Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 38

Thread: Since when is trespassing a capital offense

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Kent, Washington, USA
    Posts
    2,048

    Since when is trespassing a capital offense

    Since when is simple trespassing a capital offense, justifying deadly force by simply crossing a "boundary"?

    There are several government facilities with signs of "No Trespassing", and some even say that deadly force is authorized beyond a "point".

    Then these vehicle suddenly show up if one gets "too close" to the boundary.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Click image for larger version. 

Name:	nocamo2.jpg 
Views:	496 
Size:	21.2 KB 
ID:	4367  

  2. #2
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Washington Island, across Death's Door, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    9,193
    I'll bet that the 'No Trespassing Deadly Force Authorized' signs also specify the authority for the warning. If one bothered to read.

  3. #3
    Regular Member Dreamer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Grennsboro NC
    Posts
    5,358
    Groom Lake Air Force Base in NV has had that policy for nearly 50 years...

    No fence, no physical barriers, just occasional signs in the desert, and little orange posts stuck in the sand every 30 feet or so...
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Click image for larger version. 

Name:	MVC-288F.jpg 
Views:	2886 
Size:	36.6 KB 
ID:	4368  
    Last edited by Dreamer; 10-30-2010 at 02:15 PM.
    It is our cause to dispel the foggy thinking which avoids hard decisions in the delusion that a world of conflict will somehow mysteriously resolve itself into a world of harmony, if we just don't rock the boat or irritate the forces of aggression—and this is hogwash."
    --Barry Goldwater, 1964

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Kent, Washington, USA
    Posts
    2,048
    How in the world in this even legal? Getting shot for crossing an imaginary line? What is the world coming to? Why don't they have a secured fence with a guard post set up there?

  5. #5
    Centurion
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Pleasant Grove, Utah, USA
    Posts
    3,828
    Quote Originally Posted by Dreamer View Post
    Groom Lake Air Force Base in NV has had that policy for nearly 50 years...

    No fence, no physical barriers, just occasional signs in the desert, and little orange posts stuck in the sand every 30 feet or so...
    Not to be contentious here but..... "little orange posts stuck in the sand every 30 feet or so" seems to be ADEQUATE WARNING provided one is NOT BLIND OR ILLITERATE!

    Edited to add.... at many airports that are both civilian and military you will fine a wide red painted line where if one crosses into the military portion you will most likely be met BY ARMED MILITARY PERSONS WITH M16s POINTED AT YOU.
    I've never had this happen to me but I've heard from those on BOTH sides of the M16 when it has happened.
    Last edited by JoeSparky; 10-30-2010 at 07:46 PM.

  6. #6
    Regular Member Jack House's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    I80, USA
    Posts
    2,661
    I'm not really sure what the issue is here. That you can't trespass onto top secret military property? I mean, are they supposed to let you have free run of the place? What do you think would happen if you snuck into the secure portion of a police station or jail and got caught?

  7. #7
    Regular Member ChiangShih's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    KC
    Posts
    628

    Red face

    Most of us live in states where we can use lethal force if someone illegally enters our homes, they can use lethal force if someone illegally goes on their base. I think that is a fair balance of power.



    Troll disclaimer: Yes I'm aware I've over simplified the issue and compared two different empowering laws for the use of lethal force.
    Last edited by ChiangShih; 10-31-2010 at 12:12 AM.
    Tiocfaidh Ar La

  8. #8
    Regular Member Tomas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    University Place, Washington, USA
    Posts
    705
    I'll give my answer by telling a little story...

    When I was in the USAF Strategic Air Command, portions of our bases were even more secure than others, and were designated "No Lone Zones."

    In those areas a single individual was considered a security threat, would be challenged, and if they did not immediately stop, WOULD be fired on.

    While I was stationed at Carswell AFB, TX my squadron commander (a B52F pilot) was returning to the alert shack after a practice alert and realized he had left his flight bag, with his codes, on the aircraft.

    When he dropped his crew off at the shack, outside the Alert Area, instead of parking the truck, Colonel Hooker turned it around and headed back to that nuclear loaded alert aircraft to recover his bag and codes.

