Doctor with CHL stops robber in Tacoma

imported post

I agree sean, I wouldn't want to get any closer than I had to to a BG, much less try to cuff them.

We make comments about gun grabs and retention that we don't have the same issues as LEO because we don't have the obligation to get 'in with it' with the bad guys. Trying to cuff someone is just that. If you pull the gun and they try to run, GREAT!... Now you're no longer in danger.

imported post

sean-1286 wrote:

tanman wrote:

Found it- it's;
RCW 9A.16.020
Use of force — When lawful

Click to expand...

Sorry about that, just a typo. So what is your interpretation now? Mine is that RCW 9A.16 contains defenses to any crimes in the chapter and that means that if one's actions meet the critera in 9A.16.020, they would have an affirmative defense to prosecution for unlawful imprisonment. This is supported further by the attatchment to my previous post.

Personally, although I believe it would be legal, I would not attempt to cuff a suspect or otherwise restrain him/her unless it was absolutely necessary, and hopefully I would have a partner who could help out. I would hold them at gun point, or preferably just use my verbal kung fu, until the police arrived. If s/he runs off and isn't posing a threat--oh well, I have a description for the police and everyone is still safe.

Click to expand...

Roger that.

IMHO, RCW 9A.16.020:

(1) Seems to me that it extensively covers anything resonably done to assist/protect an officer or under the direction of an officer. (I am doing a ride along with a good friend this weekend, so good to know) I have also done this in a situation about two years ago where it was two on one until the cops showed up (so cuffing wasn't an option anyway- I won't try it without a 2-1 GG-BG superiority). Then it was two on two, sort of...The officer yelled at me to disarm. I told him I was gonna holster slowly. I did. He re-oriented his weapon and I pointe out the weapons one the counter. I asked him to toss me cuffs, one set at a time- he had two fortunatelly.Obviously it was common sense at the time and no one had any objection about how I had stopped an armed robbery. I was never received a suppeona, so I assume plea bargain. Good to know I was covered by this and "immunity if aiding officer" (RCW 9.01.055). That was what I was going off of at the time.

(2) Seems to make it legal to detain and transport a crimminal to an officer. However, obviously common sense says to only do this in exigent circumstances... This would appear to be a citizen's arrest law. The disadvantage to this is then you need your cuffs back, so it's probably easier and safer to just control them until an officer shows up. I'm not saying I'll automatically cuff someone if the situation arrives. Options are like guns though- nice to have them when you need them.

(3) Looks like itcovers almost any self defense/defense of party/third party situation that could arise. Good to know the law, better to have common sense- both together is invaluable.

I am not a lawyer or law enforcement officer and no one should construe my reading of this law as official in any way.

imported post

Well I'm glad we got that straightened out, tanman. I agree with all your points, and good job helping that officer. Just be careful in that the law says you must be acting under the officer's direction. So if you draw your gun or assist in some other way before you're told to by an officer and you are not otherwise justified in doing so, you would not be immune from prosecution.

By the way, RCW 9A.16.050 contains the circumstances under which homicide is excusable, although you (and most others here) are probably already aware of it. Thought it might be a helpful reference in this discussion on use of force and it brings us back to the original topic. It seems as though the doctor would have been justified in shooting the robber in the resataurant, since he was committing a felony, although it does not seem like that would have been the best course of action. I think the doctor handled the situation well.

imported post

Yeah, that's where common sense and the ten commandments come in.I have always been goverened more by them than any law.There are always grey areas. If we ever meet in person, I will tell you about two(there were more) very grey (although in my mind very clear cut times) situations in Iraq I could have used deadly force, but chose to fire a warning shot (not allowed, but tolleratedon my team).In both situationsitresulted in the situation being diffused from what would have resulted in 4 civ deathsin one and 2 in the other.Laws/Rules of Engagement should not be our only code of conduct. Morals (if you have them) and common sense should always govern trigger discipline or anything for that matter.