• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Man convicted of shooting car prowler

antispam540

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 17, 2008
Messages
546
Location
Poulsbo, Washington, USA
imported post

Okay, so keeping your weapon at the ready seems advisable. My main concern is with situations in which the criminal presents no violent threat, is not armed with anything, and does not try to hit, hold, or kick you. How do you detain someone like that who is running away? If they don't instigate violence with fists, can you use such violence to stop them from fleeing with your property? Is that advisable tactically when in possession of a firearm or knife?
 

sudden valley gunner

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 13, 2008
Messages
16,674
Location
Whatcom County
imported post

Good question. I think laws have changed but It used to be my freinds job to tackle shoplifter once they left the store with store property. (just the runners of course) It got him the nick name flyin' hawaiian.
 

joeroket

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 5, 2006
Messages
3,339
Location
Everett, Washington, USA
imported post

sudden valley gunner wrote:
joeroket wrote:
tyguy808 wrote:
I personally WAS taught that. And in preperation for battle (confrontation) I would be prepared to shoot if said criminal made aggressive actions towards myself. The guy that got sentenced for unlawful use of deadly force shot a man in the back of the head, without warning (that I could read of or find). If they run, pursue, then detain them. Detainment is achieved by just holding them til police arrive, you need no cuffs nor miranda rights.

I agree but being prepared to defend and shoot does not mean you must confront with the barrel. At the ready is good but you are still prepared to answer if the force is required.
Reactionary actions is very very quick, sometimes even quicker than you can pull a trigger while holding someone at gun point ( I personally know someone who has experience in this). Just had a conversation about that with One of Bellingham Police Deputies (open carrying of course) he stated their were studies on that. I feel nothing wrong, with approaching someone engaged in criminal activity with gun in hand, keep the distance though.

The shoot to wound thing I don't agree with, shoot to stop, don't waste valuable time trying to maim someone.

One he is probably referring to is a video based off studies called "Surviving and Edged Weapon Attack". It is a huge study aimed towards law enforcement that deals with this exact thing. I highly recommend people watch it. It gives very valuable insight into how fast things can, and do, escalate

I agree with you on shooting. If we only shoot to wound how can we possibly justify that our lives were in danger.
 

tyguy808

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 5, 2009
Messages
346
Location
Not Here Anymore
imported post

I was taught that you don't need to be the top dog, just better than the last guy. If you're still standing and he's not, you win. There's no need to kill, as long as you're an upstanding citizen (CPL, no major record) and you are testifying against a "caught red-handed" criminal, he will do his time.

I don't know about you, but if there's a criminal that is willing to come at me, I'm willing to put one in his gut. As small as I am, that is "leveling the playing field."
 

antispam540

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 17, 2008
Messages
546
Location
Poulsbo, Washington, USA
imported post

If you wound the criminal (putting aside the legality of intentionally doing so), it's likely that the criminal will sue you for the injury. I think it's excellent that we've moved away from the idea of letting the criminal walk off with your possessions, and it's good to remember that criminal and victim are often not physically well-matched, but we're trying to find an alternative to shooting unarmed thieves as they run away.

I like the idea of being able to tackle, trip, or otherwise impede the progress of a fleeing vagabond, but once again I'm not sure of the legality of assaulting someone to prevent a theft. It certainly seems reasonable for it to be legal, but does anyone have some sort of proof or corroborating section of state/federal law?
 

deanf

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 25, 2007
Messages
1,789
Location
N47º 12’ x W122º 10’
imported post

as long as you're an upstanding citizen (CPL, no major record) and you are testifying against a "caught red-handed" criminal, he will do his time.

And so might you, if the State can prove that:

- You did not have reason to believe you were in imminent danger of death or serious bodily harm.

- The danger was not such that you could save yourself only with the use of deadly force.

- You used more force than was necessary under the circumstances of your case.

These are the basic elements of a self-defense case. Read more here. A superb article about self defense cases written by an attorney with relevant experience.
 

BigDave

Opt-Out Members
Joined
Nov 22, 2006
Messages
3,456
Location
Yakima, Washington, USA
imported post

Well my turn to chime in here, IANAL nor a certified instructor, this is information I am offering for you to consider in hopes you will seek professional training as you would receive at a qualified training school.

There is a difference between the use of force and the use of deadly force and the RCW's that apply to both.

Our defense weapon is a tool of last resort, this is not to say that this will not be the first and only tool you have time for but in the situations being discussed in this thread there are other liabilities to be considered when being judged by others as the use of force will not be more then necessary then required to stop the threat as seen through the eyes of a reasonable person that knew what you knew at that point and time and would have came to the same conclusion.

As with most people we must come to a choice of why we carry our weapon and you will find your own reasoning but here is mine, I choose to carry my self defense firearm to protect my life or a life of another. Taking a life of property that I can replace is not worth taking a life or loosing my freedom and security over.
Law Enforcement is charged with the safety of the Public at Large and our Military is charged to Defend our Country.

