Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 47

Thread: the use of force bill 2016

  1. #1
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Location
    king county
    Posts
    162

    the use of force bill 2016

    I assume that the use of force bill is being put forward in the legislature partly on the request of or by persons who wish to help the Seattle police have greater guidance in their use of force, given the DOJ instructions and the fact that some people in the spd are not happy with the decrees or whatever has been somewhat decided. Note that the use of force bill also preempts any local attempts to restrict the allowable use of force.

    A few things of interest . . . use of deadly force is justified to arrest or apprehend a person who is committing or has committed a felony . . . Robbery is a felony. I actually think it should be ok to use deadly force to stop a guy who has been doing robberies . . . or is threatening a robbery or has made the threats that often constitute the beginning of a robbery.

    My question is why this guidance on deadly force use seems to be restricted to protecting law enforcement officers and whether or not regular individuals have the same power to resist robbers and/or arrest or apprehend them with means including deadly force.

    There is this and there is this . . .

    A south Austin store owner shot a suspected get-away driver after an attempted robbery. Police say the shooting appears to be justified.

    and

    JEFFERSON COUNTY - One person was shot and killed in Littleton Sunday morning following a robbery attempt.

    The incident happened in the 5400 block of South Taft Court. The Jefferson County Sheriff's Office says the homeowner was trying to sell an item on Craigslist when the two men who responded tried to rob him. The homeowner was tied up but broke free and confronted the suspects with a gun.

    One man was shot while driving away and he crashed into a house after losing control of the car. He died a short time later. . .

    LITTLETON, Colo. -- The victim of an armed robbery in his home could face criminal charges.

    The homeowner shot and killed a man Sunday morning who came into his home in the 5400 block of South Taft Court after responding to a Craigslist ad.

    The Jefferson County Sheriff’s Office and the Jefferson County District Attorney's Office are weighing the evidence in deciding whether charges are appropriate.

    ***

    I would like the bill, especially with the following changes:
    1) members of the public have the same legal rights to use deadly force as the law enforcement officers . . .
    and
    2) you have the right to use deadly force to stop persons from fleeing armed robberies.

    So, the next question is whether or not you have the right to use deadly force to stop, arrest or apprehend persons who did or began unarmed robberies.

    "Your money or your life," but with no gun or knife visible. "Your cell phone, wallet or camera or your life" with no gun or knife visible, etc.

    Also, the other question is how one may allegedly legally react to attempted or threatened unarmed assault.
    Last edited by zaitz; 01-30-2016 at 08:06 AM.

  2. #2
    Regular Member solus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    here nc
    Posts
    6,865
    Quote Originally Posted by zaitz View Post
    I assume that the use of force bill is being put forward in the legislature partly on the request of or by persons who wish to help the Seattle police have greater guidance in their use of force, given the DOJ instructions and the fact that some people in the spd are not happy with the decrees or whatever has been somewhat decided. Note that the use of force bill also preempts any local attempts to restrict the allowable use of force.

    A few things of interest . . . use of deadly force is justified to arrest or apprehend a person who is committing or has committed a felony . . . Robbery is a felony. I actually think it should be ok to use deadly force to stop a guy who has been doing robberies . . . or is threatening a robbery or has made the threats that often constitute the beginning of a robbery.

    My question is why this guidance on deadly force use seems to be restricted to protecting law enforcement officers and whether or not regular individuals have the same power to resist robbers and/or arrest or apprehend them with means including deadly force.

    There is this and there is this . . .

    A south Austin store owner shot a suspected get-away driver after an attempted robbery. Police say the shooting appears to be justified.

    {quote:
    Surveillance video shows Mitchell entering the store and pointing a pistol at the cashier. Mitchell left the scene after obtaining cash from the register.

    After Mitchell left, the cashier grabbed a pistol of his own and chased after him. The cashier said he saw Mitchell running parallel to a dark-colored SUV. The cashier shot at Mitchell and the SUV. Mitchell got into the SUV and drove off.


    The Austin Police Department was called and secured the area. Another call came in from a person, later identified as Brown, who said he had been shot while walking to the bus stop.

