Use Of Force - Shoot/No Shoot

[COMPNOR]

This is NOT some kind of chivalrous exchange between identifiable enemy combatants. And if it were, it would be a mutually agreed upon code of conduct adhered to by both sides.

That is clearly NOT a relevant consideration in this instance.

It is relevant for whoever is passing judgement, or in said situation.

And in this situation, I think if I've already given him my stuff and he's walking away, I'd call the cops, get a good description and direction of travel, and let them handle it.

Even if you're legally allowed to shoot someone in the back from making off with your stuff, and even though it probably is a lowlife, there could be unseen results of taking such an action. Distress over taking someone's life is something most could do without. And even if you are justified, it could go to a trial where untold thousands would be spent to prove you were correct.

 

[Makotoseven]

i've wondered about this for some time. one less thing to worry about.

 

[Fred Fuller]

Let's stay focused on REALITY here, folks. Many more asides into unreality and I'm locking this one down.

lpl

 

[DHJenkins]

...Attempting to effect an arrest looks legal...

How many times does the phrase "having a CCW does not make you a LEO" have to be posted?

Yelling "halt" or anything else is either going to make him turn around and start shooting, or run faster - neither of which, in a tactical/marksmanship sense, are going to be good for you; you either have a target shooting back at you, or one that's farther away and moving.

 

[Deanimator]

If you pull a gun on me, you're probably not going anywhere except in an ambulance. At that point you've demonstrated to me that you're willing to take my life. You've already proved to my satisfaction that you have no judgement or human decency. I'm not going to trust you to JUST rob me. If you don't run as soon as you see my gun, you're going to get shot. We aren't even going to get to the point of you having any of my belongings.

 

[mgkdrgn]

In South Carolina you can not use deadly force to protect property. So, if he has turned and is walking away (and NOT in your residence ... a whole different story), he is not a threat and you have no justification. However, if he walked a few steps and turned back towards you ...

Now, in my case, as I was emptying my pockets he would get multiple 22mags from my right front pocket NAA BlackWidow; as with a gun pointed at me he -is- a threat and I can use deadly force to defend myself.

 

[mgkdrgn]

I don't think it's legal to shoot him in the back.

WHERE you shoot someone (ie, location on their body) is generally not the issue. WHY you shot them is.

DOES the person present a threat to your live and/or grievous bodily harm, to your self or an innocent? If the answer is YES you may (in most states, at least the ones that value their law abiding citizens more than their criminals) deadly force to defend yourself or an innocent.

If I see someone about to shoot a cashier in a store, if I can shoot him in/from the back, so much the better. My tactics were better than his, I win. I sure as h3ll am not going to give him any warning or ask him to turn around so he can get a shot off at me.

 

[mbt2001]

If I chose to give them stuff in the hope they don't harm me, I would have absolutely no faith - only hope - that they will keep their end of the "bargain". I would only do so if I believed that any other response was tactically unsound.

Honor, isn't selective being used here but not there or not today but tomorrow... Either you have it or you do not have it. Notice that the thief didn't just blow your brains out and pick over your dead carcass. He gave you a choice, give me your gear or I will kill you. You opted to give him your gear. If your goal was to give the wallet and bag over to save your life and the felon walks away, you would be a fool to then re-engage. What then was the purpose of giving him the bag? To distract him? If so, then with that distraction LEAVE! If saving your life and using tactics to save your life is so important, make sure you do it.

If you do not intend to be robbed then do not give him the gear. Draw and fire.

It is illogical to capitulate, then to re-engage. Think about a movie scene were the character is accosted, gives over and as the assailant is walking away blows his brains out. You are the one that has to live with yourself and I can tell you, most people that did the above would spend the rest of the lives wishing they had not. That is why honor is important it is a-symmetrical.

A note on Texas Law. You can use deadly force to protect property, but there have been a lot of folks that have gone to jail for doing it. I would say that if it isn't your house (or near surrounding area) or your cows then don't do it. In Texas law when you read property, read cows. Seriously.

 

[David E]

One thing to keep in mind is that this badguy has your wallet....which has your ID......which may contain family photos (wife, daughter)......and lists YOUR HOME ADDRESS!

If calling the cops worked most of the time (they arrest him with your stuff) that'd be great.....but it seldom works out that way.

If he had sufficient drop on me in such a way that drawing my gun then would certainly result in my death, I may employ the tactic of giving him my stuff and playing scared.......until my anticipated opening came about, like, him turning his back on me.

