the use of force bill 2016

sudden valley gunner said:

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."

Click to expand...

solus said:

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

Click to expand...

solus said:

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.

Click to expand...

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.

Click to expand...

zaitz said:

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;

Click to expand...

Freedom1Man said:

http://app.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=9A.16.050

There

Click to expand...

zaitz said:

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.

Click to expand...

zaitz said:

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 . . .

Click to expand...

solus said:

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

Click to expand...

solus said:

freedom, this is the get out of jail card for your SD defense cases (...in his or her presence or company...) not something about your chasing someone down the street shooting at them.

ipse

Click to expand...

decklin said:

That really depends on how you read it. Perhaps I'm wrong but when I read that RCW it seems to me in WA state it would be legal to shoot at someone who had stolen your car.
Stealing a car is a felony. Just because he left the driveway the felony hasn't ended. He still gets arrested for a felony.
IMHO It would be legal.

Click to expand...

decklin said:

That really depends on how you read it. Perhaps I'm wrong but when I read that RCW it seems to me in WA state it would be legal to shoot at someone who had stolen your car.
Stealing a car is a felony. Just because he left the driveway the felony hasn't ended. He still gets arrested for a felony.
IMHO It would be legal.

Click to expand...

solus said:

to answer you...you misread the statute complete and in the second quote left our pertinent details, such as 'at the direction of the nice police officer & it is the nice LE who believes deadly force is warranted.

later...

ipse

Click to expand...

zaitz said:

If you wish, direct my or quote completely the post of mine in which you are claiming that I left out pertinent details.

Till then, I am praying that God show you the right way.

z

Click to expand...

solus said:

as i have quoted numerous times on this forum when others have offered...to quote twain:

But who prays for Satan? Who, in eighteen centuries, has had the common humanity to pray for the one sinner that needed it most?

do me a favor and please keep the unsubstantiated, emotionalized concepts to your self as they have no bearing on the subject at hand.

ipse

Click to expand...

zaitz said:

If you wish me to believe your claim that I have misrepresented something, please show me exactly what I posted as well as what you allege should have been included . . .

till then, but, tis the Bible way, to pray for those who are irritating . . . and as best I can determine, you are falsely accusing me . . . and . . . so . . . therefore . . . I pray that God show you the right way!

You don't regard me as any sort of person you might respect or reply to with clarity, it seems.

At this point, there are 3 persons who have read the RCW and who are substantially agreed that it permits the use of force, including perhaps deadly force, in a fellow who has just stolen "your" car as part of "arresting" him.

http://app.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=9A.16.020; (2)

(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;

this part is not speaking of a peron acting under the direction and supervision of a law enforcement person, but of an individual such as you or me or freedomman or others, who experience a guy who steals a car or robs me or you of a wallet at gunpoint or knifepoint.

Of course, I don't know if any case in which a person who is not a police person has done this and then made this argument in the courts . . . we do know of two cases in which a person killed another person who was assaulting him and was freed by the courts on the grounds that Washington state was a stand-your-ground state, not by legislation, but by court ruling that no one has to leave an area due to some threat or attack upon him and he has the right to use necessary force to remain there . . .

Click to expand...

But Barker, of WASPC, who worked in law enforcement for four agencies over 33 years, said there already is a remedy when police officers make a mistake: civil litigation to recover monetary damages.

“But it doesn’t make them a criminal,” he said, asserting the bill stems from an undercurrent of “Let’s find a way” to charge a police officer.

Click to expand...

Alpine said:

Anyone else see this in the press from the cops opposed to this bill?



Uh, if it's worth suing over then why isn't it worth criminal charges?

Click to expand...

Alpine said:

Anyone else see this in the press from the cops opposed to this bill?



Uh, if it's worth suing over then why isn't it worth criminal charges?

Click to expand...