'Spoils of war'

[Twycross]

I have a question I've been pondering, and I thought I'd see what you guys think about this.

Through military history, the losers in a fight usually get stripped of their gear. Maybe not so much through the last few centuries, but for most of human history. So here's a scenario: you have been assaulted by a thug in an alley. Because of your superior fighting skills, or just plain luck, you are victorious. The thug is either dead or unconscious, but no one else has showed up yet. Then, you notice that the guy had a Glock tucked in his jacket pocket, which, for some unknown reason, he did not pull. Or maybe he did pull it, but was unable to use it. Or used it ineffectivly. Whatever. Does this weapon now become 'spoils of war', forfeited to you, the victor? Or in other words, would you take it? Any thoughts?

[dasmi]

No, that would be a very bad idea.

[Twycross]

No, that would be a very bad idea.
Why?

[dasmi]

Because that would be theft. Think really really hard, and you'll figure out why it's a bad idea.

[Avizpls]

Now YOU have the pistol that he stole from Joe Citizen.

or it was legally his. you stole it. stole. a gun. With a serial number.


very very bad idea. now you, too, are a felon.

[MidKnight]

You stole Joe Citizens Glock. And, you're standing over his dead/mauled body. That doesn't look too good for when the authorities actually do show up. Unless there were no witnesses and you don't call the po-po, which again, would be a giant mistake.

[ATW525]

Even worse, it could be Joe Criminal's Glock he stole from Joe Citizen a few months ago and which he's used to rob several convenience stores, including one where he plugged the clerk with that very pistol which you are now carrying around...

[kymasabe]

If I had just gunned down Mr. BadGuy and saw his Glock tucked in his pants and for some reason he didn't pull it. Personally, I'd pull his weapon and make sure it was in his hand before the police arrive.

[tINY]

Post deleted

[bclark1]

if it were a real war, i don't see why not. bringing home a pallet of guns or grenades, that's pushing it, but our dads and granddads brought home lugers from germany, so i don't see why our guys shouldn't be able to grab an AK in the gulf.

but on the civilian front, we've pretty much covered the legal ramifications... you now possess a gun which can possibly through ballistics be tied to a crime, not to mention someone else may lay claim to it and then it looks stolen, and the ATF just wouldn't consider that a legitimate transfer of something they want to know about...
but all that aside, i don't want a gun i don't know the history of. not even for legality reasons, but for safety. unless i happen to be an armorer for the particular model of weapon i've come across, i just wouldn't feel safe with a gun that's likely changed hands a few times, been beaten up and poorly maintained. i'm sure i'm overly paranoid, but i'd prefer to avoid kabooms at all costs, even if it means buying all my guns new :P

[CajunBass]

Since you're talking about a civilian crime, I believe that would be called "tampering with a crime scene" or some other such legal term. (Putting the gun in the BG's hand would also be.) I think that's a crime most anywhere.

[payne]

I wouldn't touch the thing. Wouldn't want my prints on it b/c cops may think I planted it on him to justify my shooting or something. Now, In regards to soldiers taking equipment from enemy soldiers; I think it's not a bad idea and in a way a souvinere (wish I could spell) of where they've been and what there enemy was.

[Topthis]

Wow...not sure if this has already been covered or not, but you have no idea where that gun came from, if it was used in a homocide or some aggravated crime...now if you pick up the weapon and then you get caught with it, then you are now Suspect #1 for anything that gun has been through. Not a very good idea...besides, its just a friggin gun.

[Denny Hansen]

My first thought was to lock this down tighter than a bull's rear end at fly time as we do NOT condone criminal behavior here at TFL. Thanks to all the members who pointed out that the idea of theft and tampering with a crime scene is a very bad idea.

Denny

[Rojoe67]

I have no idea what would come over one's mind to take the time to steal such a pistol? So why is it one would consider stealing a hot Glock? Heck, I don't like Glock's enough to buy one and own anyhow. This is a interesting post :confused: ?

[Marko Kloos]

Life is not a Grand Theft Auto video game.

[Got Lead?]

You are not at "war", and the gun doesn't belong to you. :rolleyes:

[Rodger_p]

I'm not sure which troubles me more, whether or not to remove an item from a crime scene, or tampering with evidence in a crime scene.
I simply don't know what to say, so I will not say anymore.

