The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > Hogan's Alley > Tactics and Training

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old June 24, 2009, 09:50 AM   #176
Doc Intrepid
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 22, 2009
Location: Washington State
Posts: 822
Another alternative is when phoning 911 call it in as a "man with a gun" call, (and you're the man with a gun) rather than a "thief breaking into my car" call. May reduce the delay in response time!

Otherwise, I agree that OC is the optimal alternative given these specific circumstances - if you either (a) habitually carry a can of OC with you when you take out the trash at night; or (b) have it handy in your garage. Also agree that have an alternative "less than lethal force" Plan B available is a wise idea.

Out of the universe of scenarios you may encounter, however, I suspect that this level of bozonity is relatively rare...
Doc Intrepid is offline  
Old June 24, 2009, 09:52 AM   #177
DougO83
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 1, 2007
Location: Texas
Posts: 386
Quote:
Another alternative is when phoning 911 call it in as a "man with a gun" call, (and you're the man with a gun) rather than a "thief breaking into my car" call. May reduce the delay in response time!
We have a solution! And...it isn't a false report if somebody there has a gun. Good call.

Quote:
Otherwise, I agree that OC is the optimal alternative given these specific circumstances - if you either (a) habitually carry a can of OC with you when you take out the trash at night; or (b) have it handy in your garage. Also agree that have an alternative "less than lethal force" Plan B available is a wise idea.
You can buy the ASP Key Defender or Palm Defender that goes on the keychain. I keep the Key Defender on my flashlight that travels with me when I go out walking at night.
__________________
"You can all go to hell, I'm going to Texas."
---Colonel David Crockett

Matt 6:33
DougO83 is offline  
Old June 24, 2009, 10:28 AM   #178
Brian Pfleuger
Staff
 
Join Date: June 25, 2008
Location: Central, Southern NY, USA
Posts: 17,471
Quote:
Another alternative is when phoning 911 call it in as a "man with a gun" call, (and you're the man with a gun) rather than a "thief breaking into my car" call. May reduce the delay in response time!
That is such an obviously bad idea that it shouldn't even need to be explained why.
__________________
Still happily answering to the call-sign Peetza.
---
You do not HAVE a soul. You ARE a soul. You HAVE a body.
-----
He is no fool who gives what he can not keep to gain what he can not lose.
-Jim Eliott, paraphrasing Philip Henry.
Brian Pfleuger is offline  
Old June 24, 2009, 12:21 PM   #179
Ricky B
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 3, 2002
Posts: 251
Quote:
That is such an obviously bad idea that it shouldn't even need to be explained why
Apparently, some people do need the explanation. But you put them on the right track.
Ricky B is offline  
Old June 24, 2009, 01:09 PM   #180
Ricky B
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 3, 2002
Posts: 251
Old Marksman, this is not directly responsive to your inquiry but might of some help in this situation. I came across the standard jury instructions that a CA judge will give in a criminal case where the defense is "defense of property." These instructions are based on CA case law. Note that there is a different set of instructions for intrusion into your dwelling. These instructions below relate only to defense of property:

Quote:
The owner [or possessor] of (real/ [or] personal) property may use
reasonable force to protect that property from imminent harm. [A
person may also use reasonable force to protect the property of a
(family member/guest/master/servant/ward) from immediate
harm.]

Reasonable force means the amount of force that a reasonable
person in the same situation would believe is necessary to protect
the property from imminent harm.

When deciding whether the defendant used reasonable force,
consider all the circumstances as they were known to and
appeared to the defendant and consider what a reasonable person
in a similar situation with similar knowledge would have believed. If the defendant’s beliefs were reasonable, the danger does not
need to have actually existed.

The People have the burden of proving beyond a reasonable doubt
that the defendant used more force than was reasonable to protect
property from imminent harm. If the People have not met this
burden, you must find the defendant not guilty of
<insert crime>.
The key here is the sentence: Reasonable force means the amount of force that a reasonable person in the same situation would believe is necessary to protect the property from imminent harm.

So if the thief is injured in CA (and my guess is that this would be an issue only if there were either a serious injury or a permanent injury) and the police believe that you used unreasonable force, the jury will decide, after the fact, whether the force you used was reasonable. In other words, if the situation is at all unclear, one would have to decide on the spot what 12 people who he's never met would say about his actions in retrieving a stereo, air bag, and other car parts.