    Police determined his injuries were consistent with injuries a driver of the suspect vehicle would have suffered. unquote.

    http://www.kvue.com/story/news/crime...bery/79098786/ }

    and

    JEFFERSON COUNTY - One person was shot and killed in Littleton Sunday morning following a robbery attempt.

    The incident happened in the 5400 block of South Taft Court. The Jefferson County Sheriff's Office says the homeowner was trying to sell an item on Craigslist when the two men who responded tried to rob him. The homeowner was tied up but broke free and confronted the suspects with a gun.

    One man was shot while driving away and he crashed into a house after losing control of the car. He died a short time later. . .

    LITTLETON, Colo. -- The victim of an armed robbery in his home could face criminal charges.

    The homeowner shot and killed a man Sunday morning who came into his home in the 5400 block of South Taft Court after responding to a Craigslist ad.

    The Jefferson County Sheriff’s Office and the Jefferson County District Attorney's Office are weighing the evidence in deciding whether charges are appropriate.

    {quote: ... but the investigation could result in gun charges against the homeowner.... While the homeowner was robbed and restrained at gunpoint, legal experts say he’s not necessarily protected by self-defense statutes such as Colorado’s "make my day" law, which allows residents the right to shoot and kill a harmful intruder — but not beyond their front or back doors. unquote. http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/colo-man-shot-craigslist-robber-charged-article-1.2511408}

    ***

    I would like the bill, especially with the following changes:
    1) members of the public have the same legal rights to use deadly force as the law enforcement officers . . .
    and
    2) you have the right to use deadly force to stop persons from fleeing armed robberies.

    So, the next question is whether or not you have the right to use deadly force to stop, arrest or apprehend persons who did or began unarmed robberies.

    "Your money or your life," but with no gun or knife visible. "Your cell phone, wallet or camera or your life" with no gun or knife visible, etc.

    Also, the other question is how one may allegedly legally react to attempted or threatened unarmed assault.
    both incidents you presented the individual was not in fear of their life or facing great bodily injury...they went from victim to premeditated armed aggressor...it shan't fair well judicially i am afraid.

    at the moment to answer your question(s)
    1. no citizens (state specific) for the most part do not have the same legal rights as nice LEs to use deadly force as they have qualified immunity ~ period.
    2. no citizens (state specific) do not have the right to use deadly force to stop persons "from fleeing'...anything. citizens use of deadly force centers around the premise the citizen needs to stop the IMMEDIATE threat or perceived threat of bodily harm, death or in the case of NC sexual assault. (in NC the statutes are clear you shot and wound/kill you will be charged and "if a person of reasonable firmness" (normally the DA) determines, based on the situational investigation, deadly force was justified or not. if they do you are off the hook for the incident.

    so you want citizens chasing after alleged BGs, shooting wildly at vehicles or BGs to stop them over replaceable property OR when no crime as actually taken place when someone Attempts to rob someone w/o evidence of threat to the person's life or serious bodily harm to the victim...this should work out really well.

    finally, with the exception of NC, citizen arrests (state specific) are permissible...not sure i want to be charged with kidnapping or federal wiretapping charges and personally would rather be a good witness.

    ipse

    btw, you did notice the CO man should be worried about prosecution ?
    I'm only human; I do what I can; I'm just a man; I do what I can; Don't put the blame on me; Don't put your blame on me ~ Rag'n'Bone Man.

    Please do not get confused between my personality & my attitude. My personality is who I am ~ my attitude depends on who you are and how you act.

    Remember always, do not judge someone because they sin differently than you do!

    Get your facts first, and then you can distort them as much as you please. Mark Twain

  3. #3
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338
    Quote Originally Posted by zaitz View Post

    I would like the bill, especially with the following changes:
    1) members of the public have the same legal rights to use deadly force as the law enforcement officers . . .
    and
    2) you have the right to use deadly force to stop persons from fleeing armed robberies.

    So, the next question is whether or not you have the right to use deadly force to stop, arrest or apprehend persons who did or began unarmed robberies.

