Strange situation from the news - Page 2

Tim Burke · January 9, 2006, 05:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Derius_T

Actually, he didn't physically threaten anyone specifically with the weapon if he just brandished it.

Just how does one interpret his actions? Was his belly too hot? Was he showing off his gun? Or was he saying, "I'll shoot you if you interfere!"? I think it was "C." He's got a gun= ability. He's within range = opportunity. He's (implicitly) threatened you with the gun = jeopardy. While it may not be wise to engage him, it's certainly legally defensible. It isn't about the cat, it's about the lethal threat he presents. You are not obligated to wait until he's shooting, or until he's aiming the gun, or until he has the gun in hand, or even until he's reaching for the gun. He already poses an immediate lethal threat.

Derius_T · January 11, 2006, 08:06 PM

Just brandishing is not grounds to drawn and shoot the man dead. You would end up in prison. No sense arguing the matter, just hope you don't act so foolishly if it happens to you....

joab · January 11, 2006, 08:18 PM

Quote:

Just brandishing is not grounds to drawn and shoot the man dead. You would end up in prison. No sense arguing the matter, just hope you don't act so foolishly if it happens to you.

Brandishing a gun while committing a crime implies the threat of using that gun in a deadly manner while in the commission of the crime.
Couple that with one putting his finger to his mouth a reasonable person could reasonably conclude that a threat of deadly force if the person did not keep quiet was made

You are allowed as a citizen to stop any crime that you witness in progress you are also allowed to use deadly force against the threat of deadly force

I love living in Florida, no reason to over analyze deadly threats

EMB135Driver · January 12, 2006, 12:33 AM

Try to take my cat at gunpoint, and you are gonna get 2 to the chest and 1 to the head....then the real indignity begins as my cat pisses on your rotting corpse.

If a reasonable person in the same situation could infer that the bad guy had Opportunity, Ability and Intent to cause death or serious bodily harm during the commission of a crime, force, including deadly force, is permissible.

Florida is a great State, unless you are intent on being a criminal....life expectancy isnt' so good after 10/01/05

Tim Burke · January 12, 2006, 10:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Derius_T

Just brandishing is not grounds to drawn and shoot the man dead.

That is correct. However, the guy did not "just" brandish the weapon.
There are 3 elements that you must be able show to demonstrate that someone poses an immediate threat of grave bodily injury.
Ability- He has to have the means.
Opportunity- He has to be a position to use his means. A guy with a club threatening you from 40 yards away has the ability, but not the opportunity.
Jeopardy- He must, by his words or actions, demonstrate that he intends to cause you immediate injury. A guy simply walking out of a sporting goods store carrying a bat has Ability and Opportunity, but demonstrates no Jeopardy.
Which of these 3 elements do you believe has not been satisfied by the robber's actions?

joab · January 12, 2006, 05:13 PM

Quote:

I don't see ANY jury in the word letting you go free for killing a man who was stealing a cat.....thats just stupid....

This something that sets me off.
Nobody is going to shoot someone for stealing a cat up for adoption. It's a different story when you shoot someone for committing a violent felony with implied use of deadly force, even if the crime just happens to be stealing a cat

Eghad · January 13, 2006, 01:09 PM

He showed me his so its only polite for me to show him mine.

Edicut · January 13, 2006, 08:54 PM

Like it's been said previous, the item of value (cat) has nothing to do with this. What if it had been a man brandishing the same way and telling you nothing more than to get out of your car? Fact is, you have no way of knowing what he wants when he shows the weapon, cat and cash register and no witnesses?
Personally I'd do my best to prepare for the worst. If I was just walking in I'd back my way out of the store and call for help. If I was unable to get to a door I may very likely pull and be ready especially if I had a clear target and no one could see the weapon in my hand..

Edicut

Derius_T · January 15, 2006, 10:06 AM

Quote:

On January 1, 2006, at about 5:00 p.m. the two suspects walked into the Petco Store in the 1100 block of N. Buckner Blvd.