An armed badguy having my home address is to be avoided. If that means shooting him in the back...........well..........

 

[DHJenkins]

Honor, isn't selective being used here but not there or not today but tomorrow... Either you have it or you do not have it. Notice that the thief didn't just blow your brains out and pick over your dead carcass. He gave you a choice, give me your gear or I will kill you. You opted to give him your gear. If your goal was to give the wallet and bag over to save your life and the felon walks away, you would be a fool to then re-engage. What then was the purpose of giving him the bag? To distract him? If so, then with that distraction LEAVE! If saving your life and using tactics to save your life is so important, make sure you do it.

Kung-Fu was just a TV show, dude; and we all know what happened to David Carradine.

Besides, as we all know - "there is no honor among thieves".

 

[Deanimator]

What then was the purpose of giving him the bag? To distract him? If so, then with that distraction LEAVE!

The US Army was VERY insistent in my training, both as an ROTC cadet and as an Infantry officer, that NOBODY can outrun a bullet.

I couldn't "leave" fast enough to do that when I was twenty one. I KNOW I can't do it at FIFTY ONE.

If you can distract, deceive or trick your ASSAILANT in ANY way, DO it!

If you find yourself in a "fair" fight, SOMEBODY'S tactical skills suck.

 

[CPerdue]

Trying to stick with the situation as posed here... there is no way I can draw and fire fast enough not to die if the thief is aiming at me. Again sticking with the situation as posed, when thief has turned away my distraction tactic of giving up stuff has worked and I now have a tactical advantage.

There was no implicit deal here, I never quit fighting. Remember, just because the thief has turned does not mean he won't change his mind about leaving a witness.

Any thoughts on improving the distraction tactic, maybe by throwing your bag out into the street or something? I really like the idea of shooting from inside my pocket, but this situation was posed for summer in the south.

Edit: A quick review of the law here in Va. (thank you Mr. Korwin) confirms my thinking ... If the guy runs there really is no recourse but to let him go. If he turns back then there really is only one reason and I'd better be ready to stop him.

 

[Shadow 7D]

Fast is smooth, smooth is slow, I believe is how the saying goes.

fumble to get your hand on your gun then drop the bag, gun goes were you look, if the BG is looking at your bag, then his gun should be off you, but his attention might also be off you.

Shooting someone in the back is asking for a DA to make trouble, doesn't matter where you are, all it takes is some hotshot trying to make it off your questionable shoot.

 

[Stormshotty]

I would allow myself to draw and shoot him at whatever opportune time. He has committed a armed crime against me and all rules that govern societal interaction do not apply. Now survival becomes the first priority. Given that, I would most likely not ask him to halt or fire at him. If he is indeed running, I maximize the chances of my survival by moving in the opposite direction.

 

[mljdeckard]

The bottom line is to let him go.

You're pissed, hopped up on adrenaline, and frustrated, wondering if you made some bad move that left you in a position where you MIGHT have been able to shoot him, but it didn't work out that way.

Remember, the goal here is NOT to get to shoot someone. The goal here is to NOT GET SHOT. If he's done, walking away chuckling to himself, and you have no reason to think he's about to turn around and shoot you, it's over. WAIT UNTIL HE IS GONE, and call the police. Pulling out a phone and calling while he is close to you might make him change his mind about walking away, putting you back in danger.

If you ever shoot someone, the only thing that will keep you out of jail is to be able to convince the D.A., and ultimately the jury, that you had no other choice. This situation leaves you a choice.

 

[HorseSoldier]

+1

The other thing people aren't considering here is that even if you can sell shooting the guy in the back as a good shoot under local law or in the eyes of a sympathetic DA, you're not out of the woods yet. "I sure showed him" isn't going to be much consolation to your spouse if you have to put the house up for sale and your kids who aren't going to college because Mr Scumbag's lawyer managed to convince a jury in the civil suit that you are just as much of a scumbag for the callous and cowardly act of shooting his poor, flawed-but-reformable, drug addicted client sitting right over there with his wheel chair and colostomy bag . . .

 

[mgkdrgn]

+1
isn't going to be much consolation to your spouse if you have to put the house up for sale and your kids who aren't going to college because Mr Scumbag's lawyer managed to convince a jury in the civil suit that you are just as much of a scumbag for the callous and cowardly act of shooting his poor, flawed-but-reformable, drug addicted client sitting right over there with his wheel chair and colostomy bag . . .

