Thwarted an attempted car theft this morning.

[Freedom1Man]

Why the he11 is your firearm in your bloody BACKPACK? I will give you a holster. This would have had a much better outcome had you been prepared. Off body carry is fine for transport, not so good, as you have discovered, for self defense. "Oh, Bad Guy, hold on a sec while I get my backpack".

I was not wearing my holster going out to the car, I have since changed that.

Sent from my SM-G386T using Tapatalk

 

[davidmcbeth]

Why the he11 is your firearm in your bloody BACKPACK? I will give you a holster. This would have had a much better outcome had you been prepared. Off body carry is fine for transport, not so good, as you have discovered, for self defense. "Oh, Bad Guy, hold on a sec while I get my backpack".

Maybe this is his backpack?

 

[Grapeshot]

^ ^ Like that will really solve the problem ^ ^

Sigh.

 

[Difdi]

Predicate elements not met.

Why do you believe a spray of an unknown chemical being used as a weapon during a robbery is not noxious?

But even if you were right and it's not second degree assault, it's irrelevant anyway. We're discussing proper force response to a felony assault here, and third degree assault is ALSO a felony.

 

[HPmatt]

Eyeballs fall out on day 2....


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[FBrinson]

It is just a matter of time before someone requests that you provide the police report as citation to your story. In the meantime, I'm back on my all popcorn diet.

 

[FBrinson]

Issaquah police, case 16-03464

Sent from my SM-G386T using Tapatalk

Dawww. I only had time for one bag of popcorn. Oh well.

 

[davidmcbeth]

I<snip>

Sent from my SM-G386T using Tapatalk

You ought not do that ... if people believe you, they'll believe you.

If they don't NOTHING you post will change their mind.

Its their loss, not yours.

Recommend you delete the post. Let the naysayers spout the "show me your video" goofy mantra and laugh knowing that they are wrong.

 

[zaitz]

Found someone inside my car this morning. Seems as though he was trying to steal it. I got sprayed in the face with something. Pulled gun from my backpack and gave chase announcing that he was under arrest. He got away, called the police. Offer who took my statement said that he was glad that I did not shoot while giving chase. He also thought that car theft was not a felony....
Sent from my SM-G386T using Tapatalk

If and when someone is trying to steal or has stolen your car, do you have the right to effect a citizen's arrest of him?

If he refuses to be detained and wants to or tries to run away, do you have the right to use deadly force or merely to get into a fistfight with him or to do nothing?

 

[Difdi]

Maybe this is his backpack?

In the past I've carried (admittedly a small pistol) via backpack. DIY velcro patch towards the bottom, flush against my back.

Reach back, push bottom of backpack away from body, tear open velcro panel, and there was a holster secured inside. The whole rig looked like a normal backpack, until I started the draw. Not quite as accessible as on-body, but definitely concealed, and a good bit more comfortable than some on-body options.

 

[OC for ME]

Deadly force is not an option in protecting mere property.

A gun is mere property...no?

 

[solus]

If and when someone is trying to steal or has stolen your car, do you have the right to effect a citizen's arrest of him?

If he refuses to be detained and wants to or tries to run away, do you have the right to use deadly force or merely to get into a fistfight with him or to do nothing?

as stated previously...can you find a RCW defining citizens arrest and the parameters surrounding invoking such a activity?

abridged quote: Washington (Official Source Unavailable) We could not find an official Washington citizen’s arrest statute. We called their legislative information center, and their law library, and both informed us that the statute does not exist. A 2005 report from the Department of Licensing confirms this. http://www.solutions-institute.org/tools/citizens-arrest-laws-by-state/

thanks.

ipse

 

[solus]

Yes.
http://www.atg.wa.gov/ago-opinions/arrest-misdemeanor-citizen-officer

Note: vehicle theft is a felony.
http://app.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=9A.56.065




Because vehicle theft is a felony, you have the right to use force - but not deadly force.
http://app.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=9A.16.020

