• 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.

SB 5418 use of force bill

jbone

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 4, 2008
Messages
2,230
Location
WA
Anyone read this bill yet? It would increase our ability to use of deadly force and keep anyone who acts lawfully in the use immune from criminal and civil liability. It also would add a no retreat subsection and would extend to our vehicles.

http://dlr.leg.wa.gov/billsummary/default.aspx?Bill=5418&year=2011

(2) Whenever necessarily used by a person arresting one who has
12 committed a felony and delivering him or her to a public officer​
13 competent to receive him or her into custody;

Why is it class of felony is not specified, I'd hate to see a paper hanger, or first time car prowler shot for running away.
 

j2l3

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 18, 2007
Messages
871
Location
Seattle, Washington, USA

amlevin

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2007
Messages
5,937
Location
North of Seattle, Washington, USA
(2) Whenever necessarily used by a person arresting one who has
12 committed a felony and delivering him or her to a public officer​
13 competent to receive him or her into custody;

Why is it class of felony is not specified, I'd hate to see a paper hanger, or first time car prowler shot for running away.

Wouldn't this "event" take them out of the "first timer" category? Besides, in WA, "first timers" in the offenses you cited are all too often plead down to misdemeanors or deferred prosecution.
 
Last edited:

BigDave

Opt-Out Members
Joined
Nov 22, 2006
Messages
3,456
Location
Yakima, Washington, USA
Oh Oh, some here will not like this, if you are doing something illegal as in possession of marijuana you loose your right to use deadly force.

(2) The presumption set forth in subsection (1) of this section
does not apply if:
(c) The person who uses deadly force is engaged in an unlawful
activity or is using the dwelling, residence, other place of abode, or
vehicle to further an unlawful activity;
 

BigDave

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

FMCDH

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 9, 2008
Messages
2,037
Location
St. Louis, MO
Yeah you could say the only thing that should be smoking is your gun barrel. :monkey

I really don't think the device you use to smoke marijuana with makes any difference on its legality, but hey, each to their own....;)

Mmm...hint of CLP on the tongue.
 
Last edited:

TechnoWeenie

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 17, 2007
Messages
2,084
Location
, ,
Oh Oh, some here will not like this, if you are doing something illegal as in possession of marijuana you loose your right to use deadly force.


'you're going to jail'
but it was self defense, he tried to carjack me!
'You're parked in a fire zone!'
#(%&#%(
 

jbone

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 4, 2008
Messages
2,230
Location
WA
(2) Whenever necessarily used by a person arresting one who has​

12 committed a felony and delivering him or her to a public officer
13 competent to receive him or her into custody;

Why is it class of felony is not specified, I'd hate to see a paper hanger, or first time car prowler shot for running away.


Wouldn't this "event" take them out of the "first timer" category? Besides, in WA, "first timers" in the offenses you cited are all too often plead down to misdemeanors or deferred prosecution.

Perhaps I'm misreading the written intent, but I was looking at it from any felon regardless of class of felony still has to make it safely to "public officer
competent to receive him or her into custody" before as you mentioned the court system lessening the charge.
There are plenty of those in society living by I'd kick there ass, or put a round in them before they got away, hell, hear that on this forum. So will this wording make those types of.... think they have a license to kick ass, or kill?
Or I'm way off on this?

 

amlevin

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2007
Messages
5,937
Location
North of Seattle, Washington, USA
Perhaps I'm misreading the written intent, but I was looking at it from any felon regardless of class of felony still has to make it safely to "public officer
competent to receive him or her into custody" before as you mentioned the court system lessening the charge.
There are plenty of those in society living by I'd kick there ass, or put a round in them before they got away, hell, hear that on this forum. So will this wording make those types of.... think they have a license to kick ass, or kill?
Or I'm way off on this?


Actually, the idea of shooting a fleeing felon was an established part of Common Law up until 1985 and "Tennessee v. Garner, 471 U.S. 1".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fleeing_felon_rule

In Common law, the Fleeing Felon Rule permits the use of force, including deadly force, against an individual who is suspected of a felony and is in clear flight. Force may be used by the victim, bystanders, or police officers. In some jurisprudence failure to use such force was a misdemeanor which could result in a fine or imprisonment. According to David Caplan "Immediate stopping of the fleeing felon, whether actually or presumably dangerous, was deemed absolutely necessary for the security of the people in a free state, and for maintaining the "public security." ... " Indeed, it has been said that the social policy of the common law in this matter was not only to threaten dangerous felons and hence deter them, but was also to induce them to "surrender peaceably" if they dared commit inherently dangerous felonies, rather than allow them to "escape trial for their crimes

This was around long before John Wayne.

As for the "Class of Felony" argument, it brings to mind an old story.

This guy was drinking in a bar and asked the woman next to him if she'd sleep with him for $10,000. She said "why sure". He sipped his drink and then asked her if she'd sleep with him for $100. She responded "what do you think I am, a Prostitute?" He then said, "we know what you are, we're merely negotiating the price".

Likewise with Felons. The "Class of Felony" merely determines the "price" they have to pay for their deeds.
 
Last edited:

Dave Workman

Regular Member
Joined
May 23, 2007
Messages
1,874
Location
, ,
This is a "Stand Your Ground" bill, what the newspapers would generically call a "Castle Doctrine" bill.
 

oneeyeross

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 28, 2010
Messages
500
Location
Winlock, , USA
Satire here

Oh, my goodness, there will be blood in the streets, people will shoot at each other over parking spots, cats and dogs will be living together, macaroni and cheese will stop hanging out together and the world as we know it will end....
 

jbone

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 4, 2008
Messages
2,230
Location
WA
Is this bill even legal under the SCOTUS ruling of Tennessee v. Garner.
 
Last edited:
Top