Which is why you folks in states that don't have it yet MUST DEMAND good strong Castle Doctrine and Stand your Ground type laws in your states.

In South Carolina, if your shoot is deemed "good" (ie, no criminal action), then no civil action can be brought against you. Period.

 

[mljdeckard]

I'm not hanging my livelihood on a 'stand your ground' law. I like them, but the truth is, all it takes to get that case in front of a jury is a D.A. with something to prove and a judge who has been sleeping on the couch for a while who both think that a jury needs to hear it anyway. Even if your odds of acquittal or overturn on appeal are nearly certain, you have STILL destroyed your livelihood.

AGAIN, you only shoot when there is absolutely no other option. You STILL might not survive the fallout.

 

[Avenger29]

Nevermind...

 

[tkopp]

My thinking;

If the guy robs me for $20, he can have it. Hell, the bullet I throw at him is almost a dollar all on its own. Good money after bad!

If he's got my wallet with my driver's license, passport card, concealed carry permit, the business cards of my associates, I'll take the fight right back to him and defend my identity and credit like a son of a bitch. Honor be damned.

 

[Jeff White]

In South Carolina, if your shoot is deemed "good" (ie, no criminal action), then no civil action can be brought against you. Period.

I really and truly hope that you never have to find out how wrong you are the hard way. Anyone can be sued by anybody for anything. No castle doctrine law makes it illegal to file suit. If someone wants to file suit against you and the castle doctrine law says you can't be sued, that doesn't mean that the court clerk is going to run the attorney out of his office when he shows up to file the suit. The clerk is going to accept the complaint, take the filing fee and put the case on the docket. When the process server shows up at your door about 6am to serve you with the complaint, he's not going to say, oh sorry I didn't know, when you tell him; "The castle doctrine law says I can't be sued for this." He's going to serve you and then you are going to have to hire an attorney who will answer a complaint with a motion to dismiss on the grounds that you are covered by the castle doctrine law. And here's where you may get in trouble. If the plaintiff's attorney makes a good enough case to the judge that the suit should be allowed to proceed because your actions were so over the top you don't deserve the protection of the law (shooting a thief in the back just might do it) then guess what? You're in court. As an example I give you the New York City lawsuit against the gun shops in Virginia and a few other states. Selecting the right judge allowed the city to keep the suit going in spite of the protections provided by the lawful commerce in firearms act.

And another thing to keep in mind is that no state law protecting you from civil suit is worth the paper it's printed on in federal court. Shoot the thief in the back trying to make a citizens arrest and you probably have deprived him of his life improperly under the color of law...the federal civil rights people love cases like that.

 

[rainbowbob]

Fast is smooth, smooth is slow, I believe is how the saying goes.

Actually, I believe it is: "Slow is smooth, and smooth is fast."

Remember, the goal here is NOT to get to shoot someone. The goal here is to NOT GET SHOT.

How about this: The goal is to not get shot, not loose your possessions to a violent predator, and to not shoot him if the first two goals can be achieved without doing so.

 

[smithmax]

I've always been taught that if you are being mugged you should toss your wallet (phone, bag, whatever) which will distract them and give you a chance to run. It seems like this would also work well if guns are added to the equation. BG points gun at you and demands wallet, you toss it on the ground to the side and draw while he is looking/bending down to get it.

Someone here mentioned drawing and yelling commands. I understand the purpose of commands/warnings inside your home, but if the BG approached you and pulled a gun it seems like yelling at him isn't going to do a lot to stop his bullets.

 

[Deanimator]

I really and truly hope that you never have to find out how wrong you are the hard way. Anyone can be sued by anybody for anything.

I'm not going to place my life in the hands of someone who has demonstrated an utter contempt for human life in the name of not getting sued.

Pull a gun on me and property becomes irrelevant to the situation. You're intentionally endangering my life and I'm going to act accordingly.

Anybody's free to "trust" a criminal with a gun to "do the right thing". I'm sure those five dead women in that Lane Bryant in Tinley Park, Illinois did. They're dead, but I don't think they're being sued.

 

[catspa]

I think Deanimator has got the right brain cells rubbing together here. The attacker points a weapon at you, all of the sudden the thin veneer of civilization is ripped away and we're right back in the jungle again. Fight, flight, or bleed out while he takes what he wants.

It's a huge strain on the human psyche to shift gears backwards like that in the blink of an eye, but in my opinion worth undertaking.

Parker