They walked to a cage housing animals up for adoption and selected a cat. A clerk walked over to assist the two and the older suspect raised his shirt displaying a handgun.

The second suspect motioned for the clerk to be quiet and the two then walked out of the store with the cat and fled in an unknown direction.

I understand that would make one nervous, and would be quite startling. But the fact is, as far as the limited information we have, they calmly walked over, got a cat, when the guy approached asking if he could help or whatever, the guy lifted his shirt, showing a firearm, the other guy motioned for quiet, and they turned and walked out of the store.

It doesn't say they threatened anyone, or even spoke to the man, and made no threatening moves. He just said basically, I got a gun, be quiet, I REALLY want this cat okay?

Sure it would be nerve racking, but was he in imminent danger of death? Obviously not. Would it have helped to "show him yours" and escalate an otherwise non lethal situation into a lethal one? Causing who knows what to do down? Sometimes you have to use your judgement. Its not always necessary to jerk that pistol and go to work gunslinger.....

joab · January 15, 2006, 11:11 AM

Quote:

A clerk walked over to assist the two and the older suspect raised his shirt displaying a handgun.

Quote:

The second suspect motioned for the clerk to be quiet

Quote:

It doesn't say they threatened anyone

Tim Burke · January 15, 2006, 01:49 PM

So if someone approaches me on the street, says "Give it up, man" and lifts his shirt, displaying a gun, that isn't a threat to shoot me if I don't comply, and he isn't committing armed robbery?
Are you suggesting that in such a case, before I can justify the use of deadly force to defend myself I must wait for him to take some further action?
If so, where do you draw the line, what's your "GO" signal? When he reaches for the gun? When he grips it? When he pulls it out of his pants? After all, so far he's merely "brandished" the weapon. Do you wait until he points it in your general direction, until he aims it at you, until he fires it, or until he shoots you? Where is your line?
I am not questioning whether or not it would have been a good idea to draw on the armed cat thief; I'm questioning whether or not it is legally justified. I say it is, you seem to be saying it isn't. If it isn't, I'd like to know where you draw the line.

IndianaDean · January 15, 2006, 07:52 PM

Displaying a firearm in that fashion is brandishing, and brandishing is a crime.

Capt. Charlie · January 15, 2006, 10:09 PM

Quote:

I am not questioning whether or not it would have been a good idea to draw on the armed cat thief; I'm questioning whether or not it is legally justified. I say it is, you seem to be saying it isn't. If it isn't, I'd like to know where you draw the line.

It is legally justified. Armed robbery is just that: Armed robbery. There is no stipulation that the weapon be deployed. If you are armed when you commit a robbery, you've committed armed robbery... period. You can be charged with such even if the weapon is a toy.

No reasonable and prudent person would expect you to wait for a suspect to draw, resulting in an old West gunfight. His intent to use it is implied, the moment he displays it in the commission of a crime.

If you want to dig through the law books (I don't), there is substantial case law supporting this.

LICCW · January 15, 2006, 10:38 PM

Derius T: In my state, pistol license holders may interfere and use deadly force, to stop rape, sodomy, arson, robbery, burglary, physical violence to license holder or another person, among others. This is a case of armed robbery and would meet the defense of justification criteria. So, in my stete at least, the license is not specifically for self defense.

Derius_T · January 17, 2006, 10:40 AM

I understand what you all are trying to say. That just the brandishing alone contitutes a threat. I agree. But the fact is that he turned and walked away. No one got hurt. If you would have drawn on him, maybe you or some innocent kid looking at bunny rabbits with his mom dies. All I'm saying is sometimes a gut check is required to see if you honestly believe the man is going to use this weapon, or if its just bluster to get out without a confrontation. You escallate (sp?) what would have otherwise been non-lethal, and you can be held responsible It has happened. You just have to use your head and instincts and feel out the situation.