    He single mindedly wanted to get those codes back in his control.

    He buzzed right by the rookie A2C guard at the gate to the Alert Area, and didn't even hear the challenge yelled at him.

    That young guard put three .30 cal rounds through the back of the USAF crew-cab Dodge, blowing seat stuffing all over the cab, putting holes in the dash, and getting Col. Hooker's undivided attention.

    Hooker stopped the truck and sat there as the guard ran toward the truck while on his radio 'sounding the alarm.'

    Almost instantly Air Police trucks had Hooker surrounded and on the ground in the rain, and he rode in the bed of an AP pickup, with two guards covering him, to the base lockup.

    Had my Colonel not stopped his truck, that guard would have definitely stopped my Colonel.

    Two weeks later Hooker was out of the USAF and the guard was promoted and honored.

    Yes, there are areas where it really is shoot first, no questions.

    (That was 1968.)
    No tyranny is so irksome as petty tyranny: The officious demands of policemen, government clerks, and electromechanical gadgets. -- Edward Abbey

    • • • Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? Faciémus!• • •

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Kent, Washington, USA
    Posts
    2,048
    Quote Originally Posted by Jack House View Post
    I'm not really sure what the issue is here. That you can't trespass onto top secret military property? I mean, are they supposed to let you have free run of the place? What do you think would happen if you snuck into the secure portion of a police station or jail and got caught?
    You should get arrested and charged with trespassing, unless they can prove you had other intentions of being there. Being shot on sight? Come on. That's ridiculous. What happens if some guys are out riding a dirt bike in the desert and fail to see the signs, and happened to speed through the little orange posts? Are their cowboy security going to start firing down on them?

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Kent, Washington, USA
    Posts
    2,048
    Quote Originally Posted by ChiangShih View Post
    Most of us live in states where we can use lethal force if someone illegally enters our homes, they can use lethal force if someone illegally goes on their base. I think that is a fair balance of power.



    Troll disclaimer: Yes I'm aware I've over simplified the issue and compared two different empowering laws for the use of lethal force.
    Enters the inside of your home, yes, but here in Washington, I do not believe it's justifiable to use deadly force if someone entered your driveway, even if you have No Trespassing signs. You can use whatever force is appropriate and deemed necessary to remove them. You can't just shoot them if they walk on your driveway or patio.

    "Military Property

    Federal law also criminalizes trespassing on military or Coast Guard property. According to 18 U.S.C. 1382, anyone who trespasses on military property within the jurisdiction of the United States can be charged with criminal trespass and may face fines and incarceration for up to six months. Further, anyone who is removed from such property and ordered not to return, and who subsequently does return, can be charged with the same crime."

    I see nothing about deadly forced being legally authorized for criminal trespassing.
    Last edited by Aaron1124; 10-31-2010 at 06:40 PM.

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Kent, Washington, USA
    Posts
    2,048
    Check this video out. A few teens, with their father, drive out to Area 51 to observe the signs. They come across a couple of elderly women about 7 miles away from the "No not cross" area of Area 51. The two women are confused, and appear lost, and mentioned how they wanted to take pictures of the signs. The teens told the ladies to follow them, but also mentioned NOT to pass them once they got to the signs. Well, the ladies ended up passing them, and proceeded PAST the "Do not cross" signs. Within seconds, the "camo guys" in their pick up truck took immediate pursuit, and the County Sheriff's Department made their way within a matter of minutes.

    Watch for yourself to decide what happens.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f_Nt0jgGNek

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Granite State of Mind
    Posts
    4,509
    Quote Originally Posted by Tomas View Post
    Two weeks later Hooker was out of the USAF and the guard was promoted and honored.
    The military doesn't take kindly to NRAS personnel losing their codes.