[625]

Yes. Take the gun and any jewelry he is wearing. Make sure to check for a wallet. If you have enoiugh time you could open his mouth and check if he has any gold fillings you could pry out. :rolleyes:

[RWK]

TWYcross,

In many years of TFL participation, I must say this is one of the more foolish ideas ever raised. I debated whether to comment at all -- I probably should not -- and/or whether to be so blunt, and I finally decided that this post warrants a very straightforward and forthright response.

Please consider the following scenario: You feloniously steal the robber’s Glock. However, unbeknownst to you, he (after all, a criminal) used it to kill seven nuns two weeks before. For whatever reasons, the Glock is later seized by the police and the ballistic matches (projectile and cartridge case) tie the firearm -- and, therefore, you -- to the horrific “nun massacre”. What do you say to the police, “I’m innocent, and I only stole the gun?” That is certain to be a successful defense.

I do not intend to offend or to be disrespectful, but that is a VERY BAD idea. And, by the way, it is illegal to bring small arms -- no less grenades -- home from an overseas battlefield. I served for two decades as a Naval officer (eventually commanding hundreds of people) and I can tell you this is sometimes treated as a serious Courts Martial offense, not to mention the local police and ATF reactions to a private citizen with grenades in his home!

[Slateman]

No, its not war.

In your scenario, you had a felony crime comitted against you. That is officially a crime scene. Furthermore, messing with it would only bring you under suspicion from the police.

[XavierBreath]

Not only would taking the gun be theft, tampering with evidence, and possibly more, more importantly you are removing the very evidence that could exonerate you in the shooting! Think about that. It's not only illegal and unethical, it is contrary to your best interests.

Wartime, sure, why not?
Peacetime? No way Jose'!

[Ranger325]

So your question is....... in a civilian crime situation should you behave in a manner that has been unacceptable for military forces for "the last few centuries"? Wow...................

[CarbineCaleb]

First of all, I believe that would make you a thief, and liable to criminal prosecution as such. Furthermore, the "bad guy's" gun itself may have been stolen by someone else before you stole it, and may have been used in a criminal shooting.

As others have noted, you are going to have to have some discussion with police and possibly a prosecuting attorney, judge and jury as to how you came to ventilate this person, and if they have no weapon, I think you are putting yourself in quite a predicament for those proceedings.

[Duxman]

I would take the gun from the BG - NOT to steal it, but to secure the weapon and turn it over to the police when they show up. You do not want the BG waking up and shooting you because you knocked him out.

Stealing the weapon would make you just as evil and criminal as the person you just defending yourself against. Also - a $500 weapon is certainly not worth a jail term. Think of the consequences.

[Eghad]

I would make sure Mr BG couldnt reach it and call 911 on the cell. The Police are welcome to it. Its not your property plus as others said it might have been used in a crime that could put the BG away.

[CyberSEAL]

Jesus. Get a job and buy more guns.

[Trockstroh]

No, Because if a "Thug" has it in an ally it probably has no serial numbers on it. However I would take the slide so he couldn't use in a later crime. So the slide would be my trophy.

[Garand Illusion]

I can't believe the negative responses to this intelligent post. If you drop somebody in self defense, I think it's a clear case of "shooters keepers losers weepers".

But why stop at the gun?

The watch I'm wearing ... got it from a mugger I dropped with a head shot in Dallas.

The laptop computer I'm working on is from a road-raging business man who charged me with a tire iron that I put down with a COM shot from my .410 derringer.

The underwear I'm wearing -- from a deranged heroin addict who broke into my house that I took out with my SKS.

I'm still hoping I'll be attacked with lethal force by someone who owns a Porsche ... :D

[Twycross]

Thanks all for the input. Sorry to ruffle so many feathers. I thought this was a real question, given the military historical pattern of winner-takes-all. I guess it is not.

[dasmi]

Yes, MILITARY pattern.
A civilian shooting an attacker on the street is not a military operation.

[CarbineCaleb]

Yes, MILITARY pattern.
A civilian shooting an attacker on the street is not a military operation.

+1 on that. Laws and morality apply in peacetime - those are not minor considerations. Just because you own a gun doesn't make you a soldier, and it doesn't make your street a warscene.

I have never been in war (and am glad for that), but from what I know from journalistic and historical accounts, normal standards of morality and legality are both often ignored in what is really a crazy and lawless situation. I mean face it, even according to the "rules", murder is the basic tactical goal for the footsoldier in wartime - pretty odd.

[CyberSEAL]

Laws and morality apply all the time, in war too, at least they're supposed to. If you ask me, stripping a dead enemy soldier of equipment and intelligence is legal and moral.

