Deadly force to protest property?

[AndeyHall]

What are South Carolina laws regarding using deadly force to protect property? Like if you wake up in the night and someone is in your car stealing crap out of it or pushing a motorcycle out of your garage and what not?

Edit: My phone autocorrected "protect" to "protest". The title is supposed to say "deadly force to PROTECT property?"

 

[3gunshooter]

A forum is not a good place for legal advice like that. You need to look up your states laws or seek a lawyer.

 

[nogods]

Would you kill a person trying to steal the gps out of your car?

 

[AndeyHall]

Would you kill a person trying to steal the gps out of your car?

I'm not gonna say what I would and wouldn't do, I'll just explain the angle I'm coming from. It is MY bought and paid for, hard-earned property. If someone is trying to take it, they will be verbally confronted after the authorities are informed. If they refuse to comply, should they have the right to walk off with my property un-interfered? If someone dies of a drug addiction, no one says "those drugs had no right to kill him!" We consider it an "occupational hazard". It's the risk you run when participating in that lifestyle. In my opinion, if you wanna participate in the lifestyle of stealing other people's property, be well aware that there are life threatening hazards that go along with that lifestyle. We seem to live in a very "protect the rights of the criminals" society now for some reason. Why is that?

 

[John Canuck]

South Carolina Legislature

You may want to pre-arrange an attorney for the scenario you laid out.

A good read if your interested -> Link Removed

 

[Eidolon]

I'm not gonna say what I would and wouldn't do, I'll just explain the angle I'm coming from. It is MY bought and paid for, hard-earned property. If someone is trying to take it, they will be verbally confronted after the authorities are informed. If they refuse to comply, should they have the right to walk off with my property un-interfered? If someone dies of a drug addiction, no one says "those drugs had no right to kill him!" We consider it an "occupational hazard". It's the risk you run when participating in that lifestyle. In my opinion, if you wanna participate in the lifestyle of stealing other people's property, be well aware that there are life threatening hazards that go along with that lifestyle. We seem to live in a very "protect the rights of the criminals" society now for some reason. Why is that?

I’d really think twice about that line of reasoning if I were you, you haven’t any idea who that person is and how desperate they are to take your stuff. At the low end they may run away as soon as you turn on the bedroom light at the high end they just might open fire as soon as you walk out the door. Do you want to bleed out on your front lawn over a GPS?

Second thing to consider let’s say the guy doesn’t run and doesn’t win, in other words you kill him if he’s in your car when you shoot him odds are the car is going to the impound lot to be held as evidence pending a possible trial. Even if you get no billed the blood will be good and set in your upholstery by the time you ever see that car again. Are you going to drive it?

Nothing I own is worth killing another human being over

 

[AndeyHall]

South Carolina Legislature

You may want to pre-arrange an attorney for the scenario you laid out.

A good read if your interested -> Link Removed

I never said I was planning to execute that scenario. That's why I asked what SC law concerning this was.

 

[AndeyHall]

I’d really think twice about that line of reasoning if I were you, you haven’t any idea who that person is and how desperate they are to take your stuff. At the low end they may run away as soon as you turn on the bedroom light at the high end they just might open fire as soon as you walk out the door. Do you want to bleed out on your front lawn over a GPS?

Second thing to consider let’s say the guy doesn’t run and doesn’t win, in other words you kill him if he’s in your car when you shoot him odds are the car is going to the impound lot to be held as evidence pending a possible trial. Even if you get no billed the blood will be good and set in your upholstery by the time you ever see that car again. Are you going to drive it?

Nothing I own is worth killing another human being over

Upholstery is a hell of a lot cheaper than a car. And I've heard that last line a lot when talking to people about whether or not they would shoot a home intruder (yes I know we're not talking about a home intruder here though). The line is usually "possessions can be replaced, a human life cannot." I consider that apples vs oranges though. The difference is, most of the things I own are actually worth replacing...

 

[XD40scinNC]

It all depends on how SC laws are written:

In NC, use of deadly force is justified only to defend against the threat of death, serious injury, or sexual assault. Once the threat has stopped (the attacker, stop, turn to run, verbally surrenders) the use of deadly force is no longer permitted.

I know SC has CC training classes as I have seen advertizements for them on the SC stations we get, this should be covered specifically in these courses, or they are a disservice to those that pay for the course.

A quick search find this: 2011-2012 Bill 5072: Use of deadly force - South Carolina Legislature Online

"Section 16-11-440. (A) A person is presumed to have a reasonable fear of imminent peril of death or great bodily injury to himself or another person when using deadly force that is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily injury to another person if the person:
(1) against whom the deadly force is used is in the process of unlawfully and forcefully entering, or has unlawfully and forcibly entered a dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle, or if he removes or is attempting to remove another person against his will from the dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle; and

Which seems to say you can shoot someone breaking into your vehicle, only if you are in the vehicle.