    "Your money or your life," but with no gun or knife visible. "Your cell phone, wallet or camera or your life" with no gun or knife visible, etc.

    Also, the other question is how one may allegedly legally react to attempted or threatened unarmed assault.
    No way! I'd rather they pay attention to the legislative note in the use of force RCW that recognized cops have a limited use of force and the civilians a much broader one.
    I am not anti Cop I am just pro Citizen.

    U.S. v. Minker, 350 US 179, at page 187
    "Because of what appears to be a lawful command on the surface, many citizens, because
    of their respect for what only appears to be a law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their
    rights, due to ignorance." (Paraphrased)

  4. #4
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    In my state, the use of force is the same for cops and citizens in the performance of making arrests.

    Looks like in WA they want to expand the use of force for police beyond the normal common law application of the use of deadly force (which pretty much is in favor of police now).

    Many crimes are committed by kids and young adults-I don't think that granting police "Judge Dredd" authority to kill certain criminals is a wise move.

    Next it will be expanded to stops for speeding tickets.

  5. #5
    Regular Member Freedom1Man's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Greater Eastside Washington
    Posts
    4,690
    Quote Originally Posted by zaitz View Post
    I assume that the use of force bill is being put forward in the legislature partly on the request of or by persons who wish to help the Seattle police have greater guidance in their use of force, given the DOJ instructions and the fact that some people in the spd are not happy with the decrees or whatever has been somewhat decided. Note that the use of force bill also preempts any local attempts to restrict the allowable use of force.

    A few things of interest . . . use of deadly force is justified to arrest or apprehend a person who is committing or has committed a felony . . . Robbery is a felony. I actually think it should be ok to use deadly force to stop a guy who has been doing robberies . . . or is threatening a robbery or has made the threats that often constitute the beginning of a robbery.

    My question is why this guidance on deadly force use seems to be restricted to protecting law enforcement officers and whether or not regular individuals have the same power to resist robbers and/or arrest or apprehend them with means including deadly force.

    There is this and there is this . . .

    A south Austin store owner shot a suspected get-away driver after an attempted robbery. Police say the shooting appears to be justified.

    and

    JEFFERSON COUNTY - One person was shot and killed in Littleton Sunday morning following a robbery attempt.

    The incident happened in the 5400 block of South Taft Court. The Jefferson County Sheriff's Office says the homeowner was trying to sell an item on Craigslist when the two men who responded tried to rob him. The homeowner was tied up but broke free and confronted the suspects with a gun.

    One man was shot while driving away and he crashed into a house after losing control of the car. He died a short time later. . .

    LITTLETON, Colo. -- The victim of an armed robbery in his home could face criminal charges.

    The homeowner shot and killed a man Sunday morning who came into his home in the 5400 block of South Taft Court after responding to a Craigslist ad.

    The Jefferson County Sheriff’s Office and the Jefferson County District Attorney's Office are weighing the evidence in deciding whether charges are appropriate.

    ***

    I would like the bill, especially with the following changes:
    1) members of the public have the same legal rights to use deadly force as the law enforcement officers . . .
    and
    2) you have the right to use deadly force to stop persons from fleeing armed robberies.

    So, the next question is whether or not you have the right to use deadly force to stop, arrest or apprehend persons who did or began unarmed robberies.

    "Your money or your life," but with no gun or knife visible. "Your cell phone, wallet or camera or your life" with no gun or knife visible, etc.

    Also, the other question is how one may allegedly legally react to attempted or threatened unarmed assault.
    You must be new to Washington.

    When I get home, I will cite the law showing that you can slay a fleeing felon.