[wayneinFL]

Reminds me of a friend who carries and was mugged once.

"Oh,yeah? You give me your F-ing wallet!"

Taking anything from a crime scene is a no-no, unless there are no witnesses and you are burying the body. :rolleyes:

Otherwise, call the police and don't touch anything. If you have to leave the scene to call, hope the gun is still there when you get back. I've heard stories of guns being picked up by cohorts hiding in the bushes.

[progunner1957]

Don't do it - it sounds like a GREAT way to in up in some very deep brown stinky.

I believe the authorities would call it "murder/robbery." :eek:

I'll pay the $549.00 for the Glock at the gun shop rather than the $75,000 it will cost for an attorney to "try" to keep me out of The Big House.

[3 weelin geezer]

I have a question: Why is it that people like to take a gun/knife/evidence and call it 'securing' it to turn it over to the police??? Kinda like when I leave stuff laying around, come back and its gone. How the hell can an inanimate, stone cold dead, thing with no noticable arms or legs get up and walk away to end up in some one else's possesion across the street?? Or say I leave my glasses on a shelf at the store and they turn up at the register on the other side of said store. How am I supposed to know some one turned them it there??That really aggravates me. I figger that sooner or later, the owner will retrace his/her steps and come looking for the thing lost. If it is where they visited, they will find it by themselves!!! Or in this case, the police man will know how to handle it to save fingerprints needed and he will also not be scared of the idiot waving a 'secured' gun at him. How does he know the samaritan is not the perp? I say: leave the damn gun on the floor. Guns don't kill people by themselves they just lay there. Once again that might be an important piece of evidence. Where it was found and in what position. Was it loaded? Etc.

[BillCA]

Thank you Duxman!

My only contribution to this discussion would be to echo others by saying that you don't "take" (as in keep for your own) the BG's gun. Rather, in a justifiable shooting scenario, you secure visible weapons at the scene.

This means that the knife the BG used to accost you and any visible weapon that is present should be guarded against tampering. Who would tamper? Lots of folks -- some through negligence, such as a medical person attempting to aid the "poor man" -- some through malice such as a street buddy who distracts you while his accomplice picks up the weapons -- and some through stupidity such as the gawkers who come to look and see an "easy gain" by taking something laying around.

I pray that I'll never have to shoot someone but if it happens I'll want everyone to stay back from the scene unless they are bona fide emergency personnel (and some of them are the worst offenders). Until the police arrive it's in YOUR best interest to take charge of the scene and minimize the number of people who approach you or the BG. Have people call 911. Ask someone to get the names of witnesses for you. Keep an eye on the crime scene so no one comes up to riffle the BG's pockets or take evidence.

When the cops arrive you give up control of the crime scene to them, but it's in YOUR best interest to point out the weapons you know about and tell them you tried to keep the scene and evidence as it was. If you moved something (e.g. kicked the knife out of reach of the BG) DO tell the cops so that apparent discrepancies (like distance) are accounted for early on.

Note: I'm not a lawyer and this isn't legal advice, but it's just what I'd do to cover my rump.

[matchy]

yeah i agree with bill, taking the gun as a trophy is obviously not such a good idea. but im sure its very appealing to certain people within society. but to those who can easily and legally get their hands on a glock, i wouldn't think twice of keeping it because of the ramifications that may occur from doing so.

although, disarming the bg of visible weapons could be and most likely is a good idea. because you should always be thinking of safety first! i would resort to picking it up if i had no other way of moving it, but in the confusion of the momeant.. you might forget that picking something does leave prints and dna.

but on the other hand, taking spoils of wars (within reason) is one of the rights that soldiers should have, like that golden ak..

[Heist]

No, that would be a very bad idea.

Why?


If I had just gunned down Mr. BadGuy and saw his Glock tucked in his pants and for some reason he didn't pull it. Personally, I'd pull his weapon and make sure it was in his hand before the police arrive.

:eek: :eek: :eek:

Let me guess, you guys would haul a bad guy who you shot in your yard up to your house and plant your gun in his hand if he had a knife?

I can think of a site with a name that starts with a word that rhymes with barf where you'd be much, much more at home when it comes to advocating dangerous, absurd, and absolutely irresponsible practices.

Why would you want a criminal's weapon anyway?

[ArKay]

It's a crime scene,NOT a battlefield.The rule of war does not apply in this instance.You are stealing.

