Defensive Carry banner

Self defense shooting?

4K views 49 replies 29 participants last post by  DFuller 
#1 ·
Charges filed in Tamaqua car theft, shooting | Times News Online

Hello all,

Just came upon this story from 2011. I was wondering what this forum thinks of the circumstance. Can you chase after a car thief, confront them, have them assault (stab) you and then shoot in self defense in PA? Just wondering what you all may have done.

Tom
 
#2 ·
Just wondering one thing.How can it be self defense if you chased a car thief?I'm assuming no one is in it, but the thief.If you chased them down,can't see where it's self defense period.First thing i bet you will be asked is,why didn't you call 911 and let cops deal with it.
 
#5 ·
My thoughts exactly. The shooter did call 911 before he went after the BGs. There were three in the stolen car (kids 18 - 19). Apparently it's ok to chase, confront and when things don't go your way, shoot. At least no one was killed over a car.
 
#14 ·
... "when things don't go your way, shoot..." yeah, I'd say that was good, and when a car thief stabs me, I'd say that was surely "things not going my way..." 3 against one attacks require a bit of levelling the field...what do you think the outcome would have been had he not been armed??? the perp wasn't shot for stealing the car...he was shot for stabbing the owner when asked what he'd done with it...different crime altogether...



...all's well that ends well: Three Tamaqua men receive prison sentences | Times News Online
 
#9 ·
In FL, giving chase makes u the instigator and u getting stabbed is considered self defense by the other party. You shooting and killing the man that stabbed you makes you a murderer.

Sent from my HTCEVOV4G using Tapatalk 2
Can you cite this? Was there a past case supporting this statement? I'm not saying it's not true but I just don't see how something like that can be so cut and dry.
 
#8 · (Edited)
In the State of Texas anyone who views a felony occur can make a legal arrest of that felon. (Texas Code of Criminal Procedure Article 14.01)

When this man caught-up to the thieves, he was attacked by the use of deadly assault trying to recover the property. The offense in Texas becomes Aggravated Robbery, another felony. The person trying to recover the property has every legal right to protect himself against the illegal use of deadly force. (Texas Penal Code Section 9.32 and 9.43)

Now, we can argue all the "what ifs" you desire, but in Texas people have a right to protect their own property and that of another person's property. Quite frankly, I would have shot the other kid with the brass knuckles beating on the hood of the car, too. He was a participant in the Robbery and the prohibited weapon (knuckles) is a felony as well.

I would not have moved the car as that is a crime scene. I would desire police to see the actual conditions and site of the shooting.
 
#10 ·
One other thing to add about Texas is that under PC 9.42 you can prevent the other who is fleeing after the theft during the night time. In Jan at 8:45 it would certainly be nighttime.

Once he caught up with them, he was certainly within in rights to defend himself against the use of brass knuckles and a knife the way I see it.
 
#11 ·
I think the OP asked specifically about PA. The laws are all over the place
depending on the state one is in. I'm sure in some you must about say to the
thieves, "Thank you sir, I appreciate your kindness in stealing my car, my insurer
will fix me up, and its just a small deductible. I think I'll sue you in small claims court
to recover that deductible."

And in others you can use the level of force needed to recover your property, and if
attacked defend yourself.

I have no clue what the law in PA is. Common sense seems to me to say that
if someone comes at you with a knife after being confronted by you for stealing your car,
your use of force is self defense. YMMV and WILL VARY, by State.
 
#12 ·
A quick search of PA statutes says that you can pursue the person after they commit the theft. So by limited reading the shop owner was fine with following them.
 
#15 ·
I was wondering what this forum thinks of the circumstance. Can you chase after a car thief, confront them, have them assault (stab) you and then shoot in self defense in PA? Just wondering what you all may have done.
In the current climate, this past decade at least, it doesn't really look good to go chasing down a criminal suspect only to end up having had used lethal force against that criminal. No matter what the statutes say.

But the reality is, in most states where I've looked, the basic statutes are like this: so long as you don't unlawfully provoke another to violence, so long as you aren't the criminal in the situation, you are lawfully justified to protect your very life with force, up to and including deadly force.

But the reality also is, that if you find yourself having chased down a criminal (ostensibly to retrieve your property personally), it's going to get difficult to distinguish between that ostensible cause, being seen as taking steps that "provoked" the situation (for lack of a better term), and actually desiring to harm the criminal. Tough distinction, made all the harder with a dead or dying perpetrator lying in the gutter or on a slab.

