What if the bad guy bolts? - Page 3

What if the bad guy bolts?

This is a discussion on What if the bad guy bolts? within the Carry & Defensive Scenarios forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; Originally Posted by Texaszed4mc After having my house broken into on 3 seperate ocassions and having long discussions with my local Police and Sheriff's department. ...

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 59
Like Tree51Likes

Thread: What if the bad guy bolts?

  1. #31
    Senior Member Array USM1976's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    1,058
    Quote Originally Posted by Texaszed4mc View Post
    After having my house broken into on 3 seperate ocassions and having long discussions with my local Police and Sheriff's department. I was told by both departments that if you see a person illegally holding your property while trespassing ANYWHERE on your property(land) you have the legal right you shot them and use deadly force. As the penal code below states.
    I will vouch for your sheriff's office and local police departments. While assigned to the Homicide Division as a Crime Scene Unit Investigator, I investigated many home and business burglaries involving shootings. I recall none where the homeowners or business owners were ever indicted for any crimes. All potential felony crimes have to be reviewed by a grand jury in Texas.


  2. #32
    VIP Member Array Smitty901's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Posts
    3,480
    If BG runs or makes and effort to leave you had better stand down and let them go. If they are leaving you are no longer in danger and will be arrested.
    That make that very clear here.

  3. #33
    Distinguished Member Array kelcarry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    charleston, SC
    Posts
    1,917
    Quote Originally Posted by Smitty901 View Post
    If BG runs or makes and effort to leave you had better stand down and let them go. If they are leaving you are no longer in danger and will be arrested.
    That make that very clear here.
    I'll say it one last time. AT NIGHT in South Carolina, the above statement by Smitty is incorrect; refer to SC Code of Law/ Sections 17-13-10 to 17-13-30. Clear as day and upheld in court. Let me make it clear, that I agree with Smitty and these Sections of the law only apply AT NIGHT.

  4. #34
    Senior Member Array USM1976's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    1,058
    Quote Originally Posted by kelcarry View Post
    Two specific comments on your reply.
    1) I hope your comment about the law is not in response to my factoid about a section in the SC Code of Laws, as defined in my Reply #4---I only quoted the law and did indicate that I am not going to shoot someone over "stuff"--it is not imminent danger in my appreciation of what imminent danger means to me personally and within the Code of Law
    2) You mention the psychological effect a shooting has had on friends etal. When I decided to purchase a firearm, I was convinced after thoughtful consideration that if I am in imminent danger and am required to discharge my firearm and even end up killing someone, that my well-being easily trumps the "not so well-being" of my adversary. If I had the slightest doubt, which could translate into those few milli-seconds of delay in my defensive reaction, I would not have bothered obtaining a firearm. If this should exist in anyone, they had better get over it real quickly because the BG has none and he will kill you.

    No, I think you have merely made-up you mind that you can shoot...until you feel the issues of the death of a human being at your hands, you might not be so calloused. Police officers have made up their minds to shoot if necessary, and you would call them what if they have psychological issues for havingkilled someone ?? Many officers resign after shooting due to the psychological after math and the legal ramifications of such. Nope, they just don't go back to work very easily.

    It is called PSTD in military circles....and, it can be real, very real.
    Snub44 likes this.

  5. #35
    VIP Member Array SmokinFool's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    2,297
    I think the bottom line for me is that I will not shoot someone if I do not feel I'm in imminent danger, whether or not the law says I can.

  6. #36
    Distinguished Member Array kelcarry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    charleston, SC
    Posts
    1,917
    Quote Originally Posted by USM1976 View Post
    No, I think you have merely made-up you mind that you can shoot...until you feel the issues of the death of a human being at your hands, you might not be so calloused. Police officers have made up their minds to shoot if necessary, and you would call them what if they have psychological issues for havingkilled someone ?? Many officers resign after shooting due to the psychological after math and the legal ramifications of such. Nope, they just don't go back to work very easily.

    It is called PSTD in military circles....and, it can be real, very real.
    You may be very right about PSTD and I sure as heck cannot argue since I have never discharged my firearm at anything but a target at the range. I do believe, however, with a certainty (and yes that still can never be determined before I stand over someone I killed) that if I get to the point where my presumption of imminent danger to my life is absolute and I end up shooting/killing someone, PSTD will not enter into my life's scenario. Easy for me to say on a forum and I understand your comments but I just know who I am; as much as I care about the people around me, my survival convincingly preempts any other result including the death of someone who wants to kill me----there is not a question in my mind about this.

  7. #37
    Senior Member Array Weeg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    NC
    Posts
    529
    Unless the guy/girl is equipped with a rear gun turret, and is firing at you as he makes his/her egress, don'thca think letting them go is the prudent thing to do?