[Tylden]

Personally I think it would be a VERY bad idea for not only the reasons already mentioned, but also just because it's morally wrong (just my opinion). One other thing to think about...in this day and age you could very well be on surveillance camera. They are just about everywhere nowadays....parking lots, intersections, many places of business, and who knows where else. Especially since the worldwide reality of terrorism....just some food for thought.

[chicagopimp]

What's to stop the thug from saying he was trying to use that gun to protect himself against you? The way I see it, by taking that gun away from the thug, you have just opened yourself up to battery and robbery charges, at least in Illinois. Now you could swear all day long that he attacked you, but the police are realistically going to look at who was beaten up and definitely question why you stole his gun!!

[perception]

I would keep a careful eye on the gun to make sure that it did not "dissapear" before the police arrived, but I would not touch it unless absolutely necesarry.

[Windlord0]

I can understand wanting to have the weapon afterwards, but I wouldn't dare touch it. I would approach the police about obtaining the weapon from them afterwards, or at least a part of it. They would probably say no, but at least I tried. Touching it at the crime scene though, that's a bad bad thing, I don't want to go to jail.

[shield20]

I don't think asking the police for a trophy after killing somebody is such a good idea either. Chances are, unless they have come out on top in a similiar life/death struggle, they would not get your wanting a souvenir - may lead to trouble for you when they pass the info on to investigators/DA, etc and they start questioning motives, reasonable-ness, etc.

For years we have all been told how upsetting and distressful and depressing it will be if we have to take another's life, no matter how much they may have deserved it. Most others, cops included probably won't understand a different reaction.

[Superhornet]

DUXMAN--------no do not take anything.......and...if it is me and him in an alley........and I have the upper hand....he is not going to ever wake up again......IMHO

[leadcounsel]

Whether the BG has the weapon in his hand or in his waistband, I think the best action would be to "secure the crime scene" and make sure that the BG does not have access to any weapon in the event that he is alive and decides to shoot back or run and dispose of his evidence before going to the hospital. Alternately, what if a witness decides HE wants that shiny gun laying on the sidewalk near the BG's hand and picks it up and runs with it. You cannot leave the crime scene. I can just see it now, "NO really officer, he had a gun but someone else took it."

So, I would take the BG's weapon and then provide it to the police when the arrive, which is also a very delicate matter. No sudden moves, comply 100%, etc.

I would NOT steal it, for reasons that others have offered (ethics, could tie you to a prior crime, could be stolen, etc.). After a shooting you can be assured you will be, at the minimum, completely searched and placed into a patrol car and taken in for questioning. They'll find the gun at that time and you're credibility will start to drop fast.

[Eightball]

Personally, I'd pull his weapon and make sure it was in his hand before the police arrive.If you do that, at least make sure your own prints aren't on it :rolleyes: .

Personally, I wouldn't touch it--I'd call cops (or get someone to do so), and point out the firearm. That, and I just don't like Glocks to begin with, so I wouldn't touch one anyway :p .

In a warfare scenario (i.e. not in a street fight, but actually a war), go ahead and take the guy's gun--he's dead, won't need it, and I sure as heck wouldn't want a buddy of mine to get shot with a gun I didn't take. If it was FA, and you could get it past .gov, then there's even more fun it it :p . If it was a pistol--I'd grab it anyway (I'm under 21, so that's about the only way I'd manage to get a handgun :rolleyes: ). To each their own.

[12-34hom]

Who would want to steal a Glock to begin with.... ;)

12-34hom.

[Russ538]

I wouldn't want the gun because it could have been stolen or used in other crimes. Maybe I'm just paranoid, though. However, I would certainly be tempted to disassemble it and swipe some parts just so he couldn't use it again.

[Crosshair]

Onlt time I would CONSIDER doing something like this would be in a SHTF situation. Though I supose I could alway's request it from the cops after the investigation is over. :rolleyes:

[Glenn E. Meyer]

This is very simple:

1. The gun is evidence against the bad guy, so you want the police to see it.
2. You only move it, if it is necessary for your safety. That is a tactical
question.

a. unconscious people can wake up and shoot you, even if you have them
covered.

b. Is he really dead or unconscious, such that when you reach to the
person, they will grab you?

Thus, there are tactical risks in leaving the gun or trying to get it. However, just taking it for fun would weaken your case that the BG is a BG.

One might suggest calling the law and taking a position that gives you some advantage over the suspect as you wait for the law. One might argue for fleeing if you are in contact with the dispatcher and telling them that you are doing such for your own safety.