If during the arrest, the perpetrator resists the use of force and resists the arrest to the point that the arresting citizen finds themselves in immediate danger of grave bodily injury or death, then the arresting citizen has the right to use deadly force in defense.
http://app.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=9A.16.050

yes commander you may throw my material back in my ball park, but as previously stated commander...please provide a RCW statute regarding 'citizens arrest' criteria...

most states, and i presume WA state will not be different, prohibit the use of deadly force to stop the theft of property IF the citizen's life or serious bodily harm is not in danger. (RCW 9A.16.040 ~ police are prohibited in the use of deadly force so why do you believe citizens will be given further latitude ~ nawllll)

RCW...otherwise you are going to use an 1957 WA AG opinion to the court against a very, very narrowly defined case to state it is so...RCW 9A.16.040 says no

ipse.

added...sorry reread your cite, RCW 9A.16.020
Use of force—When lawful.
quote
(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;unquote

sorry how can a citizen use force again w/o a nice LE giving permission/direction?

 

[HPmatt]

Summary from Texas Law Shield group -

Texas law allows a person to use force in the protection of property to prevent or terminate another’s trespass or other unlawful interference with the possession of real or personal property. Deadly force can be used in Texas when the crime against property is classified as arson, burglary, robbery, criminal mischief at night or theft at night. Deadly force may also be used to prevent a person from fleeing with property immediately after the commission of a burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, or theft during the nighttime if the actor believes that the property cannot be recovered by any other means or the use of force other than deadly force would expose the person to a substantial risk of death or serious bodily injury.

Texas also allows a person to use force and deadly force to protect the personal property of a third party. The use of force is permissible if the person believes that the force or deadly force is necessary to prevent the commission of theft or criminal mischief, or if the person believes that the third party has asked them to protect the property, the person has a legal duty to protect the property, or the third party is the spouse, parent, child or under the care of the person using force.
​

As such is daylight savings time a plot by democrats to allow property theft after deadbeat's wake up around noon and only 'get going' around dinner time?

Don't know how far out on the limb I'd go in using deadly force to protect a neighbor's house or car.


https://www.uslawshield.com/portal/texas-gun-law/

 

[golddigger14s]

This whole thread takes place in Washington State, so what you can do in Texas does not apply (even though I sometimes wish it did).

 

[Grim_Night]

http://www.dol.wa.gov/business/securityguards/docs/citizenarrest1.pdf

Just throwing my 2 pennies into the conversation.

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.

And let's not forget...

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 or her 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 or her presence, or upon or in a dwelling, or other place of abode, in which he or she is.

 

[solus]

Summary from Texas Law Shield group -

Texas law snippp​

https://www.uslawshield.com/portal/texas-gun-law/

sorry golddigger...a minor indulgence if i might ask...

you know HP you posted this as gospel on a public forum which i am sure JQPublic will believe as the truth, especially with that wonderful cite but i noticed there was absolutely no specific cite to any texas statutes...but i suppose their caveat at the end of the page gets them off the hook...
quote: Any of the above information is solely a general legal discussion of the law in Texas and should not be considered as giving legal advice, nor creating an attorney-client relationship. unquote.

interestingly Texas Penal Code § 30.05. Criminal Trespass, indicates trespass is a misdemeanor, as well as fails to mention the use of deadly force.

thanks golddigger, appreciated.

ipse

 

[solus]

grim, thanks, now a quandary...is the person reflected in paragraph 2) the same mentioned in paragraph 1)?

again thanks

ipse

 

[Jeff Hayes]

grim, thanks, now a quandary...is the person reflected in paragraph 2) the same mentioned in paragraph 1)?

again thanks

ipse

Solely based in the way Paragraph 1 is worded, it uses person and public officer as two distinct people. One would hope that in the next paragraph the definition would not change. Not mention in paragraph 2 that person is delivering another person that has committed a felony to a public official. Got no cites just my plain reading of the RCW. Based on that person delivering another felonious person to a competent Public Officer 1 and 2 can not be the same person.

 

[HPmatt]

Deadly force is not an option in protecting mere property.

Maybe not in WA, but in Texas after sundown it is.