.... Shooting someone already on the ground is excessive use of force, and will get you prison time. Shooting someone in the back is excessive use of force, and will get you in prison....
The legal rule of thumb in Florida is that it's allowable to fire until the attacker "stops advancing" or alternately, stops their attack.Mostly good points except for what's quoted above. There are a couple of scenarios that I can think of where shooting someone on the ground is apprpriate. As for shooting someone in the back as being "excessive use of force", that can be debated as well.
The legal rule of thumb in Florida is that it's allowable to fire until the attacker "stops advancing" or alternately, stops their attack.
It's possible for an attacker to fire from the ground, or a gun-wielding suspect may still be dangerous even though their back is turned for a second. Anyone may be dangerous if they're turning to grab a weapon. It would certainly be allowable to fire at a mass shooter from the back, or someone who is attacking someone else.
Mostly good points except for what's quoted above. There are a couple of scenarios that I can think of where shooting someone on the ground is apprpriate. As for shooting someone in the back as being "excessive use of force", that can be debated as well.
The world isn't as "black and white" as you make it out to be. If pointing a gun at someone is "illegal period", then there are a lot of LEO on the streets that should be brought up on charges. Laws differ from state to state and in the end, most times it's a judge (who is usually human and from this earth) that will be administering your punishment.
gf
If the kid, or his parents, wanted to push the issue, the old man could have been found guilty of assault with a deadly weapon. It is illegal to point a gun at another person. If your state has a citizen's arrest law, may be not. I NC, a citizen has a very limited right to"detain", but can not use lethal or deadly force to effect or enforce this "detainmant". the fact that the would be robber was a minor blows the original scenario completely out of the water. Kids are "hands off" even for LEOs. asault on a minor, illegal detainment of a minor, come to mind. It isn't right, but it is the law. Ought to be able to give them a good beating with a belt, but try that with your own kids now days and see what happens. If a criminal wants to leave, and you cant use nondeadly force to hold him until the calvary arrives, he is free to leave. never try to hold someone at gunpoint until the law gets there. Again, your state may be different, but I doubt it.
In Indiana, deadly force can be employed to prevent the occurrence of a forcible felony..... and citizens arrest is viable if a felony, or some misdemeanors are witnessed.
IC 35-41-3-2
Use of force to protect person or property
Sec. 2. (a) A person is justified in using reasonable force against
another person to protect the person or a third person from what the
person reasonably believes to be the imminent use of unlawful force.
However, a person:
(1) is justified in using deadly force; and
(2) does not have a duty to retreat;
if the person reasonably believes that that force is necessary to
prevent serious bodily injury to the person or a third person or the
commission of a forcible felony. No person in this state shall be
placed in legal jeopardy of any kind whatsoever for protecting the
person or a third person by reasonable means necessary.
(b) A person:
(1) is justified in using reasonable force, including deadly force,
against another person; and
(2) does not have a duty to retreat;
if the person reasonably believes that the force is necessary to
prevent or terminate the other person's unlawful entry of or attack on
the person's dwelling, curtilage, or occupied motor vehicle.
(c) With respect to property other than a dwelling, curtilage, or an
occupied motor vehicle, a person is justified in using reasonable
force against another person if the person reasonably believes that
the force is necessary to immediately prevent or terminate the other
person's trespass on or criminal interference with property lawfully
in the person's possession, lawfully in possession of a member of the
person's immediate family, or belonging to a person whose property
the person has authority to protect.
Indiana Code 35-33-1-4:
Any person may arrest any other person if:
(1) the other person committed a felony in his presence;
(2) a felony has been committed and he has probable cause to believe that the other person has committed that felony; or
(3) a misdemeanor involving a breach of peace is being committed in his presence and the arrest is necessary to prevent the continuance of the breach of peace.
A person making an arrest under this section shall, as soon as practical, notify a law enforcement officer and deliver custody of the person arrested to a law enforcement officer.
.I'm pretty sure that if pointing a weapon prevents a serious violent crime, then it's justifiable just about everywhere
Correct, and the highlighted portion supports your statement... .
The citizen's arrest portion posted to note that the level of force allowed (in Indiana) to effect a citizen's arrest is not specified.
Nice thread. Lots of good info here.
I have a question. I'm walking to my car and I see a three suspicious characters heading my way. At some point they start making demands for money and car keys. In my state I must retreat so I turn and run till I risk being caught. I don't know what, if any, weapons they may have, and they have not made any death threats. I am however very afraid for my safety. I stop, turn to face them and...
Do I risk drawing my weapon and shooting some punk kids trying to scare an old guy for fun. Or, do I sweep back by jacket and put my hand on my holstered weapon and tell them to stop as I am prepared to defend myself.
Seems to me that announcing my capabilities by showing my holstered firearm would put the punks in a position to make up their own minds as to how this encounter will end and, I technically did not brandish my firearm.
Any further advance would be proof to me that they intend to do me harm and would cause me to draw and fire. A retreat would be wiser on their part and my firearm stayed holstered.
Of course, timing is important and the retreat law does not help. Making an old guy run away is a great idea. In reality I would turn away and note their reaction. If they are still threatening, that's when I turn to confront them.
Comments?
In my state I must retreat so I turn and run till I risk being caught.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?