Theft of property is not a capital offense.

 

[AndeyHall]

It all depends on how SC laws are written:

In NC, use of deadly force is justified only to defend against the threat of death, serious injury, or sexual assault. Once the threat has stopped (the attacker, stop, turn to run, verbally surrenders) the use of deadly force is no longer permitted.

I know SC has CC training classes as I have seen advertizements for them on the SC stations we get, this should be covered specifically in these courses, or they are a disservice to those that pay for the course.

A quick search find this: 2011-2012 Bill 5072: Use of deadly force - South Carolina Legislature Online

Which seems to say you can shoot someone breaking into your vehicle, only if you are in the vehicle.

Theft of property is not a capital offense.

That is the way I read it as well, but I wanted to find out if there were any other laws I wasn't aware of. Also, yes we do have CWP classes, but I took mine back in 09. Their has been lot of legislation since then...

 

[farsidefan1]

Pure theft, I let him go but if I walk in on him and he moves toward me at all... Darwin takes another one. I'm not going to hope he is going to stop coming at me. I'm going to stop him myself AFTER I warn him what is about to happen if he continues toward me, bye. If he splits, no worries, I call 911 with a description. Heck, I might even take his pic with my phone. Left handed of course. Right hand will be otherwise occupied. But I'm not going to shoot someone for theft alone. Making me fear for my life is a capital offense in my house. But I'm not that easy to scare, BG has a chance to leave in good condition. IF he leaves.

 

[whodat2710]

PROTECTION OF PERSONS AND PROPERTY ACT

The stated intent of the legislation is to codify the common law castle doctrine, which recognizes that a person’s home is his castle, and to extend the doctrine to include an occupied vehicle and the person’s place of business. This bill authorizes the lawful use of deadly force under certain circumstances against an intruder or attacker in a person’s dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle. The bill provides that there is no duty to retreat if (1) the person is in a place where he has a right to be, including the person’s place of business, (2) the person is not engaged in an unlawful activity, and (3) the use of deadly force is necessary to prevent death, great bodily injury, or the commission of a violent crime. A person who lawfully uses deadly force is immune from criminal prosecution and civil action, unless the person against whom deadly force was used is a law enforcement officer acting in the performance of his official duties and he identifies himself in accordance with applicable law or the person using deadly force knows or reasonably should have known the person is a law enforcement officer.

H.4301 (R412) was signed by the Governor on June 9, 2006.

Link Removed

However, I believe that "brandishing" your weapon (i.e. point it at them and announce your presence) would be reasonable if this was on your property. Might work, might not, but if the guy then decided to become violent or aggressive you'd be ready.

Here's the entire law:
http://www.scstatehouse.gov/sess116_2005-2006/bills/4301.htm

 

[JimTh]

The difficulty in choosing which way to proceed is a problem. Usually the type of folks you are dealing with are probably part of a greater criminal enterprise. I doubt that your states laws allow for shooting someone for trying to steal your stuff...but what has been said throughout this thread is what if the bad guy is armed and shoots you. Now the picture changes...he is no longer a simple thief but is a potential killer. You don't know this though because you have decided not to shoot someone over a property crime. Tomorrow you pick up the paper and see the headline blare out that a man has been arrested for breaking into a home in your neighborhood with the intent of burglarizing it. He murdered the 2 occupants of the home that startled him while he was in the commission of the crime. He also raped and murdered the 15 year old daughter of the couple he had already killed. This stuff happens all the time. This is your guy!!! They found your stuff from your car in his possession. At least you get you stuff back. The moral of the story is the laws are not meant to protect us. They are merely guidelines for bad guys to determine what the maximum amount of time is they will have to stay in prison if they get caught

 

[Jay]

Which seems to say you can shoot someone breaking into your vehicle, only if you are in the vehicle.

Theft of property is not a capital offense.

Indiana has a similarly worded law.... "you" don't have to be in the vehicle, the vehicle simply needs to be occupied by a person, in order to allow the ability to use deadly force.

Regarding property... I know all about "I earned that "stuff"... nobody's gonna take it".... but most of the chest-thumping folks have never taken a life in self-defense, or combat, and have no clue as to the after-effects of taking a life. I do not condone thievery, but my car radio (for one example) is not worth someone dying for.

Prevention of the possibility of the commission of violent crimes committed by a potential thief coming to light after the fact, requires pre-emptive action. Something all gun-owners historically abhor.... back to "gag all movie goers so nobody yells fire"? Respectfully, I'll pass.