    Sent from my SM-G386T using Tapatalk
    Provision for free medical attendance and nursing, for clothing, for food, for housing, for the education of children, and a hundred other matters, might with equal propriety be proposed as tending to relieve the employee of mental strain and worry. --- These matters obviously lie outside the orbit of congressional power. (Railroad Retirement Board v Alton Railroad)

  6. #6
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Location
    king county
    Posts
    162
    Quote Originally Posted by solus View Post
    both incidents you presented the individual was not in fear of their life or facing great bodily injury...they went from victim to premeditated armed aggressor...it shan't fair well judicially i am afraid.

    at the moment to answer your question(s)
    1. no citizens (state specific) for the most part do not have the same legal rights as nice LEs to use deadly force as they have qualified immunity ~ period.
    2. no citizens (state specific) do not have the right to use deadly force to stop persons "from fleeing'...anything. citizens use of deadly force centers around the premise the citizen needs to stop the IMMEDIATE threat or perceived threat of bodily harm, death or in the case of NC sexual assault. (in NC the statutes are clear you shot and wound/kill you will be charged and "if a person of reasonable firmness" (normally the DA) determines, based on the situational investigation, deadly force was justified or not. if they do you are off the hook for the incident.

    so you want citizens chasing after alleged BGs, shooting wildly at vehicles or BGs to stop them over replaceable property OR when no crime as actually taken place when someone Attempts to rob someone w/o evidence of threat to the person's life or serious bodily harm to the victim...this should work out really well.

    finally, with the exception of NC, citizen arrests (state specific) are permissible...not sure i want to be charged with kidnapping or federal wiretapping charges and personally would rather be a good witness.

    ipse

    btw, you did notice the CO man should be worried about prosecution ?
    After December 7th 1941, the US was not in imminent danger of attack on december 8th. The fact of the attack at Pearl Harbor meant that the us and Japan were at war and we should kill or disable them and not wait for the next attack or until the next attack was imminent.

    The man in Colorado is, according to the news reports at risk of prosecution, but, at least as far as his neighbors are concerned, he acted properly . . . and maybe a lot of the neighbors are happy that is not them tomorrow who is being busted into and busted up and tied up by a man with a history of armed robberies . . .

  7. #7
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Location
    king county
    Posts
    162
    Quote Originally Posted by sudden valley gunner View Post
    No way! I'd rather they pay attention to the legislative note in the use of force RCW that recognized cops have a limited use of force and the civilians a much broader one.
    where may I read the legislative note to that effect and what exactly does it say?

  8. #8
    Regular Member solus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    here nc
    Posts
    6,865
    Quote Originally Posted by zaitz View Post
    After December 7th 1941, the US was not in imminent danger of attack on december 8th. The fact of the attack at Pearl Harbor meant that the us and Japan were at war and we should kill or disable them and not wait for the next attack or until the next attack was imminent.

    The man in Colorado is, according to the news reports at risk of prosecution, but, at least as far as his neighbors are concerned, he acted properly . . . and maybe a lot of the neighbors are happy that is not them tomorrow who is being busted into and busted up and tied up by a man with a history of armed robberies . . .
    so you get threatened, walk away from the event, and you then pick up a firearm and hunt the perps down shooting at them in public, without concern for life and limb of those citizens ~ noncombatants if you will, not involved in your initial incident. i see this ending quite well for all concerned...

    which neighbour is paying for damage resulting from the nice individual running outside after getting his gun to attack the bad guys:



    oh wait, the BG has insurance wouldn't he...or better yet, since it is the shooter's vehicle their insurance will cover the damage to the house and car ~ including detailing the vehicle to remove the blood stains.

    ipse
    I'm only human; I do what I can; I'm just a man; I do what I can; Don't put the blame on me; Don't put your blame on me ~ Rag'n'Bone Man.

    Please do not get confused between my personality & my attitude. My personality is who I am ~ my attitude depends on who you are and how you act.

    Remember always, do not judge someone because they sin differently than you do!

    Get your facts first, and then you can distort them as much as you please. Mark Twain

  9. #9
    Regular Member Difdi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Seattle, Washington, USA
    Posts
    996
    Quote Originally Posted by zaitz View Post
    One man was shot while driving away and he crashed into a house after losing control of the car. He died a short time later. . .
    This one says it all, really. While driving away. That's not defense of your life, that's extrajudicial execution/vigilantism. You're supposed to get the courts involved with punishing criminals, not lynch them.