  8. #38
    VIP Member Array sixgun's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    indiana usa
    Posts
    2,563
    Most tvs are cheap and insurance is somewhat cheap. Compared to your life and the aftermath of shooting someone. if they are running they are no longer a threat. Just my thoughts.

  9. #39
    TVJ
    TVJ is offline
    Senior Member Array TVJ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Tejas
    Posts
    848
    Quote Originally Posted by 68blackbird View Post
    Depends on your state... Texas Penal Code -

    9.42. DEADLY FORCE TO PROTECT PROPERTY. A person is
    justified in using deadly force against another to protect land or
    tangible, movable property:
    (1) if he would be justified in using force against the
    other under Section 9.41; and
    (2) when and to the degree he reasonably believes the
    deadly force is immediately necessary:
    (A) to prevent the other's imminent commission of
    arson, burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, theft during the
    nighttime, or criminal mischief during the nighttime; or
    (B) to prevent the other who is fleeing
    immediately after committing burglary, robbery, aggravated
    robbery, or theft during the nighttime from escaping with the
    property; and
    (3) he reasonably believes that:
    (A) the land or property cannot be protected or
    recovered by any other means; or
    (B) the use of force other than deadly force to
    protect or recover the land or property would expose the actor or
    another to a substantial risk of death or serious bodily injury.
    The problem with shooting the guy as presented in the video here in Texas is the part I bolded at the very end.

    If the guy had a knife or tire iron or gun or a screwdriver shank...etc...a potentially lethal tool....part 3b applies. Legal shoot. This event happening at night, legal shoot. Since he didnt, that part is moot. The prosecutor can go after a Texan for 3A since this happened during the day. At night, different story.

    If the guy bolts and you shoot him, that is unjustified homicide. He broke off. Dont drop the soap where your headed...

    If the guy continues to carry your TV/item away with both hands busy holding your item, his face, head, and neck are vulnerable to non-lethal means of force. But you get close to him with your weapon, especially a long gun, you raise your risk of him getting inside the length of your barrel and fighting for your gun.

    I have not studied the lawfulness of shooting out his tires if he loaded it and was going to drive away. That is certainly a very nice tactical non-lethal use of a lethal tool. Maybe Farronwolf can comment on this.
    The United States Constitution 1791. All Rights Reserved.

    "When plunder becomes a way of life for a group of men in a society, over the course of time they create for themselves a legal system that authorizes it and a moral code that glorifies it."
    - Frederic Bastiat

  10. #40
    Distinguished Member Array kelcarry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    charleston, SC
    Posts
    1,917
    Quote Originally Posted by sixgun View Post
    Most tvs are cheap and insurance is somewhat cheap. Compared to your life and the aftermath of shooting someone. if they are running they are no longer a threat. Just my thoughts.
    I just hope I made it clear in all my replies on this thread that I merely stated a current SC law on the books that literally allows someone making a citizens arrest, on the presumption of a felony being committed at night, to shoot the BG if he tries to evade your detention/arrest. I agree with you sixgun, on everything you say in your reply and have no interest in shooting someone who is not an imminent threat to me. As far as I am concerned, this goes for my home as well; when I am in my locked bedroom at night and someone is breaks into my home and is stealing "stuff" in the other rooms, I will take actions that are prudent (911, activate car alarms etal) but I will not go out of my bedroom to confront--the "stuff" is insured and replaceable--I am insured but not replaceable. I am just as certain that if I am in a position, after trying to avoid/evade a confrontation with a BG and can presume an imminent threat, I will use my firearm to stop/eliminate the threat and if that BG should die I will have no remorse or PTSD or whatever you want to call it. The BG wanted to kill me and he died instead---there is no reason why I will have any concerns over my actions other than having to answer questions and, if it happened in my bedroom that the BG decided to enter after defeating the lock on the door, the replacement of a bedroom door jam and carpet.

  11. #41
    VIP Member Array Snub44's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    4,575
    ...you lose the protection of the law in the above scenario when he drops the TV...you're not protecting property anymore, and 9:42(2)B) quoted here applies only to keep him from escaping with the property so(3) (A) and (B) never come into play...(see the "and" in (2) (B)...)

    I'm not taking a life over a TV...and risking my freedom over the chance of getting a pass from some good old boys on a grand jury...no shoot...

    Quote Originally Posted by TVJ View Post
    The problem with shooting the guy as presented in the video here in Texas is the part I bolded at the very end.

    If the guy had a knife or tire iron or gun or a screwdriver shank...etc...a potentially lethal tool....part 3b applies. Legal shoot. This event happening at night, legal shoot. Since he didnt, that part is moot. The prosecutor can go after a Texan for 3A since this happened during the day. At night, different story.

    If the guy bolts and you shoot him, that is unjustified homicide. He broke off. Dont drop the soap where your headed...