 

[kelcarry]

Leaving aside the basic firearm laws governing the use of a firearm, I refer you to SC Code of Law-Title 17-Criminal Procedures-Chapter 13-Arrest, Process, Searches and Seizures and specifically Sections 17-13-10, 17-13-20 and 17-13-30. Under a citizens arrest AT NIGHT due to evidence of a felony having been committed, you can use any means INCLUDING DEATH to secure the citizens arrest. As to the original thread, SC law will allow you to commit to a citizens arrest and actually kill the person if they try to evade the arrest. Not for me, but is in the law and has been upheld in cases that I can recall such as firing at a truck that contained persons who had just stolen someone's property.
As far as I am concerned, everything in and around my house is insured and replaceable, I am insured and not replaceable. I will call LEOs and I will stay in my locked and secure bedroom but I will not commit to any confrontation. Come into my bedroom during any kind of forced entry into my home or on my property I will make sure you will never do it again.

 

[JimTh]

Indiana has a similarly worded law.... "you" don't have to be in the vehicle, the vehicle simply needs to be occupied by a person, in order to allow the ability to use deadly force.

Regarding property... I know all about "I earned that "stuff"... nobody's gonna take it".... but most of the chest-thumping folks have never taken a life in self-defense, or combat, and have no clue as to the after-effects of taking a life. I do not condone thievery, but my car radio (for one example) is not worth someone dying for.

Prevention of the possibility of the commission of violent crimes committed by a potential thief coming to light after the fact, requires pre-emptive action. Something all gun-owners historically abhor.... back to "gag all movie goers so nobody yells fire"? Respectfully, I'll pass.

"Chest Thumpers!' Is that something like a guerrilla or a gorilla? Which war did you win for us by the way? Don't forget...the life you save may be one of your own loved ones!

 

[Eidolon]

Lots of chest thumping going on here and most of it (as previously noted) coming from folks who have never actually been in a fight; anyone can talk big about what they’re gonna do if and when but if when ever happens you’re going to find out that the first time pulling that trigger isn’t as easy as you think it is.

Might be the last lesson you ever learn

 

[Eidolon]

Which war did you win for us by the way?

Which war did you even participate in? Is that a CNN newswatcher patch on your right shoulder?

 

[the dark]

I'm not gonna say what I would and wouldn't do, I'll just explain the angle I'm coming from. It is MY bought and paid for, hard-earned property. If someone is trying to take it, they will be verbally confronted after the authorities are informed. If they refuse to comply, should they have the right to walk off with my property un-interfered? If someone dies of a drug addiction, no one says "those drugs had no right to kill him!" We consider it an "occupational hazard". It's the risk you run when participating in that lifestyle. In my opinion, if you wanna participate in the lifestyle of stealing other people's property, be well aware that there are life threatening hazards that go along with that lifestyle. We seem to live in a very "protect the rights of the criminals" society now for some reason. Why is that?

Isn't that exactly what the"war on drugs"is saying? And although you espouse a grand (and appealing) philosophy, it is likely one you could share with your fellow imates. Why? Because what is next-shooting people for harsh language? No they should not have the right to walk away, but there is a point where personal defense means just that, protecting ones life, not property defense. The idea that not being allowed to shoot a thief is "protecting their rights" is a stretch.

 

[AndeyHall]

PROTECTION OF PERSONS AND PROPERTY ACT

The stated intent of the legislation is to codify the common law castle doctrine, which recognizes that a person’s home is his castle, and to extend the doctrine to include an occupied vehicle and the person’s place of business. This bill authorizes the lawful use of deadly force under certain circumstances against an intruder or attacker in a person’s dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle. The bill provides that there is no duty to retreat if (1) the person is in a place where he has a right to be, including the person’s place of business, (2) the person is not engaged in an unlawful activity, and (3) the use of deadly force is necessary to prevent death, great bodily injury, or the commission of a violent crime. A person who lawfully uses deadly force is immune from criminal prosecution and civil action, unless the person against whom deadly force was used is a law enforcement officer acting in the performance of his official duties and he identifies himself in accordance with applicable law or the person using deadly force knows or reasonably should have known the person is a law enforcement officer.

H.4301 (R412) was signed by the Governor on June 9, 2006.

Link Removed

However, I believe that "brandishing" your weapon (i.e. point it at them and announce your presence) would be reasonable if this was on your property. Might work, might not, but if the guy then decided to become violent or aggressive you'd be ready.

Here's the entire law:
http://www.scstatehouse.gov/sess116_2005-2006/bills/4301.htm

This is actually the main reason I asked this question. The "Protection of Persons and Property Act" makes it sound right off the bat as if your property is going to be treated as a person. But then in the actually body if it, it never mentions protection of property other than when you are occupying that property, which to me should be a given without this act.