  13. #13
    Regular Member Tomas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    University Place, Washington, USA
    Posts
    705
    Quote Originally Posted by KBCraig View Post
    The military doesn't take kindly to NRAS personnel losing their codes.
    I believe that may be a slight understatement...
    No tyranny is so irksome as petty tyranny: The officious demands of policemen, government clerks, and electromechanical gadgets. -- Edward Abbey

    • • • Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? Faciémus!• • •

  14. #14
    Founder's Club Member PrayingForWar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    The Real World.
    Posts
    1,705
    Quote Originally Posted by Aaron1124 View Post
    You should get arrested and charged with trespassing, unless they can prove you had other intentions of being there. Being shot on sight? Come on. That's ridiculous. What happens if some guys are out riding a dirt bike in the desert and fail to see the signs, and happened to speed through the little orange posts? Are their cowboy security going to start firing down on them?
    Attention to detail, and situational awareness will help keep you alive. Go sneaking around on some rancher's property at night and see how much warning you get. The military has more tolerance for trespassing than a lot of cattle ranchers do here in TX do.
    If you ladies leave my island, if you survive recruit training. You will become a minister of death, PRAYING FOR WAR...

  15. #15
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Kent, Washington, USA
    Posts
    2,048
    Quote Originally Posted by PrayingForWar View Post
    Attention to detail, and situational awareness will help keep you alive. Go sneaking around on some rancher's property at night and see how much warning you get. The military has more tolerance for trespassing than a lot of cattle ranchers do here in TX do.
    BUT, is it legal? I do not see a single trespassing law that justifies the use of deadly force. Even in Federal offenses. If someone can find one, and cite it, that'd be great. I will concede that I am incorrect, but in the meantime, it sounds as if they are acting above the law. Breaking and entering or burglary is a different story. I am talking about criminal trespassing.

  16. #16
    Regular Member MarlboroLts5150's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    San Antonio
    Posts
    407
    Quote Originally Posted by Aaron1124 View Post
    You should get arrested and charged with trespassing, unless they can prove you had other intentions of being there. Being shot on sight? Come on. That's ridiculous. What happens if some guys are out riding a dirt bike in the desert and fail to see the signs, and happened to speed through the little orange posts? Are their cowboy security going to start firing down on them?
    Where did you get the idea that you would be shot on sight???
    "My dedication to my country's flag rests on my ardent belief in this noblest of causes, equality for all. If my future rests under this earth rather than upon it, I fear not."

    -Leopold Karpeles, US Civil War Medal of Honor Recipient

  17. #17
    Campaign Veteran Bookman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Winston Salem, North Carolina, United States
    Posts
    1,424
    Quote Originally Posted by Aaron1124 View Post
    You should get arrested and charged with trespassing, unless they can prove you had other intentions of being there. Being shot on sight? Come on. That's ridiculous. What happens if some guys are out riding a dirt bike in the desert and fail to see the signs, and happened to speed through the little orange posts? Are their cowboy security going to start firing down on them?
    It doesn't say that you'll be shot on sight. It says that deadly force is authorized. That means that if you "accidentally" cross the boundary you'd better obey the guys who show up to "talk" to you. The use of deadly force involves a progression from the least amount of force (verbal) to the greatest, lethal (deadly) force. These aren't attack dogs we're talking about. They're highly trained military personnel.
    Last edited by Bookman; 11-01-2010 at 06:35 AM.
    "All that is required for evil to prevail is for good men to do nothing." - Edmund Burke


    "I like people who stand on the Constitution... unless they're using it to wipe their feet." - Jon E Hutcherson

  18. #18
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Portsmouth, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    463
    Quote Originally Posted by MarlboroLts5150 View Post
    Where did you get the idea that you would be shot on sight???
    +1

    "Deadly Force Authorized" and "Trespassers will be shot on sight" are two completely different unrelated statements. Basically, the statement "Deadly Force Authorized" means, if you trespass, you will be arrested or at least stopped and questioned. If you attempt to resist or flee, we will do whatever we have to to apprehend you, up to and including shooting you!

  19. #19
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Fairborn, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    13,063
    Quote Originally Posted by Aaron1124 View Post
    You should get arrested and charged with trespassing, unless they can prove you had other intentions of being there. Being shot on sight? Come on. That's ridiculous. What happens if some guys are out riding a dirt bike in the desert and fail to see the signs, and happened to speed through the little orange posts? Are their cowboy security going to start firing down on them?
    Deadly force being authorized does not mean that they will shoot on sight. Any security guard shooting on sight will likely be brought up on charges and will also surely have any immunity to civil suit pierced.

