Challenge

This is a discussion on Challenge within the Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; I think it is a matter of carefully reading what the law states , or just skimming over them and thinking you know what it ...

Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 50
Like Tree46Likes

Thread: Challenge

  1. #16
    Member Array rstanek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Holmen, Wisconsin
    Posts
    86
    I think it is a matter of carefully reading what the law states , or just skimming over them and thinking you know what it says. I have been in conversations with people about certian laws, and you be surprise on how many time topics of the laws can be misread just by passing over a few words. Read the laws carefully and several times and don't be afraid to ask questions. You will get many different answers from people, so you have to sometimes draw your own conclusion. Just my 2 cents...

  2. Remove Ads

  3. #17
    Distinguished Member
    Array accessbob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Portland, Oregon
    Posts
    1,318
    I'll play. The Oregon Statutes (and it does show that deadly physical force cannot be used for property crimes, only with a few exceptions and even just burglary doesn't come with a free pass to use deadly force unless a few conditions exist).

    Quote Originally Posted by ORS Chapter 161
    161.205 Use of physical force generally. The use of physical force upon another person that would otherwise constitute an offense is justifiable and not criminal under any of the following circumstances:
    (1)(a) A parent, guardian or other person entrusted with the care and supervision of a minor or an incompetent person may use reasonable physical force upon such minor or incompetent person when and to the extent the person reasonably believes it necessary to maintain discipline or to promote the welfare of the minor or incompetent person.
    (b) Personnel of a public education program, as that term is defined in section 1, chapter 665, Oregon Laws 2011, may use reasonable physical force upon a student when and to the extent the application of force is consistent with section 3, chapter 665, Oregon Laws 2011.
    (2) An authorized official of a jail, prison or correctional facility may use physical force when and to the extent that the official reasonably believes it necessary to maintain order and discipline or as is authorized by law.
    (3) A person responsible for the maintenance of order in a common carrier of passengers, or a person acting under the direction of the person, may use physical force when and to the extent that the person reasonably believes it necessary to maintain order, but the person may use deadly physical force only when the person reasonably believes it necessary to prevent death or serious physical injury.
    (4) A person acting under a reasonable belief that another person is about to commit suicide or to inflict serious physical self-injury may use physical force upon that person to the extent that the person reasonably believes it necessary to thwart the result.
    (5) A person may use physical force upon another person in self-defense or in defending a third person, in defending property, in making an arrest or in preventing an escape, as hereafter prescribed in chapter 743, Oregon Laws 1971. [1971 c.743 §21; 1981 c.246 §1; 2011 c.665 §10]


    Note 1: The amendments to 161.205 by section 10, chapter 665, Oregon Laws 2011, become operative July 1, 2012. See section 12, chapter 665, Oregon Laws 2011. The text that is operative until July 1, 2012, is set forth for the user’s convenience.
    161.205. The use of physical force upon another person that would otherwise constitute an offense is justifiable and not criminal under any of the following circumstances:
    (1) A parent, guardian or other person entrusted with the care and supervision of a minor or an incompetent person may use reasonable physical force upon such minor or incompetent person when and to the extent the person reasonably believes it necessary to maintain discipline or to promote the welfare of the minor or incompetent person. A teacher may use reasonable physical force upon a student when and to the extent the teacher reasonably believes it necessary to maintain order in the school or classroom or at a school activity or event, whether or not it is held on school property.
    (2) An authorized official of a jail, prison or correctional facility may use physical force when and to the extent that the official reasonably believes it necessary to maintain order and discipline or as is authorized by law.
    (3) A person responsible for the maintenance of order in a common carrier of passengers, or a person acting under the direction of the person, may use physical force when and to the extent that the person reasonably believes it necessary to maintain order, but the person may use deadly physical force only when the person reasonably believes it necessary to prevent death or serious physical injury.
    (4) A person acting under a reasonable belief that another person is about to commit suicide or to inflict serious physical self-injury may use physical force upon that person to the extent that the person reasonably believes it necessary to thwart the result.
    (5) A person may use physical force upon another person in self-defense or in defending a third person, in defending property, in making an arrest or in preventing an escape, as hereafter prescribed in chapter 743, Oregon Laws 1971.

    Note 2: The amendments to 161.205 by section 11, chapter 665, Oregon Laws 2011, become operative June 30, 2017. See section 12, chapter 665, Oregon Laws 2011. The text that is operative on and after June 30, 2017, is set forth for the user’s convenience.
    161.205. The use of physical force upon another person that would otherwise constitute an offense is justifiable and not criminal under any of the following circumstances:
    (1) A parent, guardian or other person entrusted with the care and supervision of a minor or an incompetent person may use reasonable physical force upon such minor or incompetent person when and to the extent the person reasonably believes it necessary to maintain discipline or to promote the welfare of the minor or incompetent person. A teacher may use reasonable physical force upon a student when and to the extent the teacher reasonably believes it necessary to maintain order in the school or classroom or at a school activity or event, whether or not it is held on school property.
    (2) An authorized official of a jail, prison or correctional facility may use physical force when and to the extent that the official reasonably believes it necessary to maintain order and discipline or as is authorized by law.
    (3) A person responsible for the maintenance of order in a common carrier of passengers, or a person acting under the direction of the person, may use physical force when and to the extent that the person reasonably believes it necessary to maintain order, but the person may use deadly physical force only when the person reasonably believes it necessary to prevent death or serious physical injury.
    (4) A person acting under a reasonable belief that another person is about to commit suicide or to inflict serious physical self-injury may use physical force upon that person to the extent that the person reasonably believes it necessary to thwart the result.
    (5) A person may use physical force upon another person in self-defense or in defending a third person, in defending property, in making an arrest or in preventing an escape, as hereafter prescribed in chapter 743, Oregon Laws 1971.