    Quote Originally Posted by zaitz View Post
    After December 7th 1941, the US was not in imminent danger of attack on december 8th. The fact of the attack at Pearl Harbor meant that the us and Japan were at war and we should kill or disable them and not wait for the next attack or until the next attack was imminent.
    The flaw in your argument is that there was no overarching authority above Japan and the United States in 1941. The US couldn't call the World Police and have Japan arrested, tried for the crime and punished if convicted. Generally, nations still can't do things like that. So war is a valid response to an act of war. But you are not a sovereign nation and neither is someone who commits a crime against you, and both you and they are subject to the consequences of breaking the law.

  10. #10
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    FYI .. in CT one can kill a fleeing murderer even if not a threat to the shooter.

    The WWII analogy? Not a very good example.

  11. #11
    Moderator / Administrator Grapeshot's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    North Chesterfield, Va.
    Posts
    34,602
    Quote Originally Posted by davidmcbeth View Post
    FYI .. in CT one can kill a fleeing murderer even if not a threat to the shooter.
    --snipped--
    This ain't Kansas Connecticut Toto.
    You will not rise to the occasion; you will fall back on your level of training.” Archilochus, 650 BC

    Old and treacherous will beat young and skilled every time. Yata hey.

  12. #12
    Regular Member solus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    here nc
    Posts
    6,865
    Quote Originally Posted by davidmcbeth View Post
    FYI .. in CT one can kill a fleeing murderer even if not a threat to the shooter.

    The WWII analogy? Not a very good example.
    putting my hand to cover my mouth is surprise...

    ya'l got a site for that their statement?

    ipse
    I'm only human; I do what I can; I'm just a man; I do what I can; Don't put the blame on me; Don't put your blame on me ~ Rag'n'Bone Man.

    Please do not get confused between my personality & my attitude. My personality is who I am ~ my attitude depends on who you are and how you act.

    Remember always, do not judge someone because they sin differently than you do!

    Get your facts first, and then you can distort them as much as you please. Mark Twain

  13. #13
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Location
    king county
    Posts
    162
    Quote Originally Posted by davidmcbeth View Post
    FYI .. in CT one can kill a fleeing murderer even if not a threat to the shooter.

    The WWII analogy? Not a very good example.
    A man breaks into the homes of you . . . or of A, B C and you, and beats you, points a handgun at you and rapes your wife, steals what money and gold and silver there is

    and starts to run or drive off . . . in his car, your car or in a stolen vehicle . . .

    and by some fluke you are still able and moving and have a handgun nearby he did not take . . .

    you can't shoot him because he is not a threat to your life or body anymore, although he is just finishing his little armed robbery, rape and aggravated assault . . .

    The guy shot down in Colorado who was shot by the man he had assaulted and robbed was on offense #whatever . . .

    Here in Seattle there are assaults which take place downtown or on Capitol hill . . . at times a single blow is enough to knock a guy out and maybe 2 to 5 such blows lands him in the hospital and sometimes a single blow can kill . . .

    some of the guys who start the bullying attacks begin with a small and minor push to see how someone will react . . .4

    The guy who has robbed and/or raped and/or stolen is not subject to a higher authority unless and until he is caught and he is obviously not acting like he regards himself as subject to a higher authority.

    But I admit that I am not infallible and do not always know everything that God or infallible persons would know or understand . . . but shooting armed robbers who are in the process of fleeing seems like a necessary thing at times.

  14. #14
    Regular Member solus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    here nc
    Posts
    6,865
    Quote Originally Posted by zaitz View Post
    A man breaks into the homes of you . . . or of A, B C and you, and beats you, points a handgun at you and rapes your wife, steals what money and gold and silver there is

    and starts to run or drive off . . . in his car, your car or in a stolen vehicle . . .

    and by some fluke you are still able and moving and have a handgun nearby he did not take . . .

    you can't shoot him because he is not a threat to your life or body anymore, although he is just finishing his little armed robbery, rape and aggravated assault . . .

    The guy shot down in Colorado who was shot by the man he had assaulted and robbed was on offense #whatever . . .

