your state might not have the same standards- but do you know what the legal standards to establish self defense are in your jurisdiction?

We are not only dealing with legal standards here- we have moral standards to uphold as well. We're supposed to be the good guys, after all. How are we to support that claim if we endorse executing people out of fear for what they might do in the future?

Self defense ends when the threat ends. If the threat resumes, then so does self defense. Please leave the 'kill 'em all let God sort 'em out' attitude for those less mature and disciplined. It is not suitable for members here.

lpl

 

[jahwarrior]

no. i wouldn't let an intruder get away. the way my apartment is built, the only way to get in is by force. if someone forces their way in, he obviously is there to do more than rob the place. besides, i'm not going to put my kids at risk; the guy might try something on the way out while running past them. in PA we have castle doctrine. the guy's gonna stay put, and if he doesn't like that....