    As mentioned in earlier posts, shooting will be a last resort after several attempts to correct a trespass have failed. And, that is a lot more consideration than a trespasser will receive from property owners in some jurisdictions!

    I kinda like that our nukes (for example) are protected by an authorization to use deadly force.

  20. #20
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Kent, Washington, USA
    Posts
    2,048
    Quote Originally Posted by eye95 View Post
    Deadly force being authorized does not mean that they will shoot on sight. Any security guard shooting on sight will likely be brought up on charges and will also surely have any immunity to civil suit pierced.

    As mentioned in earlier posts, shooting will be a last resort after several attempts to correct a trespass have failed. And, that is a lot more consideration than a trespasser will receive from property owners in some jurisdictions!

    I kinda like that our nukes (for example) are protected by an authorization to use deadly force.
    I agree with deadly forced being authorized for unauthorized entrance inside of a facility or an establishment (also known as burglary here in Washington). I am just arguing against it for criminal trespassing when it comes to the passing of a boundary line or being in the perimeter of someone else's property, whether it's government or privately owned. Even if I had $1,000,000,000 in my house, I wouldn't start firing at a man for walking on my driveway. I understand that you're saying it isn't necessarily justifying immediate deadly force, but having a sign that says "Deadly force authorized" seems more like an intimidation tactic to me.

  21. #21
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Fairborn, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    13,063
    Quote Originally Posted by Aaron1124 View Post
    I agree with deadly forced being authorized for unauthorized entrance inside of a facility or an establishment (also known as burglary here in Washington). I am just arguing against it for criminal trespassing when it comes to the passing of a boundary line or being in the perimeter of someone else's property, whether it's government or privately owned. Even if I had $1,000,000,000 in my house, I wouldn't start firing at a man for walking on my driveway. I understand that you're saying it isn't necessarily justifying immediate deadly force, but having a sign that says "Deadly force authorized" seems more like an intimidation tactic to me.
    I wouldn't open fire either. Responsible folks take measured steps--as would the guards at military installations that display those signs.

    Yes, it is an intimidation tactic! That is step 1 of the measured steps: Make folks think twice before even crossing the line. Make them fear for their safety when challenged by the armed guard. Good!!!

    Step 27 is, "Shoot the m***********!"

  22. #22
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Kent, Washington, USA
    Posts
    2,048
    This is a very interesting video. Not sure if you had a chance to see it or not, but it's two older women who passed the boundary at Area 51 while some teens and their dad filmed the incident. The "camo men" took immediate pursuit, and the county Sheriff's Department arrived within minutes.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f_Nt0jgGNek
    Last edited by Aaron1124; 11-01-2010 at 11:46 AM.

  23. #23
    Regular Member Marco's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Greene County
    Posts
    3,844
    Quote Originally Posted by Aaron1124 View Post
    Since when is simple trespassing a capital offense, justifying deadly force.


    Trespassing on private property has always been akin to playing Russian Roulette!!
    Much like J-walking and running redlights the offender knows (or should know) it can lead to death.


    Many trespassing signs are enforced by four legged fast movers that don't care who you are or why you are there!!!
    Many FLFM are backed up by armed personnel who will (almost) always side with the FLFM!!!

  24. #24
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338
    Quote Originally Posted by Aaron1124 View Post
    How in the world in this even legal? Getting shot for crossing an imaginary line? What is the world coming to? Why don't they have a secured fence with a guard post set up there?
    Although I agree with your sentiment when it comes to 'public' property which all government property is.

    I would disagree and think that private property when well posted/fenced should be able to be defended even with fire power.

  25. #25
    Regular Member Jack House's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    I80, USA
    Posts
    2,661
    Quote Originally Posted by sudden valley gunner View Post
    Although I agree with your sentiment when it comes to 'public' property which all government property is.

    I would disagree and think that private property when well posted/fenced should be able to be defended even with fire power.
    I'd have to agree with you, especially when well fenced and posted. Because if you actively circumvented the fence and ignored the warning signs, then odds are you're not there for tea and crumpets.

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
  •