    Here in Seattle there are assaults which take place downtown or on Capitol hill . . . at times a single blow is enough to knock a guy out and maybe 2 to 5 such blows lands him in the hospital and sometimes a single blow can kill . . .

    some of the guys who start the bullying attacks begin with a small and minor push to see how someone will react . . .4

    The guy who has robbed and/or raped and/or stolen is not subject to a higher authority unless and until he is caught and he is obviously not acting like he regards himself as subject to a higher authority.

    But I admit that I am not infallible and do not always know everything that God or infallible persons would know or understand . . . but shooting armed robbers who are in the process of fleeing seems like a necessary thing at times.
    shades of bronson's death wish...shudder

    ipse
    I'm only human; I do what I can; I'm just a man; I do what I can; Don't put the blame on me; Don't put your blame on me ~ Rag'n'Bone Man.

    Please do not get confused between my personality & my attitude. My personality is who I am ~ my attitude depends on who you are and how you act.

    Remember always, do not judge someone because they sin differently than you do!

    Get your facts first, and then you can distort them as much as you please. Mark Twain

  15. #15
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Location
    king county
    Posts
    162
    Quote Originally Posted by solus View Post
    shades of bronson's death wish...shudder

    ipse
    New york state law on the police power to shot those who are fleeing . . .

    Section 35.30 of the state penal code says that a police officer "in the course of effecting or attempting to effect an arrest, or of preventing or attempting to prevent the escape from custody, of a person whom he or she reasonably believes to have committed an offense, may use physical force when and to the extent he or she reasonably believes such to be necessary to effect the arrest, or to prevent the escape from custody … except that deadly physical force may be used for such purposes" under specific conditions.

    One of them is when "the offense committed" by the fleeing person is "a felony … involving the use or attempted use or threatened imminent use of physical force against a person" which Sweat's original crime was. Deadly force is also permitted when the person has committed "kidnapping, arson, escape in the first degree, burglary in the first degree or any attempt to commit such a crime." Escape in the first degree is what Sweat apparently committed when he broke out of prison.

    ***

    Police in New york have the power to use deadly force when pursuing, arresting or attempting to arrest those believed guilty of several heinous crimes, but you and I do not?

    ***

    Also, for individuals who are not police persons . . . from the new york law . . .

    may use deadly physical force for
    such purpose when he or she reasonably believes such to be necessary to:
    (a) Defend himself, herself or a third person from what he or she
    reasonably believes to be the use or imminent use of deadly physical
    force; or
    (b) Effect the arrest of a person who has committed murder,
    manslaughter in the first degree, robbery, forcible rape or forcible
    criminal sexual act and who is in immediate flight therefrom.

    http://ypdcrime.com/penal.law/article35.htm#p35.30

    Are you alleging that there is been serious problems in New York as a result of the individual right to use deadly force to arrest fleeing robbers or murderers?

    Also, a police persons shot David Sweat who was unarmed but who had previously committed murder and then broke out of prison . . . are you suggesting it would have been better for the officer to not have shot Sweat?



    z
    Last edited by zaitz; 01-30-2016 at 09:43 PM.

  16. #16
    Moderator / Administrator Grapeshot's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    North Chesterfield, Va.
    Posts
    34,602
    Quote Originally Posted by zaitz View Post
    --snipped-- . . are you suggesting it would have been better for the officer to not have shot Sweat?
    Are you suggesting that it was better that the officer shot Sweat?

    No other means to regain custody?
    You will not rise to the occasion; you will fall back on your level of training.” Archilochus, 650 BC

    Old and treacherous will beat young and skilled every time. Yata hey.

  17. #17
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338
    Quote Originally Posted by zaitz View Post
    where may I read the legislative note to that effect and what exactly does it say?
    http://app.leg.wa.gov/Rcw/default.aspx?cite=9A.16.040

    NOTES:
    Legislative recognition: "The legislature recognizes that RCW 9A.16.040 establishes a dual standard with respect to the use of deadly force by peace officers and private citizens, and further recognizes that private citizens' permissible use of deadly force under the authority of RCW 9.01.200, 9A.16.020, or 9A.16.050 is not restricted and remains broader than the limitations imposed on peace officers."
    I am not anti Cop I am just pro Citizen.