    161.209 Use of physical force in defense of a person. Except as provided in ORS 161.215 and 161.219, a person is justified in using physical force upon another person for self-defense or to defend a third person from what the person reasonably believes to be the use or imminent use of unlawful physical force, and the person may use a degree of force which the person reasonably believes to be necessary for the purpose. [1971 c.743 §22]

    161.215 Limitations on use of physical force in defense of a person. Notwithstanding ORS 161.209, a person is not justified in using physical force upon another person if:
    (1) With intent to cause physical injury or death to another person, the person provokes the use of unlawful physical force by that person; or
    (2) The person is the initial aggressor, except that the use of physical force upon another person under such circumstances is justifiable if the person withdraws from the encounter and effectively communicates to the other person the intent to do so, but the latter nevertheless continues or threatens to continue the use of unlawful physical force; or
    (3) The physical force involved is the product of a combat by agreement not specifically authorized by law. [1971 c.743 §24]

    161.219 Limitations on use of deadly physical force in defense of a person. Notwithstanding the provisions of ORS 161.209, a person is not justified in using deadly physical force upon another person unless the person reasonably believes that the other person is:
    (1) Committing or attempting to commit a felony involving the use or threatened imminent use of physical force against a person; or
    (2) Committing or attempting to commit a burglary in a dwelling; or
    (3) Using or about to use unlawful deadly physical force against a person. [1971 c.743 §23]

    161.220 [Repealed by 1971 c.743 §432]

    161.225 Use of physical force in defense of premises. (1) A person in lawful possession or control of premises is justified in using physical force upon another person when and to the extent that the person reasonably believes it necessary to prevent or terminate what the person reasonably believes to be the commission or attempted commission of a criminal trespass by the other person in or upon the premises.
    (2) A person may use deadly physical force under the circumstances set forth in subsection (1) of this section only:
    (a) In defense of a person as provided in ORS 161.219; or
    (b) When the person reasonably believes it necessary to prevent the commission of arson or a felony by force and violence by the trespasser.
    (3) As used in subsection (1) and subsection (2)(a) of this section, “premises” includes any building as defined in ORS 164.205 and any real property. As used in subsection (2)(b) of this section, “premises” includes any building. [1971 c.743 §25]

    161.229 Use of physical force in defense of property. A person is justified in using physical force, other than deadly physical force, upon another person when and to the extent that the person reasonably believes it to be necessary to prevent or terminate the commission or attempted commission by the other person of theft or criminal mischief of property. [1971 c.743 §26]

    161.230 [Repealed by 1971 c.743 §432]

    161.235 Use of physical force in making an arrest or in preventing an escape. Except as provided in ORS 161.239, a peace officer is justified in using physical force upon another person only when and to the extent that the peace officer reasonably believes it necessary:
    (1) To make an arrest or to prevent the escape from custody of an arrested person unless the peace officer knows that the arrest is unlawful; or
    (2) For self-defense or to defend a third person from what the peace officer reasonably believes to be the use or imminent use of physical force while making or attempting to make an arrest or while preventing or attempting to prevent an escape. [1971 c.743 §27]

    161.239 Use of deadly physical force in making an arrest or in preventing an escape. (1) Notwithstanding the provisions of ORS 161.235, a peace officer may use deadly physical force only when the peace officer reasonably believes that:
    (a) The crime committed by the person was a felony or an attempt to commit a felony involving the use or threatened imminent use of physical force against a person; or
    (b) The crime committed by the person was kidnapping, arson, escape in the first degree, burglary in the first degree or any attempt to commit such a crime; or
    (c) Regardless of the particular offense which is the subject of the arrest or attempted escape, the use of deadly physical force is necessary to defend the peace officer or another person from the use or threatened imminent use of deadly physical force; or
    (d) The crime committed by the person was a felony or an attempt to commit a felony and under the totality of the circumstances existing at the time and place, the use of such force is necessary; or
    (e) The officer’s life or personal safety is endangered in the particular circumstances involved.
    (2) Nothing in subsection (1) of this section constitutes justification for reckless or criminally negligent conduct by a peace officer amounting to an offense against or with respect to innocent persons whom the peace officer is not seeking to arrest or retain in custody. [1971 c.743 §28]

    161.240 [Repealed by 1971 c.743 §432]

    161.245 “Reasonable belief” described; status of unlawful arrest. (1) For the purposes of ORS 161.235 and 161.239, a reasonable belief that a person has committed an offense means a reasonable belief in facts or circumstances which if true would in law constitute an offense. If the believed facts or circumstances would not in law constitute an offense, an erroneous though not unreasonable belief that the law is otherwise does not render justifiable the use of force to make an arrest or to prevent an escape from custody.
    (2) A peace officer who is making an arrest is justified in using the physical force prescribed in ORS 161.235 and 161.239 unless the arrest is unlawful and is known by the officer to be unlawful. [1971 c.743 §29]