Anytime you introduce a deadly weapon into a situation be prepared to be arrested at the minimum and even be charged and now with the tasked of proving your actions were warranted be it by Law Enforcement, Prosecutor, Jury or a Judge.

Some of the RCW's that govern the use of force.
RCW 9.41.270 Weapons apparently capable of producing bodily harm

(1) It shall be unlawful for any person to carry, exhibit, display, or draw any firearm, dagger, sword, knife or other cutting or stabbing instrument, club, or any other weapon apparently capable of producing bodily harm, in a manner, under circumstances, and at a time and place that either manifests an intent to intimidate another or that warrants alarm for the safety of other persons.

(3) Subsection (1) of this section shall not apply to or affect the following:

(a) Any act committed by a person while in his or her place of abode or fixed place of business;

(c) Any person acting for the purpose of protecting himself or herself against the use of presently threatened unlawful force by another, or for the purpose of protecting another against the use of such unlawful force by a third person;

(d) Any person making or assisting in making a lawful arrest for the commission of a felony;
(a) Ensure you read this and read it again and understand this RCW well, there are exceptions to display of your weapon to stop a threat.

Note "Your Place of Abode" is defined as with in your home, attached garage/building or attached porch or deck. If you step off the deck or enter an unattached garage or building from your home then this exemption does not apply.

(c) If you can articulate that you are being threaten of life or limb then drawing your weapon to deter the foreseen attack then you would again be able to draw your weapon to deter the attack.

(d) Is an entire different can or worms and I will not address, unless you have to call 911.

Now lets look at the Use of Force which would be the first step if possible.

RCW 9A.16.020 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;

(3) Whenever used by a party about to be injured, or by another lawfully aiding him or her, in preventing or attempting to prevent an offense against his or her person, or a malicious trespass, or other malicious interference with real or personal property lawfully in his or her possession, in case the force is not more than is necessary;

(4) Whenever reasonably used by a person to detain someone who enters or remains unlawfully in a building or on real property lawfully in the possession of such person, so long as such detention is reasonable in duration and manner to investigate the reason for the detained person's presence on the premises, and so long as the premises in question did not reasonably appear to be intended to be open to members of the public;

(5) Whenever used by a carrier of passengers or the carrier's authorized agent or servant, or other person assisting them at their request in expelling from a carriage, railway car, vessel, or other vehicle, a passenger who refuses to obey a lawful and reasonable regulation prescribed for the conduct of passengers, if such vehicle has first been stopped and the force used is not more than is necessary to expel the offender with reasonable regard to the offender's personal safety;

(6) Whenever used by any person to prevent a mentally ill, mentally incompetent, or mentally disabled person from committing an act dangerous to any person, or in enforcing necessary restraint for the protection or restoration to health of the person, during such period only as is necessary to obtain legal authority for the restraint or custody of the person.
RCW 9A.16.030 Homicide — When excusable.
Homicide is excusable when committed by accident or misfortune in doing any lawful act by lawful means, without criminal negligence, or without any unlawful intent.
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 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 presence, or upon or in a dwelling, or other place of abode, in which he is.
If you want to receive a short course on the use of deadly force along with many other issues relating to using a firearm in a self defense shooting try The Marksman in Puyallup, WA with Ron Schmitt http://www.themarksman.net/personal_protection.php
Personal Protection and The Use of Force $125.00
For the master of the Use of Deadly Force then look to FAS http://www.firearmsacademy.com/ and look for Massad Ayoob and his LFI 1 Class, where professionals and Attorneys go to get the hard and fast information.

Hopefully this will just add to your questions and hopefully drive you to seek out professional training.
 

Capn Camo

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 19, 2009
Messages
165
Location
E TN
imported post

This is a sticky wicket. A car break in is INSURED. Cars insured, contents... thats what we have insurance for. Insured losses, let em have it vs killing them. The Perp cant do violence to a car...

Granted thats not as easy for you to determine within the 4 seconds you have to assess the situation and act, vs. some left-wing judge/jury/bleeding heart media outlet having hindsight...:cuss:

Heres a photo of one of my "safeties" - a blue round (CCI shot shell) on top, FMJ balls next then the hi- powered HPs. That buckshot round on top should get the attention of all but those on PCP, which will take a head shot to stop.

Prosecutor: "So you drew your 9mm pistol intending to kill the burglar."

Me: "Thats where youre wrong, I didn't have a pistol, I had a SHOTGUN which evidences I went out of my way, even to the extent of possibly putting myself in harms way to use a shot-shell with low power that tends to jam my weapon, to give the perp a chance."


An Ohio Sherrif Deputy once told me that if I killed some burglar on the front porch, to be sure to drag his carcass completely inside (implying "before they got there"). Gods honest truth.
 

BigDave

Opt-Out Members
Joined
Nov 22, 2006
Messages
3,456
Location
Yakima, Washington, USA
imported post

Capn Camo I read your post and disagree with a couple of your statements as I find one being Dangerous to yourself and the other has no reasonable logic.