In such a situation, personally I can easily discern the difference between the original crime (the robbery or theft) and the subsequent crime (aggravated assault / attempted murder). But the law doesn't always do so, particularly when humans who weren't there get to determine the reasonableness of one's actions.

Take a simple variant of the scenario: confronting someone burgling your car, demanding he stop, then being confronted with a deadly weapon and threat of death. Seems simpler, since it doesn't also involve chasing down the criminal in order to stop the theft of the vehicle. And therein lies the problem, I think, with how many will subsequently view our actions when asked to consider reasonableness. Fact is, though, the criminal created caused the problem, committed the crime and and upstanding citizen stood up to stop it all from happening, despite escalation from burgling/robbery to aggravated assault and attempted murder.

I'm all for this concept: that upstanding citizens every right to attempt to stop a crime against us; that we also have every right to additionally defend against unjustifiable and unlawful escalation by a criminal against us, even if that defense requires deadly force; and we need not be presumed guilty merely because the original perpetrator happened to end up getting the short end of the stick. But not all the statutes are written that way, and frankly some of the states have horrible potholes we can all fall into, if we dare believe we're "scot free" when seen chasing down a criminal and find ourselves succeeding.
 
#16 ·
Well, techinically here .... a citizen can perform a citizen's arrest, even chasing down the person if necessary "IF" they saw them commit a felony act, and can use whatever force is necessary to restrain and complete the arrest. Soooooooo...... here, I think about all he would have to do is .... say he chased in order to perform a citizens' arrest. I wouldn't have done it..... I would have called 911 and told them where the people and car were at, and kept in a position to observe them and keep track of the car .... and reporting that information to the dispatcher.
 
#17 ·
Great replies! Thank you. But I don't understand why someone would decide to chase then confront the BGs even if it is covered by a statute, when after observing the initial crime if no ones life was at risk, or a kidnapping was not taking place. Call 911 and let the police take care of it. If you decide to put your life at risk over property you have to be prepared for a fight that you are willingly getting involved in. Isn't the best way to win a fight to not show up? Personally I wouldn't chase three guys who stole a car, especially if it wasn't mine. Too many loony tunes roaming around who will kill you just for inconveniencing them. The police are much better prepared to deal with that, and they have backup readily available.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Paymeister
#18 ·
Great replies! Thank you. But I don't understand why someone would decide to chase then confront the BGs even if it is covered by a statute, when after observing the initial crime if no ones life was at risk ...
Depends on the situation.

Consider anyone living way out in the boonies, for whom police/sheriff response is next to nil, for whom theft/destruction of certain items might well put the family at grave risk soon after the loss (ie horses, food stores, the family vehicle).

Not so many years ago, stealing a man's horse was considered a hanging offense, since being left without means of transportation in certain areas could well result in death by dehydration/starvation in the wilds. Depends on the item, depends on the crime, depends on the person/family involved and how grievous the loss would be to simply let it go.
 
#21 ·
Patroling one's neighborhood "looking" for someone who "doesn't belong" versus watching an automobile theft up close and personal is certainly not a perfect analogy, or even similar in my view.

Just because it may have ended similarly, one certainly can't overlook how the scenario started. One started with a felony, one started with someone walking through a neighborhood. All of the factors come into play when a prosecutor looks at the case.

Our prosecutors are pretty big on property rights and giving homeowners or similar the benefit of the doubt when protecting property against the criminal element.
I'm not in disagreement with you, FW. Your statement is true, for the most part. That is the risk that each ccw has to mitigate to the extent that they are comfortable. We all will view that differently.

But I agree with your assessment of the general mentality here in Texas. But those are all subjective when presented to a grand jury.

We agree in principal, for sure.
saa.
 
#23 ·
To me, a cwp is not a police badge. It simply says I can carry a weapon to protect myself, my loved ones and my property, although property tends to be easy to replace. I am not one to fall in to the mentality of a vigilante. Humans are emotional creatures and revenge, no matter how slight, is an extraordinary motivator.

Sent from my HTCEVOV4G using Tapatalk 2
 
#28 ·
In most places if you contribute to the escalation of the conflict at all, your right to claim self defense can be jeprodized. In most places you must do everything possible to avoid and evade the problem, not chase after it and make it worse.
 
#29 ·
...thank God for TEXAS...where a reasonable man can protect his life, family, and property in a reasonable manner and have the force of law behind him...instead of ON him...sorry for those places where you must run and hide and put a pink ribbon on your belongings for the BG...and count on the police for protection when the SC's explained to us they have no responsibility to protect us...
...criminals don't seem to fear the police much...crimes against persons have become a high-risk career choice 'round these parts...

...to the OP's scenario...if asking 3 thieves where they took my car that they just stole is escalating...punch the button for the 35th floor, please...and if 3 guys attacking me on a public street with a knife and brass knuckles and stabbing me because I asked a question is not justification for shooting them...we've lost the war already...call Uncle Joe and ask where the turn-in station is...
...as for me, I ain't too sure of all my ancestors, but sheep and wabbits ain't some of them!!!
 
#30 ·
If you made statements to, about, or copied a post referring to the Zimmerman case...it has been deleted.
We have already given notice that there would be no mention of this case in forum threads, and we know from experience that those posts tend to go downhill rather quickly.
No points, no warnings, just "gone".:wave:
 
#32 ·
I have no problem with what he did, until he confronted the car thieves. Instead of confronting them he should have pulled out his cell phone and called the police again and notified them as to the location of the thieves.
 
#33 ·
You know, until about 1845, there was no such thing as a police force in America. If a man stole your horse, you didn't yell, "HELP! POLICE! THIS MAN MATCHING THIS DESCRIPTION JUST STOLE MY HORSE! GO CATCH HIM!" No, what happened was you chased after your horse and reclaimed your property, and if necessary, you took care of the horse thief.
 
#37 · (Edited)
That's still done, but in many jurisdictions it's called vigilantism. IMO, it's still fully justified, so long as one is simply using the degree of force needed to stop the crime, particularly if there are clearly two separate crimes (the theft/robbery to begin with, then the assault/murder attempt subsequently). Basically, the statutes generally support exactly this, with some exceptions (in some states) regarding property, fleeing persons, etc. Hopefully we'll get back to simplicity, where citizens stopping crime aren't unceremoniously castrated on assumption and bias, merely for daring to stop what was happening to them.
 
#34 ·
So, in this case if a BG asks for your keys you should smile, hand them over, and go on with your day to avoid escalating the situation? I am not a sheep and will stand up to a certain extent. If the guy gets the draw on you and threatens to rape your wife if you don't comply I can see that would be a time to back down and let the BG take off. Without a serious reason not to chase, I'm going to.
 
#35 ·
Here's my take: I live in a very rural area. If a bad guy is on my property and is in the act of stealing my car, I could certainly imagine heading out the door to demand that he leave.

BUT...

Considering that we have an emerging Meth problem here, I could also imagine being very thankful that he's soon about to be off my property, with my only loss being my car. If he's nuts enough to steal a car in our county (where about half the people are armed), he's nuts enough to do anything, and I would be delighted to fork over the deductible to have the threat removed.

Not to mention that the deductible on a stolen car is likely to be lots less than post-shooting lawyer costs, attendance troubles at work if you're locked up, bail fees, and so on... and that's assuming that you came out the winner in a confrontation.
 
#36 ·
Not every self defense shooting results in an arrest and trial, or any need for a lawyer. Depending on where you live, and the actual circumstances, if the police can determine that it was a good shoot, you probably won't have to deal with all that. There have been many cases where someone defended themselves or another, and they were never arrested or charged.
 
#38 ·
A vigilante is: a member of a self-appointed group of citizens who undertake law enforcement in their community without legal authority, typically because the legal agencies are thought to be inadequate.

Chasing after a man who victimized you while the crime is still in progress is hardly vigilantism.
But we do agree.

Even after America had a police force, IIRC, they weren't even allowed to carry weapons. The general consensus was that if the police needed such force they could just call upon the citizens for help.

How far we have come from the days where a man could handle his business without "leaving it to the police" to take care of his problems.

Where I live right now, there were 26,539 reported crimes last year. Guess how many arrests the police were able to actually make?

4,478.

I'll take my chances with the horse thief. The police have enough problems.
 
#49 ·
Chasing after a man who victimized you while the crime is still in progress is hardly vigilantism.
I agree. It isn't, truly.

And yet, in many places around the country, dare to involve yourself directly in any situation not otherwise avoidable and you run the very real risk of being accused of, essentially, vigilantism, taking the law into your own hands, or materially contributing to escalating/creating the situation (in the sense of a subsequent violent attack by the burglar/robber once caught up with). I agree, it's lunacy. Yet we see still see examples of people being jumped on for pursuing. God help us, as a society, if we turn the "British" corner to outright punishment of all people who dare to stop any crime in any fashion, follow-on/pursued or not.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top