:aargh4: You mean my .22 derringer, loaded with shot shells won't stop a car dead in it's tracks??!! Say it ain't so!!! It works in the movies, that's why I carry it. :aargh4:
Seriously though. The most effective shot in that situation is going to be taking out the driver, and that will be from the side or rear of the vehicle. For the most part, none of us carry the most effective round for a windshield. With the laminated glass, it will be difficult for a hollow point to penetrate it. I'd prefer a FMJ against a windshield. Take the side glass and driver is your best bet.
I don't think I would be shooting at a car that had my daughter in it!
This thread is getting scary. All I can see is a fleeing car and someone just blasting away at a "possible" kidnapping that may or may not be actually happening. The alter ego rule is difficult enough but this gets you even farther away from the idea of imminent danger. License plate and 911 just sound like a better idea.
I'm all about driving after the person. At least that gives time to gather more details about them and the vehicle, possibly the ability to stay with them, at least get a direction of travel. Shooting at the car you have the chance to miss and hit something or someone important to you, or at best you accomplish nothing. The chances of putting a handgun round through a steel-belted tire while it's spinning are slim to none.
The situation is you have seen your young daughter thrown into a car by bad guys. It is now driving past then away from you. Keep in mind stranger kidnapping of children is most often fatal.
Originally Posted by kelcarry
If it's my daughter, please do.
Originally Posted by Ksgunner
Of course, like Hawkeye said, this is all assuming that there is no doubt that there is an actual kidnapping of a child taking place.
North Carolina has no provision for "Citizen's Arrest" and therefore it's technically illegal to pursue & detain an "alleged" crimminal. Once a perpetrator attempts to flee, deadly force (by a citizen) is not allowed. We then can only call 911 & if possible follow the car...as long as doing so does not endanger ourselves or the public at large (i.e. high speed pursuit).
Were it my daughter being kidnaped, I wouldn't be able to consider the legal ramifications because I'd be concentrating too hard on a good sight picture on the driver through the side window.
Florida allows deadly force to prevent or stop forcible felonies, kidnapping being one of them. And since fleeing with the kidnapee is still part of the act of kidnapping, I would construe that to mean I could use deadly force in the pursuit of my child's kidnapper.
Anyone ever shoot an engine block with a 5.56 or .308?
I wonder, because if anyone remembers the opening scenes of Black Hawk Down when they shoot the block of the Land Rover from a helicopter, it shuts it down pretty quick. Realistic or no?
I would put as many rounds through the rad as possible, jump in my vehicle, pursue while calling the popos, and wait for the motor to finally seize. In ideal conditions.
If I didn't have a car, I might try shooting through the glass at the BG, and when I missed (I probably would), be ready with a description/tag number.
He's only "attempting to flee" if he lets your daughter out of the car and then takes off. If your daughter is still in the car, he's not fleeing the crime, he's still in the process of committing a crime.
Originally Posted by DaGunny
In NC, I'd bank on the following to protect me from prosecution (although, like you said, I'd act regardless of potential legal ramifications):
§ 14-51.3. Use of force in defense of person; relief from criminal or civil liability.
(a) A person is justified in using force, except deadly force, against another when and to
the extent that the person reasonably believes that the conduct is necessary to defend himself or
herself or another against the other's imminent use of unlawful force. However, a person is
justified in the use of deadly force and does not have a duty to retreat in any place he or she has
the lawful right to be if either of the following applies:
(1) He or she reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent
imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another.
(2) Under the circumstances permitted pursuant to G.S. 14-51.2.
(b) A person who uses force as permitted by this section is justified in using such force
and is immune from civil or criminal liability for the use of such force, unless the person
against whom force was used is a law enforcement officer or bail bondsman who was lawfully
acting in the performance of his or her official duties and the officer or bail bondsman
identified himself or herself in accordance with any applicable law or the person using force knew or reasonably should have known that the person was a law enforcement officer or bail
bondsman in the lawful performance of his or her official duties. (2011-268, s. 1.)
Any reasonable person would assume that 2 adult males kidnapping a 10 year old girl will result in imminent death or great bodily harm.
So you kill your daughter by mistake as you shoot at the speeding car or even if the car is standing still. At least you stopped the kidnapping. I must admit I did not really really read the thread completely but I read enough to shake my head and write my reply to this whole scenario, daughter or not, about shooting at a car. Quite frankly, since we are talking about responses to this kidnapping, who is to say they were bad guys and who was to say that thrown in the car is what really happened--that is the problem with this alter ego scenario; the scenario is a bit paranoid as you talk about shooting at the car like this is a reasonable response--daughter or not. What kind of answer were you expecting; as it is, some of the replies are sarcastic, which tells me that I am not the only one who found this thread to be a bit too much. Personally, following the car was mentioned, with horn blaring continuously, and I mentioned license and 911
Originally Posted by _Hawkeye_
Recall what I said about having time to start second guessing?
A child snatched by strangers has near zero chance of surviving. The child will, in all probability, be knocked to the floor out of the way, so shots into the windows and wind shields have a near zero chance of hitting the child.
Certain death vs possible death.
Failure to act is to kill the child.
The scenario made the following assumptions:
Originally Posted by kelcarry
1) Car was stopped only two houses down from your house (and from you standing outside with a weapon)
2) It was your 10 year old daughter, and there was no doubt that it was a forced kidnapping by two bad guys - and you witnessed it happening.
Obviously, if you ignore the assumptions, there are many variables you could throw in that would change the response. But taking into account those assumptions, I don't see how anyone wouldn't try to take out the driver as he's passing by - and just hope they are going to take her out for ice cream.
Kelcarry, I don't know why you're trying to change the scenario. In the original thread you watched two people throw your daughter into a car while your younger son cried and looked on. Anyone that is taking my 10 year old child anywhere without my authorization is kidnapping them, period. Every ounce of hell I have at my disposal will be unleashed upon them. If it doesn't work out as planned I will at least be able to look at myself in the mirror and know I did everything within my grasp to save my child.
Even if you are not able to stop the car or kill the driver, a car with several bullet holes will be easier to identify. That coupled with the make, model, and license plate might make it easier to find the car that the kidnappers used.
Close the gap, close the gap, close the gap, unleash, pursue, call.