Capn Camo wrote: Heres a photo of one of my "safeties" - a blue round (CCI shot shell) on top, FMJ balls next then the hi- powered HPs. That buckshot round on top should get the attention of all but those on PCP, which will take a head shot to stop.
Using a CCI Shot Shell for a defensive round when your life or the life of another is in immanent danger will place yourself or another in added danger where one might have only time for one shot.

Firing a warning shot, I feel will get you into some pretty deep do do, as why would you do that when you are in fear for your life or the life of another, or if you choose you had time to shoot a warning shot then apparently you were not in inmanent fear of your life or of another.

Say you wanted to go straight for a JHP you would have to shoot one round to access or rack the slide to get to the new round, or do you keep one in the chamber?

Do yourself and your family a favor seek out professional training with schools as Firearms Academy of Seattle.

Capn Camo wrote: Prosecutor: "So you drew your 9mm pistol intending to kill the burglar." Me: "Thats where youre wrong, I didn't have a pistol, I had a SHOTGUN which evidences I went out of my way, even to the extent of possibly putting myself in harms way to use a shot-shell with low power that tends to jam my weapon, to give the perp a chance."
What in the world do you really think you will trick the Prosecutor, Judge or Jury into believing you used a CCI Shot Shell for a pistol that it was instead of a shotgun?

You are willing to shoot ammunition you know will jam your weapon in an emergency that may cost you your life? and give the perp a chance? they took their chance when they placed my life or the life of another in jeopardy.

Again seek professional training for tactics and legal aspects of carrying a firearms for protection.
 

Vandal

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 1, 2008
Messages
557
Location
Spokane, Washington, USA
imported post

My car is insured for accidents and theft. That is what vehicular insurance is for. I also have Homeowner's insurance that is to get me back my stuff should someone break in and make off with anything of mine.

Someone breaks into my home, and the BG will be dealt with accordingly and possibly shot depending on the BGs actions when confronted at gun point.

What I am getting at is this, property is replaceable, human life is not.Shoot only when there is a threat to your life All of my stuff is insured and can be replaced. Those of you who are willing to end a life over a computer, TV, car, etc should seriously re-evaluate their priorities when it comes to taking a human life, it's kind of a big deal. You kill someone over a TV and I will almost guarantee that you will get to experience Walla Walla in a way you never have before. Killing over a property crime is insanely stupid.

The guy in the OPs link deserves to be in prison. Shooting a guy from behind with a rifle shows intent to kill a non-threat. If there is no immediate and undeniable threat to your life or the lives of others, don't shoot. Draw, detain and wait for the cops to arrive or be the best witness you can be and help find the BG.

I'm going to go put on my flame retardant suit for the fire that is sure to come my way.
 

antispam540

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 17, 2008
Messages
546
Location
Poulsbo, Washington, USA
imported post

My stuff isn't insured. I lost $5000 worth of electronics and my Glock 34 when someone smashed my car's window. None of it was visible. None of it was recovered, and insurance didn't pay a dime for anything but the repairs to the car.

If I hadn't had an understanding landlord, I may have been out on the street a month away from graduation. My life would have taken a much different turn. Because of things like that, and the lives possibly taken by my weapon in the hands of criminals, I'm not sure just letting them take everything they want is the right strategy.
 

sudden valley gunner

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 13, 2008
Messages
16,674
Location
Whatcom County
imported post

Capn Camo wrote:
An Ohio Sherrif Deputy once told me that if I killed some burglar on the front porch, to be sure to drag his carcass completely inside (implying "before they got there"). Gods honest truth.
Never ever touch the body, if you had to shoot who cares where the body lay.
 

David.Car

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 1, 2008
Messages
1,264
Location
Spokane, Washington, USA
imported post

antispam540 wrote:
My stuff isn't insured. I lost $5000 worth of electronics and my Glock 34 when someone smashed my car's window. None of it was visible. None of it was recovered, and insurance didn't pay a dime for anything but the repairs to the car.

If I hadn't had an understanding landlord, I may have been out on the street a month away from graduation. My life would have taken a much different turn. Because of things like that, and the lives possibly taken by my weapon in the hands of criminals, I'm not sure just letting them take everything they want is the right strategy.
No offense but an extra 10 bucks a month with your insurance provider would cover your belongings in your car from theft... Glock 34 @ 600 + 5,000 inelectronics means you could have paid that 10 bucks a month for 45 years and it would have still been cheaper then replacing your equipment.

Oh, and anyone who stores a firearm in their car for any amount of time should also take responsibility for making sure that firearm doesn't leave the car. There are plenty of cheaply attained lock boxes that you can secure to the mounts under your car seat, so the only way the gun leaves is if they take your seat, or the whole car.
 

compmanio365

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 21, 2007
Messages
2,013
Location
Pierce County, Washington, USA
imported post

sudden valley gunner wrote:
Something rubs me wrong we have to pay extra to protect our stuff. Don't steal my stuff!!!
Precisely SVG....definitely rubs me the wrong way as well. Why do I have to pay for "protection" against criminal behavior? How about we stop the criminal behavior as it happens....
 
Top