As far as citizen's arrest goes, I can't imagine any state granting a citizen the privilege of using force greater than what a sworn peace officer is permitted to use.
Ricky B is offline  
Old June 24, 2009, 02:09 PM   #181
Hornett
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 1, 2006
Posts: 569
Don't compare with police officers.
They are entirely different.
At some point a police officer can take you down (really hard) for not complying with commands because the BG is then resisting arrest.
__________________
Guns don't kill people, Jack Bauer kills people.
Hornett is offline  
Old June 24, 2009, 02:22 PM   #182
markj
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 27, 2005
Location: Crescent Iowa
Posts: 2,936
The anti theft device in robo cop is what every car should have factory.

Lob a small package of c4 into the car. close the doors, run and ignite.

The tactical chimp would need the trunk to be opened as that is where mine is most of the time.

A cat that poops when thrown could come in handy here.

Ben the rat and his friends come out of the sewers and do their job?

No I will whip out the mighty cell phone and dial that majical number 911 and report a guy is getting tore up by a dog in my car. Make sure you can hose it out later.

No reason for gun play here.......
markj is offline  
Old June 24, 2009, 05:39 PM   #183
scottaschultz
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 27, 2009
Location: Missouri
Posts: 392
Quote:
Lob a small package of c4 into the car. close the doors, run and ignite.
If you do that, make sure your car is a Volkswagen Polo!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VSSWeGBkf9o

Scott
__________________
"I don't like repeat offenders, I like dead offenders!" Ted Nugent
scottaschultz is offline  
Old June 24, 2009, 06:03 PM   #184
Walter
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 17, 2004
Location: North Texas
Posts: 637
I believe I would retreat to the house, collect my wife's ONE MILLION VOLT stun gun. If several jolt of that didn't change his mind, I
might just let him have the car.

Walter
Walter is offline  
Old June 24, 2009, 06:21 PM   #185
hogdogs
Staff In Memoriam
 
Join Date: October 31, 2007
Location: Western Florida panhandle
Posts: 11,071
If they steal my junker truck, THEY DESERVE IT! It would take $500 in my hand to take it back!
Brent
hogdogs is offline  
Old June 25, 2009, 05:34 AM   #186
bestbod85
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 7, 2006
Posts: 161
GOOD thread!

I had a similar experience last year, someone was trying to steal my lights off of my garage (don't ask me why). i came outside after i heard some scratching against the house ( around 2am) and there was a guy standing there with a screwdriver trying to get our decorative lights off of our garage! i was dumbfounded and told the guy to leave - they guy said "not until i get my lights" "you stole em' " at that point it was clear he was on something so i call local pd. he was mad at this and dropped the screwdriver and tried to tackle me! long story short he ended up in the hospital trying to convince the cops that he was going to press charges on me for stealing his lights - weird stuff out there
bestbod85 is offline  
Old June 25, 2009, 11:52 PM   #187
XpatBubba
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 27, 2009
Location: Roatan, Honduras
Posts: 114
If they are already inside my truck and have already got my stereo, hell I know they would have found at least one gun in there. My girlfriend would have released the dogs and been on the 2nd story deck with shotgun without instruction. I think I would have a hard time making a lot of rational decisions with the guy actually laughing. I would not be able to handle that. It would have already have gotten to the face stomping, unless of course he wanted to try and draw that smokewagon he was trying to steal...
XpatBubba is offline  
Old June 26, 2009, 12:02 AM   #188
ImprobableJoe
Junior member
 
Join Date: June 11, 2009
Posts: 87
Quote:
You slip to a window and tell a family member what's happening and to call 911. When you return, you decide to confront Carl Carthief to prevent further damage to your car.
Fail. Once you walk away, you don't really have a right to walk back over to the guy. Lethal force should only be used to protect yourself and your family, IMO. Your car stereo shouldn't be worth killing for, no matter how insecure you feel about your manhood. The fact that you have time to walk past the criminal, knock on a window, wake someone up and talk to them about calling the police means that you did not feel that you were in danger. Returning to the place where the crime is happening means that YOU are escalating the situation, and if you then shoot the person you are at least partially at fault.