    161.249 Use of physical force by private person assisting an arrest. (1) Except as provided in subsection (2) of this section, a person who has been directed by a peace officer to assist the peace officer to make an arrest or to prevent an escape from custody is justified in using physical force when and to the extent that the person reasonably believes that force to be necessary to carry out the peace officer’s direction.
    (2) A person who has been directed to assist a peace officer under circumstances specified in subsection (1) of this section may use deadly physical force to make an arrest or to prevent an escape only when:
    (a) The person reasonably believes that force to be necessary for self-defense or to defend a third person from what the person reasonably believes to be the use or imminent use of deadly physical force; or
    (b) The person is directed or authorized by the peace officer to use deadly physical force unless the person knows that the peace officer is not authorized to use deadly physical force under the circumstances. [1971 c.743 §30]

    161.250 [Repealed by 1971 c.743 §432]

    161.255 Use of physical force by private person making citizen’s arrest. (1) Except as provided in subsection (2) of this section, a private person acting on the person’s own account is justified in using physical force upon another person when and to the extent that the person reasonably believes it necessary to make an arrest or to prevent the escape from custody of an arrested person whom the person has arrested under ORS 133.225.
    (2) A private person acting under the circumstances prescribed in subsection (1) of this section is justified in using deadly physical force only when the person reasonably believes it necessary for self-defense or to defend a third person from what the person reasonably believes to be the use or imminent use of deadly physical force. [1971 c.743 §31; 1973 c.836 §339]

    161.260 Use of physical force in resisting arrest prohibited. A person may not use physical force to resist an arrest by a peace officer who is known or reasonably appears to be a peace officer, whether the arrest is lawful or unlawful. [1971 c.743 §32]

    161.265 Use of physical force to prevent escape. (1) A guard or other peace officer employed in a correctional facility, as that term is defined in ORS 162.135, is justified in using physical force, including deadly physical force, when and to the extent that the guard or peace officer reasonably believes it necessary to prevent the escape of a prisoner from a correctional facility.
    (2) Notwithstanding subsection (1) of this section, a guard or other peace officer employed by the Department of Corrections may not use deadly physical force in the circumstances described in ORS 161.267 (3). [1971 c.743 §33; 2005 c.431 §3]

    161.267 Use of physical force by corrections officer or official employed by Department of Corrections. (1) As used in this section:
    (a) “Colocated minimum security facility” means a Department of Corrections institution that has been designated by the Department of Corrections as a minimum security facility and has been located by the department on the grounds of a medium or higher security Department of Corrections institution.
    (b) “Department of Corrections institution” has the meaning given that term in ORS 421.005.
    (c) “Stand-alone minimum security facility” means a Department of Corrections institution that has been designated by the department as a minimum security facility and that has been located by the department separate and apart from other Department of Corrections institutions.
    (2) A corrections officer or other official employed by the Department of Corrections is justified in using physical force, including deadly physical force, when and to the extent that the officer or official reasonably believes it necessary to:
    (a) Prevent the escape of an inmate from a Department of Corrections institution, including the grounds of the institution, or from custody;
    (b) Maintain or restore order and discipline in a Department of Corrections institution, or any part of the institution, in the event of a riot, disturbance or other occurrence that threatens the safety of inmates, department employees or other persons; or
    (c) Prevent serious physical injury to or the death of the officer, official or another person.
    (3) Notwithstanding subsection (2)(a) of this section, a corrections officer or other official employed by the department may not use deadly physical force to prevent the escape of an inmate from:
    (a) A stand-alone minimum security facility;
    (b) A colocated minimum security facility, if the corrections officer or other official knows that the inmate has been classified by the department as minimum custody; or
    (c) Custody outside of a Department of Corrections institution:
    (A) While the inmate is assigned to an inmate work crew; or
    (B) During transport or other supervised activity, if the inmate is classified by the department as minimum custody and the inmate is not being transported or supervised with an inmate who has been classified by the department as medium or higher custody.
    (4) Nothing in this section limits the authority of a person to use physical force under ORS 161.205 (2) or 161.265. [2005 c.431 §2]

    161.270 Duress. (1) The commission of acts which would otherwise constitute an offense, other than murder, is not criminal if the actor engaged in the proscribed conduct because the actor was coerced to do so by the use or threatened use of unlawful physical force upon the actor or a third person, which force or threatened force was of such nature or degree to overcome earnest resistance.
    (2) Duress is not a defense for one who intentionally or recklessly places oneself in a situation in which it is probable that one will be subjected to duress.
    (3) It is not a defense that a spouse acted on the command of the other spouse, unless the spouse acted under such coercion as would establish a defense under subsection (1) of this section. [1971 c.743 §34; 1987 c.158 §22]

    161.275 Entrapment. (1) The commission of acts which would otherwise constitute an offense is not criminal if the actor engaged in the proscribed conduct because the actor was induced to do so by a law enforcement official, or by a person acting in cooperation with a law enforcement official, for the purpose of obtaining evidence to be used against the actor in a criminal prosecution.
    (2) As used in this section, “induced” means that the actor did not contemplate and would not otherwise have engaged in the proscribed conduct. Merely affording the actor an opportunity to commit an offense does not constitute entrapment. [1971 c.743 §35]
    I included the part about Entrapment just for fun.
    EDC - Glock 36 OR Glock 30, Ruger LC9, OR Ruger SR1911 CMD AND
    Ruger LCP in Desantis Pocket Holster (backup)
    Member - SAF, OFF,
    NRA Life Member

  4. #18
    Distinguished Member Array ericb327's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Bellevue, Ky/Cincinatti
    Posts
    1,406
    Thanks for the support. Contrary to some opinion I am not assuming everyone here doesn't know the laws. I said a FEW not all or even most. If one person does this that hasn't, its a good thing. I'm not offended or angered by the negativity, just amused by it.

