Bad: Shooting at fleeing suspect

I believe that most of us who own and carry firearms would not do this. Unless I was in fear of my life I would refrain from shooting someone over belongings. However, the more that criminals perpetrate their trade, the more frustrated law-abiding citizens get and leads to this sort of event.

Like Lima said, I digress. I can recall a time when people had respect for property of others and we used to go away from our home with the door wide open, covered only by a wooden screen door and nobody dared enter because they had respect. Apparently respect is no longer fashionable, but again I digress.

When I lived in GA in the early 90's, a criminal attempted to carjack a victim at a gas station. The victim was able to fight off the attacker and shot him as he was fleeing. The victim ended up being charged and sentenced because the police said that once the attacker was fleeing, the danger was over. Add me to those who believe that my property is insured and not worth taking someone's life over. I'll use deadly force to protect me and my loved ones without hesitation. A man fleeing doesn't present a deadly threat (normally).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 21bubba

Maybe this should be another thread but here goes.

What if the person is not stealing your T.V.,or computer, or cash. or valuables but is stealing your guns or your prescription drugs. Think about the posibilities....

---

Your guns aren't insured? In fact, your home or apartment, or even your vehicle isn't insured against burglary?

If he's stealing my guns (except the one on my hip), he's carrying the safe... he's no threat to me... but I suppose I could outrun him, since he's carrying the safe, and tip it over on him. That would hold him 'til the police arrive.

Drugs, for the uninsured, are very expensive. But some states have victim restitution. I'd wager that if your state is one of them, and it was a bona fide B&E, you'd get enough to get you by by the next day.

Someone made a comment once before on a simular thread, about what if they are stealing your car, (which this guy might have been attempting,) and you can't afford insurance, and need your car to get to work. You lose your car, you then lose your job, you were already behind on your mortgage/rent, now you end up homeless.

Is it still better to let them take your car?

I'm not saying you should shoot them but I can see where possession might be more important to some people than to others.

Gee, what if the car is your only way to get to work, you can't afford insurance and if you don't stop the BG, you'll end up homeless but one of your stray shots goes into a nearby home and kills an innocent child?

Bottom line:

Let him take the car unless you can guarantee the BG is the only bullet sponge around.

There is a significant difference between actively trying to prevent the theft of your property and shooting at a fleeing suspect. Generally, I support the former, but not the latter. Now if in attempting to prevent the burglary/theft/etc, the susp becomes a threat, that is a different matter.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by oakchas

Your guns aren't insured? In fact, your home or apartment, or even your vehicle isn't insured against burglary?

If he's stealing my guns (except the one on my hip), he's carrying the safe... he's no threat to me... but I suppose I could outrun him, since he's carrying the safe, and tip it over on him. That would hold him 'til the police arrive.

Drugs, for the uninsured, are very expensive. But some states have victim restitution. I'd wager that if your state is one of them, and it was a bona fide B&E, you'd get enough to get you by by the next day.

---

It's not the loss of the property that would concern me. It's like so many here have posted, once you choose to carry, you have taken your responsibility to another level. Well, once a BG has a gun they have moved to a whole new threat level over an unarmed BG, or a BG with a knife/screwdriver that is running away.

Guns make everything more "meaningful" in conflict. Whether you are the BG, or the law-abiding citizen. It's why those who are CCing should practice conflict avoidance so we don't get shot over something stupid, or we don't kill someone else over something stupid.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by adric22

I feel it is sort of a grey area. In my state I would be protected by law if I did that. I think I would probably do it assuming I had a clear shot and there was no chance of me accidentally hitting somebody else. The reason has little to do with recovery of my stuff. I don't think there is any property in my home that I can say is worth a man's life. But, I feel if more people took this course of action, it would serve as a deterrent to future criminals. I've pointed out before, most criminals are not afraid of jail. Most of them have been there before several times and have little to lose by going. But they are afraid of dying. That is the whole purpose behind our capital punishment system. Some people think it is for revenge, but in reality it is there to save lives.

If the man is fleeing with my property and I shoot him in the back with a single shot, there is (I'm guessing) a 75% chance or more that he will survive it. You can bet he and everyone he knows will think twice about burglarizing someone's home after that.

Then when we get to the question of what a man's life is worth. Well, it is hard to place a dollar value on any life. But when dealing with crooks like these they are pretty much a parasite on society adding no benefit. The best thing they do is give employment to police officers, prisons guards, and lawyers. I'd say society can probably get along just fine without him if he dies.

---

OK, Wait, OK, let me see if I have this straight...if I remember correctly you're the one that would fire warning shots around a crowd just so they will know your gun is "real"...and now you're going to shoot a fleeing suspect in the back, not because he's a threat to you, but just as a deterrent to other criminals?
Son you're scary, seriously, you better get your head screwed on straight before you wind up in the legal system, on the wrong side of the system. Some of the "brain farts" you've posted here don't suggest if, but rather when. I'm not jumping on you, I'm trying to give some constructive advice.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by oakchas

Your guns aren't insured? In fact, your home or apartment, or even your vehicle isn't insured against burglary?