Not being required to retreat doesn't give you the right to advance and engage.
ImprobableJoe is offline  
Old June 26, 2009, 10:27 AM   #189
Ricky B
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 3, 2002
Posts: 251
Quote:
Not being required to retreat doesn't give you the right to advance and engage.
That's true as far as self-defense goes, but the owner or lawful occupant of real property also has the right to use reasonable force to eject a trespasser (and to protect personal property), at least in CA. See the initial (and currently only) post in the thread on "California law on self-defense, defense of property, etc." that I started. Therefore an owner or lawful occupant does have the right to advance and engage a trespasser and use reasonable force to make him leave.

If the trespasser then raises the stakes to where the owner or lawful occupant reasonably fears death or great bodily injury, and the owner or lawful occupant has to use deadly force to defend himself, he would be privileged to do so.

This situation differs from the typical bar fight where the aggressor loses his right to self-defense. The trespasser has no right to be where he is and the owner or lawful occupant has every right to try to make him leave. That doesn't make the owner or lawful occupant the aggressor.

The risk that one runs in this scenario is that the facts get jumbled and the owner or lawful occupant is deemed to have used deadly force to eject a trespasser or to protect property.

A more serious risk is that the owner or lawful occupant gets seriously injured or killed by the thief.
Ricky B is offline  
Old June 26, 2009, 06:06 PM   #190
ROGER4314
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 17, 2009
Location: East Houston
Posts: 257
In Texas, the rules change as soon as the sun goes down. You are not bound by the reasonable expectation that the bad guy will kill you once it gets dark. You may defend your property as needed. Daytime in Texas.....it is clearly not a shooting situation. Night time.....you may get a pat on the back from authorities as long as a stray slug doesn't hit your neighbor.

What I can not understand in these posts is why we gag on the lethal force issue when there are so many other ways we could defend our property? Make no mistake, I would NOT shoot this thief. At 6'1" and 260 pounds, that guy would beg me to shoot him after I got done correcting his behavior.

How about a bucket of cold water? That is using NON lethal force to protect my property. Make it so darned unpleasant for him to continue, that he will change what he's doing. If he had enough and came at me with a weapon, it is time to pop a cap and no court would convict me.

I worked for several years in the Texas prison system. There are lots of hard a-- guys who could whip me in there. For behavior correction, you find what hurts them and use that. If a guy is immune to physical pain, take away visitation with his children and he will cry like a baby. Use whatever works .................and .......it isn't always violence. Same goes with lethal force.

Flash

Last edited by ROGER4314; June 26, 2009 at 06:23 PM.
ROGER4314 is offline  
Old June 26, 2009, 09:41 PM   #191
Texas Man
Member
 
Join Date: June 16, 2009
Location: VV, Texas
Posts: 52
Since he didn't want to comply in your gunpoint orders to stop dissasembly of your car I would put a shot through his ear and when he's daised put him on the ground until the cops show up.

And if he wasn't trying to harm me or my family I wouldn't try kill him, because you are probobly puttin him in hell for eternity.
Texas Man is offline  
Old June 26, 2009, 09:46 PM   #192
ImprobableJoe
Junior member
 
Join Date: June 11, 2009
Posts: 87
I think automatic lights and loud alarms are a good idea, and would eliminate most situations where shooting someone would become necessary. Anyone who doesn't run away when a loud alarm and floodlights go off is someone who you probably wouldn't have to think once about shooting.

I liked ROGER4314's idea about a bucket of cold water for about 3 seconds, and then I thought about it. Then, it seemed like a TERRIBLE idea. All cold water will do is **** someone off, and make them more violent. Tasers and pepper spray might work better... although pepper spray in your car might linger, it can't be much worse that getting out blood and brains from the seats.
ImprobableJoe is offline  
Old June 26, 2009, 11:25 PM   #193
Hardtarget
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 3, 2001
Location: Nashville, Tn.
Posts: 683
I'm not talking to "dirt bag" at all...yet.
Leg sticking out?...my body weight hard on the door...broken leg...now I'll talk.

We will wait for the police and medical transport. If he gets aggressive, we'll wait for the coroners wagon.

I've had five break-ins of vehicles. The last one broke a $700.00 window to get a $150.00 radio...it will get ugly quick if I catch the next one!