  5. #19
    Moderator
    Array RETSUPT99's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Central Florida
    Posts
    43,822
    I'll add FL's

    The 2011 Florida Statutes


    Title XLVI
    CRIMES
    Chapter 776
    JUSTIFIABLE USE OF FORCE
    View Entire Chapter
    CHAPTER 776
    JUSTIFIABLE USE OF FORCE
    776.012 Use of force in defense of person.
    776.013 Home protection; use of deadly force; presumption of fear of death or great bodily harm.
    776.031 Use of force in defense of others.
    776.032 Immunity from criminal prosecution and civil action for justifiable use of force.
    776.041 Use of force by aggressor.
    776.05 Law enforcement officers; use of force in making an arrest.
    776.051 Use of force in resisting arrest or making an arrest or in the execution of a legal duty; prohibition.
    776.06 Deadly force.
    776.07 Use of force to prevent escape.
    776.08 Forcible felony.
    776.085 Defense to civil action for damages; party convicted of forcible or attempted forcible felony.
    776.012 Use of force in defense of person.—A person is justified in using force, except deadly force, against another when and to the extent that the person reasonably believes that such 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 if:
    (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 or to prevent the imminent commission of a forcible felony; or
    (2) Under those circumstances permitted pursuant to s. 776.013.
    History.—s. 13, ch. 74-383; s. 1188, ch. 97-102; s. 2, ch. 2005-27.
    776.013 Home protection; use of deadly force; presumption of fear of death or great bodily harm.—
    (1) A person is presumed to have held a reasonable fear of imminent peril of death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another when using defensive force that is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm to another if:
    (a) The person against whom the defensive force was used was in the process of unlawfully and forcefully entering, or had unlawfully and forcibly entered, a dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle, or if that person had removed or was attempting to remove another against that person’s will from the dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle; and
    (b) The person who uses defensive force knew or had reason to believe that an unlawful and forcible entry or unlawful and forcible act was occurring or had occurred.
    (2) The presumption set forth in subsection (1) does not apply if:
    (a) The person against whom the defensive force is used has the right to be in or is a lawful resident of the dwelling, residence, or vehicle, such as an owner, lessee, or titleholder, and there is not an injunction for protection from domestic violence or a written pretrial supervision order of no contact against that person; or
    (b) The person or persons sought to be removed is a child or grandchild, or is otherwise in the lawful custody or under the lawful guardianship of, the person against whom the defensive force is used; or
    (c) The person who uses defensive force is engaged in an unlawful activity or is using the dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle to further an unlawful activity; or
    (d) The person against whom the defensive force is used is a law enforcement officer, as defined in s. 943.10(14), who enters or attempts to enter a dwelling, residence, or vehicle in the performance of his or her official duties and the officer identified himself or herself in accordance with any applicable law or the person using force knew or reasonably should have known that the person entering or attempting to enter was a law enforcement officer.
    (3) A person who is not engaged in an unlawful activity and who is attacked in any other place where he or she has a right to be has no duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground and meet force with force, including deadly force if he or she reasonably believes it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.
    (4) A person who unlawfully and by force enters or attempts to enter a person’s dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle is presumed to be doing so with the intent to commit an unlawful act involving force or violence.
    (5) As used in this section, the term:
    (a) “Dwelling” means a building or conveyance of any kind, including any attached porch, whether the building or conveyance is temporary or permanent, mobile or immobile, which has a roof over it, including a tent, and is designed to be occupied by people lodging therein at night.
    (b) “Residence” means a dwelling in which a person resides either temporarily or permanently or is visiting as an invited guest.
    (c) “Vehicle” means a conveyance of any kind, whether or not motorized, which is designed to transport people or property.
    History.—s. 1, ch. 2005-27.
    776.031 Use of force in defense of others.—A person is justified in the use of force, except deadly force, against another when and to the extent that the person reasonably believes that such conduct is necessary to prevent or terminate the other’s trespass on, or other tortious or criminal interference with, either real property other than a dwelling or personal property, lawfully in his or her possession or in the possession of another who is a member of his or her immediate family or household or of a person whose property he or she has a legal duty to protect. However, the person is justified in the use of deadly force only if he or she reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent the imminent commission of a forcible felony. A person does not have a duty to retreat if the person is in a place where he or she has a right to be.
    History.—s. 13, ch. 74-383; s. 1189, ch. 97-102; s. 3, ch. 2005-27.
    776.032 Immunity from criminal prosecution and civil action for justifiable use of force.—
    (1) A person who uses force as permitted in s. 776.012, s. 776.013, or s. 776.031 is justified in using such force and is immune from criminal prosecution and civil action for the use of such force, unless the person against whom force was used is a law enforcement officer, as defined in s. 943.10(14), who was acting in the performance of his or her official duties and the officer 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. As used in this subsection, the term “criminal prosecution” includes arresting, detaining in custody, and charging or prosecuting the defendant.
    (2) A law enforcement agency may use standard procedures for investigating the use of force as described in subsection (1), but the agency may not arrest the person for using force unless it determines that there is probable cause that the force that was used was unlawful.
    (3) The court shall award reasonable attorney’s fees, court costs, compensation for loss of income, and all expenses incurred by the defendant in defense of any civil action brought by a plaintiff if the court finds that the defendant is immune from prosecution as provided in subsection (1).
    History.—s. 4, ch. 2005-27.
    776.041 Use of force by aggressor.—The justification described in the preceding sections of this chapter is not available to a person who:
    (1) Is attempting to commit, committing, or escaping after the commission of, a forcible felony; or
    (2) Initially provokes the use of force against himself or herself, unless:
    (a) Such force is so great that the person reasonably believes that he or she is in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm and that he or she has exhausted every reasonable means to escape such danger other than the use of force which is likely to cause death or great bodily harm to the assailant; or
    (b) In good faith, the person withdraws from physical contact with the assailant and indicates clearly to the assailant that he or she desires to withdraw and terminate the use of force, but the assailant continues or resumes the use of force.
    History.—s. 13, ch. 74-383; s. 1190, ch. 97-102.
    776.05 Law enforcement officers; use of force in making an arrest.—A law enforcement officer, or any person whom the officer has summoned or directed to assist him or her, need not retreat or desist from efforts to make a lawful arrest because of resistance or threatened resistance to the arrest. The officer is justified in the use of any force:
    (1) Which he or she reasonably believes to be necessary to defend himself or herself or another from bodily harm while making the arrest;
    (2) When necessarily committed in retaking felons who have escaped; or
    (3) When necessarily committed in arresting felons fleeing from justice. However, this subsection shall not constitute a defense in any civil action for damages brought for the wrongful use of deadly force unless the use of deadly force was necessary to prevent the arrest from being defeated by such flight and, when feasible, some warning had been given, and:
    (a) The officer reasonably believes that the fleeing felon poses a threat of death or serious physical harm to the officer or others; or
    (b) The officer reasonably believes that the fleeing felon has committed a crime involving the infliction or threatened infliction of serious physical harm to another person.
    History.—s. 13, ch. 74-383; s. 1, ch. 75-64; s. 1, ch. 87-147; s. 54, ch. 88-381; s. 1191, ch. 97-102.
    776.051 Use of force in resisting arrest or making an arrest or in the execution of a legal duty; prohibition.—
    (1) A person is not justified in the use of force to resist an arrest by a law enforcement officer, or to resist a law enforcement officer who is engaged in the execution of a legal duty, if the law enforcement officer was acting in good faith and he or she is known, or reasonably appears, to be a law enforcement officer.
    (2) A law enforcement officer, or any person whom the officer has summoned or directed to assist him or her, is not justified in the use of force if the arrest or execution of a legal duty is unlawful and known by him or her to be unlawful.
    History.—s. 13, ch. 74-383; s. 1192, ch. 97-102; s. 1, ch. 2008-67.
    776.06 Deadly force.—
    (1) The term “deadly force” means force that is likely to cause death or great bodily harm and includes, but is not limited to:
    (a) The firing of a firearm in the direction of the person to be arrested, even though no intent exists to kill or inflict great bodily harm; and
    (b) The firing of a firearm at a vehicle in which the person to be arrested is riding.
    (2)(a) The term “deadly force” does not include the discharge of a firearm by a law enforcement officer or correctional officer during and within the scope of his or her official duties which is loaded with a less-lethal munition. As used in this subsection, the term “less-lethal munition” means a projectile that is designed to stun, temporarily incapacitate, or cause temporary discomfort to a person without penetrating the person’s body.
    (b) A law enforcement officer or a correctional officer is not liable in any civil or criminal action arising out of the use of any less-lethal munition in good faith during and within the scope of his or her official duties.
    History.—s. 13, ch. 74-383; s. 1, ch. 99-272.
    776.07 Use of force to prevent escape.—
    (1) A law enforcement officer or other person who has an arrested person in his or her custody is justified in the use of any force which he or she reasonably believes to be necessary to prevent the escape of the arrested person from custody.
    (2) A correctional officer or other law enforcement officer is justified in the use of force, including deadly force, which he or she reasonably believes to be necessary to prevent the escape from a penal institution of a person whom the officer reasonably believes to be lawfully detained in such institution under sentence for an offense or awaiting trial or commitment for an offense.
    History.—s. 13, ch. 74-383; s. 7, ch. 95-283; s. 1193, ch. 97-102.
    776.08 Forcible felony.—“Forcible felony” means treason; murder; manslaughter; sexual battery; carjacking; home-invasion robbery; robbery; burglary; arson; kidnapping; aggravated assault; aggravated battery; aggravated stalking; aircraft piracy; unlawful throwing, placing, or discharging of a destructive device or bomb; and any other felony which involves the use or threat of physical force or violence against any individual.
    History.—s. 13, ch. 74-383; s. 4, ch. 75-298; s. 289, ch. 79-400; s. 5, ch. 93-212; s. 10, ch. 95-195.
    776.085 Defense to civil action for damages; party convicted of forcible or attempted forcible felony.—
    (1) It shall be a defense to any action for damages for personal injury or wrongful death, or for injury to property, that such action arose from injury sustained by a participant during the commission or attempted commission of a forcible felony. The defense authorized by this section shall be established by evidence that the participant has been convicted of such forcible felony or attempted forcible felony, or by proof of the commission of such crime or attempted crime by a preponderance of the evidence.
    (2) For the purposes of this section, the term “forcible felony” shall have the same meaning as in s. 776.08.
    (3) Any civil action in which the defense recognized by this section is raised shall be stayed by the court on the motion of the civil defendant during the pendency of any criminal action which forms the basis for the defense, unless the court finds that a conviction in the criminal action would not form a valid defense under this section.
    (4) In any civil action where a party prevails based on the defense created by this section:
    (a) The losing party, if convicted of and incarcerated for the crime or attempted crime, shall, as determined by the court, lose any privileges provided by the correctional facility, including, but not limited to:
    1. Canteen purchases;
    2. Telephone access;
    3. Outdoor exercise;
    4. Use of the library; and
    5. Visitation.
    (b) The court shall award a reasonable attorney’s fee to be paid to the prevailing party in equal amounts by the losing party and the losing party’s attorney; however, the losing party’s attorney is not personally responsible if he or she has acted in good faith, based on the representations of his or her client. If the losing party is incarcerated for the crime or attempted crime and has insufficient assets to cover payment of the costs of the action and the award of fees pursuant to this paragraph, the party shall, as determined by the court, be required to pay by deduction from any payments the prisoner receives while incarcerated.
    (c) If the losing party is incarcerated for the crime or attempted crime, the court shall issue a written order containing its findings and ruling pursuant to paragraphs (a) and (b) and shall direct that a certified copy be forwarded to the appropriate correctional institution or facility.
    History.—s. 1, ch. 87-187; s. 72, ch. 96-388.