    U.S. v. Minker, 350 US 179, at page 187
    "Because of what appears to be a lawful command on the surface, many citizens, because
    of their respect for what only appears to be a law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their
    rights, due to ignorance." (Paraphrased)

  18. #18
    Regular Member solus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    here nc
    Posts
    6,865
    ZAITZ, your lack of intellectual integrity is showing as you failed to quote the whole paragraph 4 and only provided partial information on what you felt suited your purpose.

    not playing, so enjoy...

    ipse

    edited to eliminate Mr. Hayes confusion, thus assuring my comment is directed to the appropriate individual.
    Last edited by solus; 01-30-2016 at 10:41 PM. Reason: to clarify
    I'm only human; I do what I can; I'm just a man; I do what I can; Don't put the blame on me; Don't put your blame on me ~ Rag'n'Bone Man.

    Please do not get confused between my personality & my attitude. My personality is who I am ~ my attitude depends on who you are and how you act.

    Remember always, do not judge someone because they sin differently than you do!

    Get your facts first, and then you can distort them as much as you please. Mark Twain

  19. #19
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Long gone
    Posts
    2,575
    Quote Originally Posted by solus View Post
    your lack of intellectual integrity is showing as you failed to quote the whole paragraph 4 and only provided partial information on what you felt suited your purpose.

    not playing, so enjoy...

    ipse
    Who you talking to willis?
    Throw me to the wolves and I will come back leading the pack.

  20. #20
    Regular Member solus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    here nc
    Posts
    6,865
    Quote Originally Posted by sudden valley gunner View Post
    http://app.leg.wa.gov/Rcw/default.aspx?cite=9A.16.040

    NOTES:
    Legislative recognition: "The legislature recognizes that RCW 9A.16.040 establishes a dual standard with respect to the use of deadly force by peace officers and private citizens, and further recognizes that private citizens' permissible use of deadly force under the authority of RCW 9.01.200, 9A.16.020, or 9A.16.050 is not restricted and remains broader than the limitations imposed on peace officers."
    RCW 9A.16.040
    Justifiable homicide or use of deadly force by public officer, peace officer, person aiding.

    (c) When necessarily used by a peace officer or person acting under the officer's command and in the officer's aid:

    (2) In considering whether to use deadly force under subsection (1)(c) of this section, to arrest or apprehend any person for the commission of any crime, the peace officer must have probable cause to believe that the suspect, if not apprehended, poses a threat of serious physical harm to the officer or a threat of serious physical harm to others. Among the circumstances which may be considered by peace officers as a "threat of serious physical harm" are the following:

    therefore, WA's JQPublic is not acting on their own to go after the BG but under the nice LE's command AND in their aid.

    ipse
    I'm only human; I do what I can; I'm just a man; I do what I can; Don't put the blame on me; Don't put your blame on me ~ Rag'n'Bone Man.

    Please do not get confused between my personality & my attitude. My personality is who I am ~ my attitude depends on who you are and how you act.

    Remember always, do not judge someone because they sin differently than you do!

    Get your facts first, and then you can distort them as much as you please. Mark Twain

  21. #21
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Location
    king county
    Posts
    162
    Quote Originally Posted by sudden valley gunner View Post
    http://app.leg.wa.gov/Rcw/default.aspx?cite=9A.16.040

    NOTES:
    Legislative recognition: "The legislature recognizes that RCW 9A.16.040 establishes a dual standard with respect to the use of deadly force by peace officers and private citizens, and further recognizes that private citizens' permissible use of deadly force under the authority of RCW 9.01.200, 9A.16.020, or 9A.16.050 is not restricted and remains broader than the limitations imposed on peace officers."
    Ok, this seems very interesting . . . It seems that an ordinary citizen who is not a police person has the power to use deadly force to arrest or retain custody of a felon, to resist the commission of a felony against himself, when there is reasonable grounds to believe that someone has the design of committing a felony such as to rape or rob or kidnap,

    (2) Whenever necessarily used by a person arresting one who has committed a felony and delivering him or her to a public officer competent to receive him or her into custody;

    In other words, "Stop or I will shoot" may be done with felons and those about to attempt certain felonies, it appears. Perhaps even less than that in some cases.

    the law as it relates to police states that local police agencies have the power to give more restrictive instructions to their police than "Stop or I will shot," etc . . .

    the officer has to give some warning . . . there seems to be no warning requirement in the law for ordinary persons . . .