January 13, 2006, 01:09 PM	#32
Eghad Senior Member Join Date: May 28, 2005 Location: Texas Posts: 6,231	He showed me his so its only polite for me to show him mine. __________________ Have a nice day at the range NRA Life Member

January 15, 2006, 01:49 PM	#36
Tim Burke Senior Member Join Date: February 17, 1999 Posts: 551	Derius_T- So if someone approaches me on the street, says "Give it up, man" and lifts his shirt, displaying a gun, that isn't a threat to shoot me if I don't comply, and he isn't committing armed robbery? Are you suggesting that in such a case, before I can justify the use of deadly force to defend myself I must wait for him to take some further action? If so, where do you draw the line, what's your "GO" signal? When he reaches for the gun? When he grips it? When he pulls it out of his pants? After all, so far he's merely "brandished" the weapon. Do you wait until he points it in your general direction, until he aims it at you, until he fires it, or until he shoots you? Where is your line? I am not questioning whether or not it would have been a good idea to draw on the armed cat thief; I'm questioning whether or not it is legally justified. I say it is, you seem to be saying it isn't. If it isn't, I'd like to know where you draw the line. __________________ TB., NC

January 11, 2006, 08:06 PM	#27
Derius_T Senior Member Join Date: November 29, 2004 Location: South West OHIO (boondocks) Posts: 1,337	Just brandishing is not grounds to drawn and shoot the man dead. You would end up in prison. No sense arguing the matter, just hope you don't act so foolishly if it happens to you....

January 12, 2006, 12:33 AM	#29
EMB135Driver Member Join Date: November 21, 2005 Posts: 56	Try to take my cat at gunpoint, and you are gonna get 2 to the chest and 1 to the head....then the real indignity begins as my cat pisses on your rotting corpse. If a reasonable person in the same situation could infer that the bad guy had Opportunity, Ability and Intent to cause death or serious bodily harm during the commission of a crime, force, including deadly force, is permissible. Florida is a great State, unless you are intent on being a criminal....life expectancy isnt' so good after 10/01/05

January 13, 2006, 08:54 PM	#33
Edicut Member Join Date: December 25, 2005 Posts: 19	Like it's been said previous, the item of value (cat) has nothing to do with this. What if it had been a man brandishing the same way and telling you nothing more than to get out of your car? Fact is, you have no way of knowing what he wants when he shows the weapon, cat and cash register and no witnesses? Personally I'd do my best to prepare for the worst. If I was just walking in I'd back my way out of the store and call for help. If I was unable to get to a door I may very likely pull and be ready especially if I had a clear target and no one could see the weapon in my hand.. Edicut

January 15, 2006, 07:52 PM	#37
IndianaDean Senior Member Join Date: September 10, 2004 Location: Indiana(obviously) Posts: 362	Displaying a firearm in that fashion is brandishing, and brandishing is a crime.

January 15, 2006, 10:38 PM	#39
LICCW Senior Member Join Date: December 25, 2005 Posts: 266	Derius T: In my state, pistol license holders may interfere and use deadly force, to stop rape, sodomy, arson, robbery, burglary, physical violence to license holder or another person, among others. This is a case of armed robbery and would meet the defense of justification criteria. So, in my stete at least, the license is not specifically for self defense.

January 17, 2006, 10:40 AM	#40
Derius_T Senior Member Join Date: November 29, 2004 Location: South West OHIO (boondocks) Posts: 1,337	I understand what you all are trying to say. That just the brandishing alone contitutes a threat. I agree. But the fact is that he turned and walked away. No one got hurt. If you would have drawn on him, maybe you or some innocent kid looking at bunny rabbits with his mom dies. All I'm saying is sometimes a gut check is required to see if you honestly believe the man is going to use this weapon, or if its just bluster to get out without a confrontation. You escallate (sp?) what would have otherwise been non-lethal, and you can be held responsible It has happened. You just have to use your head and instincts and feel out the situation.