what if scenario

imported post

buketdude wrote:

This is in CT's General Statutes...not sure if i would use my firearm to get my property back, but i would use other means to get my property back...and the firearm as a last resort.

Physical Force in Defense of Property

A person is justified in using reasonable physical force when and to the extent he reasonably believes it necessary to (1) prevent attempted larceny or criminal mischief involving property or (2) regain property that he reasonably believes was stolen shortly before.

Click to expand...

Here is what I found at http://www.cga.ct.gov/2005/pub/Chap951.htm#Sec53a-21.htm

Sec. 53a-21. Use of physical force in defense of property. A person is justified in using reasonable physical force upon another person when and to the extent that he reasonably believes such to be necessary to prevent an attempt by such other person to commit larceny or criminal mischief involving property, or when and to the extent he reasonably believes such to be necessary to regain property which he reasonably believes to have been acquired by larceny within a reasonable time prior to the use of such force; but he may use deadly physical force under such circumstances only in defense of person as prescribed in section 53a-19.

imported post

ChinChin wrote:

FightingGlock19 wrote:

Lou_Sanderson wrote:

Ok, how about you have your firearm locked and unloaded in the trunk in accordance with interstate travel laws. You pull off the interstate to get some gas...

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Then you'd be breaking the law. . .If you are referencing interstate peaceful journey laws, they will not allow you to stop ANYWEHRE in their state if you are transporting a firearm, you have to drive straight through with no stops for refuling, bathroom breaks, etc. If you do you are in violation of law.They vary from state to state, but off the top of my head I know DC and Maryland are like that. Otherstates I know of don't have any peaceful journey statutes at all. They fear all guns and don't want them in their states, driving through or otherwise..

Click to expand...

Please post a citation to the law you'd be breaking. You're teatering on the edge of Penalty Flag Point here.

My understanding is that the safe passage law is a federal law, which allows for stops indidental to traveling, such asfuel stops. And, although DC and MD (and especially NY) might not honor it, it is they who are breaking the law, not you. Please provide evidence that I'm wrong, as it sounds very unreasonable.

imported post

If you had your state listed then you would most likely get a very specific answer to your post. As it is you are going to get posts that apply toa lot of other places. In Virginia, if you had your gun drawn and approached that person, at a minimum, you would be guilty of brandishing 18.2-282A. http://leg1.state.va.us/cgi-bin/legp504.exe?000+cod+18.2-282

imported post

sccrref wrote:

If you had your state listed then you would most likely get a very specific answer to your post. As it is you are going to get posts that apply toa lot of other places. In Virginia, if you had your gun drawn and approached that person, at a minimum, you would be guilty of brandishing 18.2-282A. http://leg1.state.va.us/cgi-bin/legp504.exe?000+cod+18.2-282

Click to expand...

I always thought that term "brandishing" was a bit ambiguous

imported post

Tomahawk wrote:

Please post a citation to the law you'd be breaking. You're teatering on the edge of Penalty Flag Point here.

My understanding is that the safe passage law is a federal law, which allows for stops indidental to traveling, such asfuel stops. And, although DC and MD (and especially NY) might not honor it, it is they who are breaking the law, not you. Please provide evidence that I'm wrong, as it sounds very unreasonable.

Click to expand...

You may be correct andI may be in error. My main information was from this source:

http://www.recguns.com/Sources/IIC2a.html

Although in reviewing it seems I misread the article, I'm double checking other sources as well so I have a clear answer one way or another. I swear I read somewhere that some states requied you to pass completely through with no stops for Gas or bathroom breaks.

imported post

ChinChin wrote:

Tomahawk wrote:

Please post a citation to the law you'd be breaking. You're teatering on the edge of Penalty Flag Point here.

My understanding is that the safe passage law is a federal law, which allows for stops indidental to traveling, such asfuel stops. And, although DC and MD (and especially NY) might not honor it, it is they who are breaking the law, not you. Please provide evidence that I'm wrong, as it sounds very unreasonable.

Click to expand...

You may be correct andI may be in error. My main information was from this source:

http://www.recguns.com/Sources/IIC2a.html

Although in reviewing it seems I misread the article, I'm double checking other sources as well so I have a clear answer one way or another. I swear I read somewhere that some states requied you to pass completely through with no stops for Gas or bathroom breaks.

Click to expand...

Some municipalities and even counties have interpreted the law in that manner and I have read much anecedotal evidence that certain IL state police officers attempt to enforce the law in that manner to issue citations. However, I also have read time after time when the law is applied in that manner, if the charged citizens shows a strong intent to fight the citation, it is always dropped or pleaded down. I know (from sources within the judiciary and leo community) that is a common practice in certain areas of IL and in certain IL state police districts as certain powers that be want to intimidate the citizens without ever having to prove their interpretations in open court where they will certainly lose.

I am with down with the make a citizen's arrest solution. I put forth a lot of effort to not travel in states or jurisdictions where the gov't requires I not be able to defend myself adequately. I honestly cannot remember the last time I left the house unarmed, and therefore would not have to get my gun in that situation as it would be holstered on my hip.

imported post

In Texas, this would be legal IF anything less than deadly force would expose you to serious bodily harm, and you immediately pursued the BG. The applicable statute, relevant passages in bold:

§ 9.42. DEADLY FORCE TO PROTECT PROPERTY. A person is
justified in using deadly force against another to protect land or
tangible, movable property:
(1) if he would be justified in using force against the
other under Section 9.41; and
(2) when and to the degree he reasonably believes the
deadly force is immediately necessary:
(A) to prevent the other's imminent commission of
arson, burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, theft during the
nighttime, or criminal mischief during the nighttime; or
(B) to prevent the other who is fleeing
immediately after committing burglary, robbery, aggravated
robbery, or theft during the nighttime from escaping with the
property; and
(3) he reasonably believes that:
(A) the land or property cannot be protected or
recovered by any other means; or
(B) the use of force other than deadly force to
protect or recover the land or property would expose the actor or
another to a substantial risk of death or serious bodily injury.

Click to expand...

So in Texas, after being mugged (aggravated robbery) you are allowed to pursueand usedeadly force, but you are on very shaky legal ground; if a prosecutor can convince a jury that you could have been expected to use a lesser degree of force or get the property back by other means, the defense is no longer valid.

Most other states I've looked up have no such provision; deadly force in those states is generally only justifiable in cases of home invasion when you yourself andothers in your home are in danger of serious injury or death.