  22. #22
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Location
    king county
    Posts
    162
    Quote Originally Posted by solus View Post
    RCW 9A.16.040
    Justifiable homicide or use of deadly force by public officer, peace officer, person aiding.

    (c) When necessarily used by a peace officer or person acting under the officer's command and in the officer's aid:

    (2) In considering whether to use deadly force under subsection (1)(c) of this section, to arrest or apprehend any person for the commission of any crime, the peace officer must have probable cause to believe that the suspect, if not apprehended, poses a threat of serious physical harm to the officer or a threat of serious physical harm to others. Among the circumstances which may be considered by peace officers as a "threat of serious physical harm" are the following:

    therefore, WA's JQPublic is not acting on their own to go after the BG but under the nice LE's command AND in their aid.

    ipse
    Use of force—When lawful.
    The use, attempt, or offer to use force upon or toward the person of another is not unlawful in the following cases:
    (1) Whenever necessarily used by a public officer in the performance of a legal duty, or a person assisting the officer and acting under the officer's direction;

    (2) Whenever necessarily used by a person arresting one who has committed a felony and delivering him or her to a public officer competent to receive him or her into custody;

  23. #23
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Location
    king county
    Posts
    162
    Quote Originally Posted by solus View Post
    ZAITZ, your lack of intellectual integrity is showing as you failed to quote the whole paragraph 4 and only provided partial information on what you felt suited your purpose.

    not playing, so enjoy...

    ipse

    edited to eliminate Mr. Hayes confusion, thus assuring my comment is directed to the appropriate individual.
    For what it matters, accusing me of lying, lacking in integrity or misrepresenting things is usually false, and my response is to pray for you that God show you the right way.

  24. #24
    Regular Member Freedom1Man's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Greater Eastside Washington
    Posts
    4,690
    http://app.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=9A.16.050


    RCW 9A.16.050
    Homicide—By other person—When justifiable.
    Homicide is also justifiable when committed either:
    (1) In the lawful defense of the slayer, or his or her husband, wife, parent, child, brother, or sister, or of any other person in his or her presence or company, when there is reasonable ground to apprehend a design on the part of the person slain to commit a felony or to do some great personal injury to the slayer or to any such person, and there is imminent danger of such design being accomplished; or
    (2) In the actual resistance of an attempt to commit a felony upon the slayer, in his or her presence, or upon or in a dwelling, or other place of abode, in which he or she is.
    There
    Provision for free medical attendance and nursing, for clothing, for food, for housing, for the education of children, and a hundred other matters, might with equal propriety be proposed as tending to relieve the employee of mental strain and worry. --- These matters obviously lie outside the orbit of congressional power. (Railroad Retirement Board v Alton Railroad)

  25. #25
    Regular Member solus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    here nc
    Posts
    6,865
    Quote Originally Posted by zaitz View Post
    Use of force—When lawful.
    The use, attempt, or offer to use force upon or toward the person of another is not unlawful in the following cases:
    (1) Whenever necessarily used by a public officer in the performance of a legal duty, or a person assisting the officer and acting under the officer's direction;

    (2) Whenever necessarily used by a person arresting one who has committed a felony and delivering him or her to a public officer competent to receive him or her into custody;
    see my comment to freedom1man...

    ipse
    Last edited by solus; 01-31-2016 at 10:51 AM.
    I'm only human; I do what I can; I'm just a man; I do what I can; Don't put the blame on me; Don't put your blame on me ~ Rag'n'Bone Man.

    Please do not get confused between my personality & my attitude. My personality is who I am ~ my attitude depends on who you are and how you act.

    Remember always, do not judge someone because they sin differently than you do!

    Get your facts first, and then you can distort them as much as you please. Mark Twain

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •