It is my understanding that here in MI, you are allowed to use deadly force if you are in fear of your life, or great bodily harm. You are NOT allowed to use your concealed weapon to defend your property. Now, my question is, if someone is trying to steal some of your guns, which could potentially be used against you, another innocent person, or a LEO, are you within the right of the law to use whatever force necessary to keep gun out of the hands of criminals?
Does anyone know about this, whether you live in a different state or not.
I would suggest asking a lawyer , rather than getting legal advice from a forum.
Originally Posted by rocky
An experienced lawyer versed in self defense law.
Trying to extrapilate a potential threat of severe bodily harm or death from your senerio will not stand the legal test of imminence. :wink:
Of course there is always the scenario where the criminal points one the stolen weapons at you. That would definitely put you in fear of your life.
+1. BG broken into your home, holding a gun = intent, ability, opportunity.... :comeandgetsome:
Originally Posted by exactlymypoint
But I concur with those that say ask a qualified lawyer - any advise you get here is just opinion, not solid legal advice.
There's your answer, then. It does vary by state, as you might imagine.
Originally Posted by Jackle1886
We need to distinguish between burglary and robbery, as well, where robbery specifically is a person-crime, whereas burglary is not. That's a critical distinction, when it comes to defense, since many states limit your right to defend to the defense of persons ... not of property.
Here in Oregon, as well, property crimes most specifically are NOT person crimes, and what degree of force is legally authorized varies between the two.
Here (in Oregon), you're certainly within your rights to ask what a thief is doing, if you witness your stuff being burgled. For example, you're on your way to the tool shed, but notice the door's open and someone is inside rooting around. Or, you're on the way to the mailbox and find someone rifling through the contents. You're not silenced by the state and disallowed to ask what that person is doing, and you're not disallowed from demanding that the person cease his actions and go elsewhere. Though, you ARE very likely limited in what sort of force you may legally apply to back up those verbal demands.
Here's the thing: you also retain the right to defend yourself and others against a violent felony. If that burglar (misdemeanor to minor felony) then turns on you with manifest intent to commit a violent felony attack against you, then everything changes at that moment. That new attack becomes a SECOND crime, a violent crime, against you. You certainly need not legally suffer through it merely because that criminal's behavior began with a "benign" property crime. Any defense against that attack then falls under the person-crimes and use-of-force statutes. Know them well, since badly navigating them during an encounter is what gets "innocents" tossed into prison for perceived infractions ... despite the fact they were defending themselves, their homes, their property.
The only really fuzzy element is the fact that you, as someone who is armed at all times, go into such a property-crime situation fully armed and in the knowledge that it could escalate at some point. It's certainly possible that a passionate prosecutor could attempt to twist that simple fact into a charge of premeditation.
In my non-attorney view, that's horsepuckey. But then, I won't be the one charging you on such a point. Your district attorney would be.
You certainly have the right to protect your things via asking thieves to explain themselves, asking thieves to stop their thievery, and asking thieves to go elsewhere. You have the right to protect your home (which begins to fall into the person-crimes arena, given the fact that the home houses the people inside). You certainly have the right to protect yourself and others against violence. What you need to be is cognizant of where the dividing line is between property/person crimes, and when the justifiability of the use of force exists.
Beyond all of that is the simple fact that any situation in which someone else doesn't walk out of it (ie, is put down by you) is going to cost you, in terms of time and money, possibly social standing, possibly with respect to how your family/friends regard you.
Read up on A.O.J. (ability, opportunity, jeopardy). Read up on your state's laws on property crimes, person crimes and the use of force. Consider picking up a copy of Massad Ayoob's book, In The Gravest Extreme. It's a bit dated, but it's an excellent coverage of this material and of the practical pros/cons of defending yourself. It ain't all peaches and cream, basically.
And, as suggested, if these are questions in your mind regarding your state's limitations on your actions, definitely speak with a criminal defense attorney skilled in the relevant areas.
In the end, if it's still a question in your mind: consider moving to Texas, where such things are much simpler.
Great helpful info, printing that one out for the file. Thanks! :bier:
ccw9mm...as usual...has some great points...
Originally Posted by ccw9mm
I agree with the above and believe they would apply in FL.
Not being a lawyer, i'm not 100%, but the main identifier for legally firing your weapon is fear of iminent danger to your life, or the life of another. I don't think this transfers to personal property. As posted above though, if one of those weapons were pointed in your direction, then that would provoke fear and a legal reaction to it. If the law arrives to the scene of a crime and the lifeless BG is surrounded by an assortment of weapons...i would think that classifies as "open & shut".
Glad I live in Florida with our castle doctrine laws!
As an adjunct to CCW9MM you should also reference my own thread and detail on the same subject...
November 27th, 2007, 01:39 AM
Folks have absolutely positively got to know this stuff so as to not wind up themselves on trial, behind bars, or even bankrupted.
My thoughts exactly.
Originally Posted by bae