    Hope that helps...
    Old School likes this.
    The last Blood Moon Tetrad for this millennium starts in April 2014 and ends in September 2015...according to NASA.

    ***********************************
    Certified Glock Armorer
    NRA Life Member[/B]

  6. #20
    Member Array rickohio's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Akron, Ohio
    Posts
    125
    Quote Originally Posted by ericb327 View Post
    After reading a few threads here I have come to the conclusion that a few people don't know or care what the laws of use of physical deadly force are in there state. Do you? My challenge is to post the use of physical deadly force for your state or just go find it and read it. I think you'll be surprised at what you find!
    SELF DEFENSE. The defendant claims to have acted in self defense. To establish a claim of self defense, the defendant must prove by the greater weight of the evidence that
    (A) he/she was not at fault in creating the situation giving rise to (describe the event in which death or injury occurred); and
    (B) he/she had reasonable grounds to believe and an honest belief, even if mistaken, that he/she was in (imminent) (immediate) danger of death or great bodily harm, and that his/her only reasonable means of (retreat) (escape) (withdrawal) from such danger was by the use of deadly force; and
    (C) he/she had not violated any duty to (retreat) (escape) (withdraw) to avoid the danger.

    3. DUTY TO RETREAT. The defendant had a duty to retreat if he/she
    (Use appropriate alternative[s])
    (A) was at fault in creating the situation giving rise to the (describe the event in which death or injury occurred).
    (or)
    (B) did not have reasonable grounds to believe and an honest belief that he/she was in (imminent) (immediate) danger of death or great bodily harm or that he/she had a reasonable means of escape from that danger other than by the use of deadly force.

    4. NO DUTY TO RETREAT.
    (A) GENERAL The defendant no longer had a duty to retreat if:
    (1) he/she ([retreated] [escaped] [withdrew] from the situation) (reasonably indicated his/her intention to [retreat] [escape] [withdraw] from the situation and no longer participate in it); and
    (2) he/she then had reasonable grounds to believe and an honest belief that he/she was in (imminent) (immediate) danger of death or great bodily harm; and
    (3) the only reasonable means of escape from that danger was by the use of deadly force, even though he/she was mistaken as to the existence of that danger.

    (B) DEFENSE OF BUSINESS. If the defendant was assaulted in his/her (home) (business), or if the (home) (business) was attacked, the defendant had no duty to (retreat) (escape) (withdraw) and could use such means as are necessary to repel the assailant from the (home) (business), or to prevent any forcible entry to the (home) (business), even deadly force, provided that he/she had reasonable grounds to believe and an honest belief that the use of deadly force was necessary to repel the assailant or to prevent the forcible entry.

    (C) DEFENSE OF HOME (offenses committed before 9/9/08). If the defendant was assaulted in his/her home, or if the home was attacked, the defendant had no duty to (retreat) (escape) (withdraw) and could use such means as were necessary to repel the assailant from the home, or to prevent any forcible entry to the home, even deadly force, provided that he/she had reasonable grounds to believe and an honest belief that the use of deadly force was necessary to repel the assailant or to prevent the forcible entry.

    (D) DEFENSE OF RESIDENCE OR VEHICLE (offenses committed on and after 9/9/08). A person who lawfully is in his/her residence has no duty to retreat before using force in (self defense) (defense of another) (defense of his/her residence), and a person who (lawfully is an occupant of his/her vehicle) (lawfully is an occupant in a vehicle owned by his/her immediate family member) has no duty to retreat before using force in (self defense) (defense of another).

    5. DEFENSE OF ANOTHER. The defendant claims to have acted in defense of (insert name of person defended). The defendant had no greater rights than (insert name of person defended) and was justified in using deadly force only if:
    (A) (insert name of person defended) was not at fault in creating the situation giving rise to (describe the event in which death or injury occurred) and had no duty to (retreat) (escape) (withdraw), and
    (B) the defendant had reasonable grounds to believe and an honest belief, even if mistaken, that (insert name of person defended) was in (imminent) (immediate) danger of death or great bodily harm and that the only means of protecting him/her was by the use of deadly force.