    If the guy continues to carry your TV/item away with both hands busy holding your item, his face, head, and neck are vulnerable to non-lethal means of force. But you get close to him with your weapon, especially a long gun, you raise your risk of him getting inside the length of your barrel and fighting for your gun.

    I have not studied the lawfulness of shooting out his tires if he loaded it and was going to drive away. That is certainly a very nice tactical non-lethal use of a lethal tool. Maybe Farronwolf can comment on this.

  12. #42
    Senior Member Array USM1976's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    1,058
    Quote Originally Posted by Snub44 View Post
    ...you lose the protection of the law in the above scenario when he drops the TV...you're not protecting property anymore, and 9:42(2)B) quoted here applies only to keep him from escaping with the property so(3) (A) and (B) never come into play...(see the "and" in (2) (B)...)

    I'm not taking a life over a TV...and risking my freedom over the chance of getting a pass from some good old boys on a grand jury...no shoot...
    While you are right in reading the statute correctly, I rather doubt a grand jury would indict you or anyone for shooting a burglar (and yes, he is still a burglar, just not a property carrying burglar) feeling without the property. Further, if you can shoot a burglar who is still in the process of breaking-in, ther eis little difference, in my opinion.

    Case in point: I remember a burglary back in the '80s on the eastside of Houston during the daytime. Burglar broke into a man's house. The homeowner worked night at the time in one of the many petro/chemical plants in the east Houston/Pasadena/Deer Park area. Burglar awakened the homeowner, who grabbed his shotgun. Homeowner met burglar in the livingroom where homeowner unloaded a round at the burglar but did not injure him enough to stop him for "John Wayneing" it through the front window of the livingroom. The homeowner ran to the broken-out window and fired another round, which happen to be a deer slug. The slug hit the running burglar on the back shoulder.

    The grand jury decided the shooting was legal and no-billed the homeowner.

    Now, would I shoot a burglar after he decided to leave property behind...probably not.

    I met one of the doctor's who was a surgeon trying to repair this man's wound. The doctor said the shoulder was pulverized. Further, this Oriental doctor with a East Texas accent continued and told me what he would have done if this man had burglarized his house.

  13. #43
    VIP Member Array Snub44's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    4,575
    ...I've seen dozens who did shoot and got cleared by the system...but I'm older...and greyer...and I've also seen the system break it off in a good ole boy who was just tryin' to do the right thing that needed doin'...all it takes is one DA who wants to make a name...

    ...my freedom at stake...it's not gonna happen over a dropped TV...when my hope for freedom afterwards is clearly worded against me...I like my ice cream and TV at night with my feet up too much...guess I'm mellowed a bit...

  14. #44
    Member Array BelaOkmyx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    CT
    Posts
    107
    Quote Originally Posted by Snub44 View Post
    ...you lose the protection of the law in the above scenario when he drops the TV...you're not protecting property anymore, and 9:42(2)B) quoted here applies only to keep him from escaping with the property so(3) (A) and (B) never come into play...(see the "and" in (2) (B)...)

    I'm not taking a life over a TV...and risking my freedom over the chance of getting a pass from some good old boys on a grand jury...no shoot...
    Exactly! And regarding a grand jury- it is a one-sided, secret, pro forma process run completely by the prosecutor. If he wants to indict you, he will indict you. Then you'll mortgage your house paying lawyers, for a 50-50 shot at an acquittal. Prosecutors have tremendous power, and they are paid to put people in prison. The only thing that limits him is that he doesn't have the resources to prosecute everybody. If he has to pick between the guy who shot and the guy who didn't, he'll pick on the guy who shot. If he has to pick between the guy who shot and the target died, and the one where the target was wounded, or missed, guess which one he picks. Don't be the big fish in his pond that day!

    In this case, it wasn't even his TV. Texas law gives the guy with the shotgun no legal standing to protect it. He also can't be sure who the rightful owner of the TV is, and if it turns out the guy walking with it just bought it or otherwise had permission to move it, you'll be charged with armed robbery along with a bunch of other crimes. Never do what was shown in this video.

  15. #45
    Member Array paullie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    kansas
    Posts
    358
    Quote Originally Posted by ExactlyMyPoint View Post
    Here is a YouTube video of a guy catching a thief making off with his TV



    Nothing really special here. However, in this scenario, when the homeowner confronts the BG with a shotgun, had the BG just put down the TV and bolted, what was the homeowner going to do? Shoot him in the back? Probably not. And the BG would have gotten away.

    I am not sure why BGs just don't run away when confronted, knowing that the GG is probably NOT going to shoot him as he runs away.

    I "knew" a guy who was up to "no good" and heard a 12 ga go "cha ching" behind him, running was not on his mind, doing whatever he was told was

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Sponsored Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Search tags for this page

can i wear my navy uniform after discharge

,

when do you can you shoot a bad guy

Click on a term to search for related topics.