If he's stealing my guns (except the one on my hip), he's carrying the safe... he's no threat to me... but I suppose I could outrun him, since he's carrying the safe, and tip it over on him. That would hold him 'til the police arrive.

Drugs, for the uninsured, are very expensive. But some states have victim restitution. I'd wager that if your state is one of them, and it was a bona fide B&E, you'd get enough to get you by by the next day.

---

Yes they are all insured. Thank you for reminding me. The point I was making that may have been hard for some to grasp was.

He's stealing a deadly weapon that he may be able to use to commit more violent crimes.
He's stealing drugs that can cause many serious problems for very many people.

If you can't see the difference between these two examples and a computer, tv or other such items then perhaps a reality check is in order.

If I catch a perp stealing my work computer, I will shoot him into the ground if necessary to save my computer and the ability to feed my family given the proprietary data on it.

Either he drops the computer voluntarily or I drop him. Period.

Same with my wife's mothers urn.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stubborn

OK, Wait, OK, let me see if I have this straight...if I remember correctly you're the one that would fire warning shots around a crowd just so they will know your gun is "real"...and now you're going to shoot a fleeing suspect in the back, not because he's a threat to you, but just as a deterrent to other criminals?
Son you're scary, seriously, you better get your head screwed on straight before you wind up in the legal system, on the wrong side of the system. Some of the "brain farts" you've posted here don't suggest if, but rather when. I'm not jumping on you, I'm trying to give some constructive advice.

---

Stubborn you are spot on.

IMO: You are fully within your right to jump on. His post is all worlds of wrong.

I thought Adric had a chance.

He is clueless.

Quote:

---

If the man is fleeing with my property and I shoot him in the back with a single shot, there is (I'm guessing) a 75% chance or more that he will survive it.

---

Guessing based on ABSOLUTELY NOTHING. Hell why not just pick 2489.23% assurance of survival. Its your fantasy.

Yuk. That guy scares me and hes in Texas.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TVJ

If I catch a perp stealing my work computer, I will shoot him into the ground if necessary to save my computer and the ability to feed my family given the proprietary data on it.

Either he drops the computer voluntarily or I drop him. Period.

Same with my wife's mothers urn.

---

I would think that a business computer at home with extremely proprietary information on it, upon which one depended for sustenance, would not only have on and off-site back-up, but would also be heavily encrypted. But then, that's just me, I guess. (well, why would one go so far as to carry a sidearm to assure himself a fighting chance in a fight for his life, yet not have similar protection for the basis of his livelyhood?)

The emotional attachment to a loved ones remains is understandable, but dropped by the perp, might be "gone with the wind" in any case.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Harryball

OMG, your telling us that in Texas you can shoot a fleeing suspect??????? And that you would shoot him to deter others. I know in texas you can defend property, but what you are saying is pure lunacy....

---

Funny that I see this now...I was just reading about these situations yesterday.
In MI, a B&E that occurs when someone is lawfully occupying the house is automatically 1st degree home invasion, a felony punishable by up to 20 years in the pen.

MI citizens are allowed by law to detain and citizen's arrest a felon. Also, in MI, a private citizen has more authorization of force than a police officer when stopping the felon. According to law, citizens are allowed to use deadly force when attempting to apprehend a fleeing felon who would be a harm to others or otherwise evade capture.

Now I'm not saying that if someone broke into my house, I'd chase him out into the street and kill him.
But if he had a weapon on him, and was fleeing with it, (depending on the situation of course) the law would protect me if I decided to make sure he wasn't a threat to other people. But for most situations with a fleeing perp...that's why beanbag rounds were invented ;)
Edit: then again, if he had a weapon on him, he wouldn't even make it out into the street.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by adric22

I feel it is sort of a grey area. In my state I would be protected by law if I did that. I think I would probably do it assuming I had a clear shot and there was no chance of me accidentally hitting somebody else. The reason has little to do with recovery of my stuff. I don't think there is any property in my home that I can say is worth a man's life. But, I feel if more people took this course of action, it would serve as a deterrent to future criminals. I've pointed out before, most criminals are not afraid of jail. Most of them have been there before several times and have little to lose by going. But they are afraid of dying. That is the whole purpose behind our capital punishment system. Some people think it is for revenge, but in reality it is there to save lives.

If the man is fleeing with my property and I shoot him in the back with a single shot, there is (I'm guessing) a 75% chance or more that he will survive it. You can bet he and everyone he knows will think twice about burglarizing someone's home after that.

Then when we get to the question of what a man's life is worth. Well, it is hard to place a dollar value on any life. But when dealing with crooks like these they are pretty much a parasite on society adding no benefit. The best thing they do is give employment to police officers, prisons guards, and lawyers. I'd say society can probably get along just fine without him if he dies.

---

I know that everyone is entitled to their opinion, but that is one screwed up point-of-view. What would you do if someone looks at you funny or cuts you off in traffic? Shoot them in the kneecap ( knowing there's a 95% chance they won't die ) to serve as a reminder not to do that again?

Remind me never to be neighbors with you. I'd hate to see you'd do if my dog started barking....

Adric22 is right in that in Texas it probably is legal. Having said that, I am not shooting a thief fleeing if they only took stuff.