    6. RESIDENCE. ” Residence” means a dwelling in which a person resides either temporarily or permanently or is visiting as a guest.

    7. DWELLING. ” Dwelling” means a (building) (specify conveyance) of any kind that has a roof over it and that is designed to be occupied by people lodging in the (building) (specify conveyance) at night, regardless of whether the (building) (specify conveyance) is temporary or permanent or is mobile or immobile. (A [building] [specify conveyance] includes, but is not limited to, an attached porch, and a [building] [specify conveyance] with a roof over it includes, but is not limited to, a tent.)

    8. VEHICLE. ” Vehicle” means a conveyance of any kind, whether or not motorized, that is designed to transport people or property.

    9. IMMEDIATE FAMILY. ” Immediate family” means a person‘ s spouse residing in the person‘ s household, brothers and sisters of the whole or the half blood, and children, including adopted children.

    This is essentially what the jury in Ohio is told, subject to circumstances of the particular situation.

  7. #21
    VIP Member Array gottabkiddin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    North Georgia
    Posts
    6,866
    I would add Georgia's, but IMO any responsible gun owner should know the laws for their state, besides, who am I to preach to the choir..
    "He that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one." – Luke 22:36

    "If a law is unjust, a man is not only right to disobey it, he is obligated to do so." – Thomas Jefferson

  8. #22
    Distinguished Member Array ericb327's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Bellevue, Ky/Cincinatti
    Posts
    1,406
    What happened to stubborn's post? it was hilarious. LMAO. I'm sure I'm not the first noob to get his hand smacked for giving an opinion or raising a serious question. If you know the law, great! Then this thread was not directed at you. I posted this thread after reading in Caught a guy breaking into my truck "that someone would have snuck up on a bad guy and its on". Do the people accusing me of being presumptuous really think i directed this thread specifically to them or was a chance to put me in my place. How dare you come in to a forum and give an opinion or idea!!!!!
    MisterFleas likes this.

  9. #23
    VIP Member Array gottabkiddin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    North Georgia
    Posts
    6,866
    For the record. My post was not meant to be disrespectful towards you, or anyone in the thread... IMO, from the day you joined the forum, this became your forum too..
    "He that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one." – Luke 22:36

    "If a law is unjust, a man is not only right to disobey it, he is obligated to do so." – Thomas Jefferson

  10. #24
    Member Array Sharkman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Tampa, FL
    Posts
    30
    As a Florida residents. Rather than trying to interrupt all the state laws and what they mean to a CC person it was suggested to me by my CWP instructor to read this book FLORIDA FIREARMS
    Law, Use & Ownership - Seventh Edition
    by JON H. GUTMACHER, P.A.

    I might add the author updates the book every year as the laws change. Great explanation with case history and layman examples of different situations pertaining to each law. Was well worth the money for the book .....
    ericb327 likes this.
    Son remeber this and you will go far ........

    "The gunfight is in the head, not in the hands."
    +++++
    "God is Great... Beer is Good.... and People are Crazy"
    +++++

  11. #25
    Distinguished Member Array Stubborn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Tampa Fl
    Posts
    1,530
    Quote Originally Posted by ericb327 View Post
    What happened to stubborn's post? it was hilarious. LMAO. I'm sure I'm not the first noob to get his hand smacked for giving an opinion or raising a serious question. If you know the law, great! Then this thread was not directed at you. I posted this thread after reading in Caught a guy breaking into my truck "that someone would have snuck up on a bad guy and its on". Do the people accusing me of being presumptuous really think i directed this thread specifically to them or was a chance to put me in my place. How dare you come in to a forum and give an opinion or idea!!!!!
    I deleted my post, after a little more thought and reflection. I decided I was being too rough on a nooB. I am not here to piss people off nor to drive someone away from this forum.
    To the contrary, I would like everyone who carries to be on here as often as possible, as this is a GREAT place to learn.
    There is a wealth of knowledge and experience here.

    That is why it disappeared.
    gottabkiddin and ericb327 like this.
    "The beauty of the Second Amendment is that it will not be needed until they try to take it".
    Thomas Jefferson

    ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ

  12. #26
    VIP Member
    Array Mike1956's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Marion County, Ohio
    Posts
    9,119
    Quote Originally Posted by ericb327 View Post
    Not homework, challenge! Maybe you could give newbies some topic suggestions since we don't have anything to offer other than what's your favorite carry gun? Exactly how many posts before we are welcome here?
    You are welcome anytime, but you need a few more gray whiskers board-wise before I start accepting challenges from you.
    suntzu and JDE101 like this.
    "Who are the ones that we kept in charge? Killers, thieves, and lawyers"

    Tom Waits, God's Away on Business

  13. #27
    Member Array carracer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Nampa, Id.
    Posts
    403
    Idaho

    Self Defense Laws
    This section contain excerpts of this states revised statutes as they pertain to self defense laws.
    •16-3-22
    (a) A person is justified in threatening or using force against another when and to the extent that he or she reasonably believes that such threat or force is necessary to defend himself or herself or a third person against such other's imminent use of unlawful force; however, except as provided in Code Section 16-3-23, a person is justified in using force which is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm only if he or she reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent death or great bodily injury to himself or herself or a third person or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.
    (b) A person is not justified in using force under the circumstances specified in subsection (a) of this Code section if he:
    (1) Initially provokes the use of force against himself with the intent to use such force as an excuse to inflict bodily harm upon the assailant;
    (2) Is attempting to commit, committing, or fleeing after the commission or attempted commission of a felony; or
    (3) Was the aggressor or was engaged in a combat by agreement unless he withdraws from the encounter and effectively communicates to such other person his intent to do so and the other, notwithstanding, continues or threatens to continue the use of unlawful force.
    (c) Any rule, regulation, or policy of any agency of the state or any ordinance, resolution, rule, regulation, or policy of any county, municipality, or other political subdivision of the state which is in conflict with this Code section shall be null, void, and of no force and effect.
    (d) In a prosecution for murder or manslaughter, if a defendant raises as a defense a justification provided by subsection (a) of this Code section, the defendant, in order to establish the defendant's reasonable belief that the use of force or deadly force was immediately necessary, may be permitted to offer:
    (1) Relevant evidence that the defendant had been the victim of acts of family violence or child abuse committed by the deceased, as such acts are described in Code Sections 19-13-1 and 19-15-1, respectively; and
    (2) Relevant expert testimony regarding the condition of the mind of the defendant at the time of the offense, including those relevant facts and circumstances relating to the family violence or child abuse that are the bases of the expert's opinion.

    •16-3-23
    A person is justified in threatening or using force against another when and to the extent that he or she reasonably believes that such threat or force is necessary to prevent or terminate such other's unlawful entry into or attack upon a habitation; however, such person is justified in the use of force which is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm only if:
    (1) The entry is made or attempted in a violent and tumultuous manner and he or she reasonably believes that the entry is attempted or made for the purpose of assaulting or offering personal violence to any person dwelling or being therein and that such force is necessary to prevent the assault or offer of personal violence;
    (2) That force is used against another person who is not a member of the family or household and who unlawfully and forcibly enters or has unlawfully and forcibly entered the residence and the person using such force knew or had reason to believe that an unlawful and forcible entry occurred; or
    (3) The person using such force reasonably believes that the entry is made or attempted for the purpose of committing a felony therein and that such force is necessary to prevent the commission of the felony.

    •16-3-24.
    (a) A person is justified in threatening or using force against another when and to the extent that he reasonably believes that such threat or force is necessary to prevent or terminate such other's trespass on or other tortious or criminal interference with real property other than a habitation or personal property:
    (1) Lawfully in his possession;
    (2) Lawfully in the possession of a member of his immediate family; or
    (3) Belonging to a person whose property he has a legal duty to protect.
    (b) The use of force which is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm to prevent trespass on or other tortious or criminal interference with real property other than a habitation or personal property is not justified unless the person using such force reasonably believes that it is necessary to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.

  14. #28
    Distinguished Member Array ericb327's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Bellevue, Ky/Cincinatti
    Posts
    1,406
    Well guys I'm of to the range, thanks for all the feedback. Points well taken.
    Last edited by ericb327; April 7th, 2012 at 10:49 AM.

  15. #29
    Distinguished Member
    Array accessbob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Portland, Oregon
    Posts
    1,318
    Quote Originally Posted by ericb327 View Post
    Well guys I'm of to ranged, thanks for all the feedback. Points well taken.
    So, if you are at the range, you are "ranged?" And then you leave you must be "deranged."
    EDC - Glock 36 OR Glock 30, Ruger LC9, OR Ruger SR1911 CMD AND
    Ruger LCP in Desantis Pocket Holster (backup)
    Member - SAF, OFF,
    NRA Life Member

  16. #30
    VIP Member Array First Sgt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Florence, SC
    Posts
    7,939
    Quote Originally Posted by ericb327 View Post
    What happened to stubborn's post? it was hilarious. LMAO. I'm sure I'm not the first noob to get his hand smacked for giving an opinion or raising a serious question. If you know the law, great! Then this thread was not directed at you. I posted this thread after reading in Caught a guy breaking into my truck "that someone would have snuck up on a bad guy and its on". Do the people accusing me of being presumptuous really think i directed this thread specifically to them or was a chance to put me in my place. How dare you come in to a forum and give an opinion or idea!!!!!
    Hey ericb....from one Hillbilly to another (I'm originally from the hills of Tennessee. And yes, I do have one leg shorter than the other from walkin on the side of the hills...) just kinda take a chill pill and watch what the majority has to say, rather than the minority...But, with that being said, sometimes the minority brings out some "points to ponder" that might influence your original position and cause it to perhaps go in a slightly different direction..Just sayin!!! Evidence of that is my good friend Mad Mac......He and I have ... cough cough ... differed in opinions in the past, but here lately, it must be something in the water, or perhaps he opened my eyes a bit more, I've begun to actually agree with some of his replies... Sooo, grab a lil glass of that clear stuff ya find in the hills of KY (put your weapon away of course!), or grab ya a big ole glass of "sweet tea" (with lemon for myself), and just enjoy the replies and reading here on DC...JMO
    suntzu likes this.
    Sometimes in life you have to stand your ground. It's a hard lesson to learn and even most adults don't get it, but in the end only I can be responsible for my life. If faced with any type of adversity, only I can overcome it. Waiting for someone else to take responsibility is a long fruitless wait.

Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

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

duty to retreat in oregon

Click on a term to search for related topics.