Mark
__________________
...even a blind hog finds an acorn every once in a while.
Hardtarget is offline  
Old June 27, 2009, 12:55 AM   #194
m&p45acp10+1
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 3, 2009
Location: Central Texas
Posts: 3,307
I think my statement would be gee officer I was reaching into my car to get a pack of smokes and spilled my coffee. I heard a sream and noticed there was someone in my car.
200 degree coffee to the groin may make him change his mind. Honestly the alarm on my truck would have gone off before that more than likely detering somone from attempting to steal something out of it.
m&p45acp10+1 is offline  
Old June 27, 2009, 07:09 AM   #195
OldMarksman
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 8, 2008
Posts: 1,854
I wonder what this guy had in mind when he went outside?

He had a gun, and went to confront what he thought was one man, who turned out to not have a gun but who did have a knife, near his trailer parked outside. He didn't go out alone, either.

The article doesn't include much detail about the initial encounter.

Do you suppose the homeowner told the man "not to move and to raise his hands slowly?" Do you suppose that the man looked over his shoulder and said "no?"

Well, even if it did happen to start out as passive non-compliance, it didn't stay that way.

What do you think the man intended to do with the gun, anyway?

All meaningless conjecture of course, but I somehow doubt that the homeowner was chuckling to himself about how he might use hot coffee, cold water, fireworks, zip ties, ammonia, brake cleaner, etc., and more importantly, I doubt that any of those things would have had a positive effect on the outcome.

A car up the street from me was burgled the other night (one of four or five in our peaceful community that night).

There were prints from two perps on the car, and the police believe that there may have been a third person in a car.

My neighbor was angry that he had not heard the commotion and gone outside to confront them. Normal reaction, I guess. Me? I'll stay inside.

One of the ideas behind the castle doctrine is that if you are in your home, you are supposed to be safe in it. That's usually true.

Not so when you venture out to confront someone in the dark.

Quote:
Doctors had to amputate the arm of a Watauga, Texas homeowner Wednesday morning after he was injured in a fight with a crook. The man interrupted a robbery attempt in front of his house and ended up getting stabbed and then shot with his own gun, reports CBS station KTVT-TV in Dallas.

Debris – including the homeowner's shotgun – from the scuffle was scattered in the yards of several homes as police continued their investigation nearly seven hours after the man first interrupted the robbery, authorities said.

According to reports, the homeowner heard some noise near his portable trailer parked outside his house in the 6000 block of Sundown Drive and went outside. His wife called 911 and woke a friend who had stayed the night at the house.

The robber, who was armed with a knife, struggled with the homeowner and his guest in the driveway. During the scuffle the homeowner dropped his gun and as the men clamored for the weapon, it went off and hit the homeowner in the arm. The house guest was also stabbed during the altercation.

Officials later said doctors amputated the man's arm because his injuries were so severe. The injury is a detrimental loss for the victim, who works as a mechanic for American Airlines and was also a part-time contractor.

One neighbor heard the gunshot, but dismissed the noise because he did not suspect it would have been a gunshot in his neighborhood.

Police continue their search for the alleged thief/attacker. "Since daylight we found a few additional items that came out of the trailer," explained Watauga Police Det. Jason Babcock. "Apparently whoever broke in to this trailer took some items and stashed them along the way in between houses."

Residents in the neighborhood say they will now be more diligent about their personal safety, including Nancy Bennett, who usually works nights and comes home in the early morning hours. She thinks the man could have been searching for an easy target.

Police believe there may have been more than one suspect. There were security cameras set up on the garage but they weren't working.

Authorities urge residents to call police instead of confronting anyone at any time of the day.

http://wjz.com/watercooler/texas.sta....2.852306.html
OldMarksman is offline  
Old June 29, 2009, 05:42 PM   #196
Bigfatts
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 20, 2005
Location: Lutz
Posts: 1,477
My wife's cousin had an alarm installed in his SUV that had tweeters inside the car. One under each front seat and one under the rear. He set them off one time as a joke when I was sitting in the car. Ear piercing doesn't even begin to describe it. Not only could I not hear for about an hour, I couldn't walk straight. But once I got my equilibrium back he quit laughing. Seems like that would be a good choice, though it would have to be already installed in the car. Hit the panic button and watch him squirm.
Bigfatts is offline  
Old June 29, 2009, 06:27 PM   #197
Stevie-Ray
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 22, 2007
Location: The shores of Lake Huron
Posts: 4,464
Quote:
Originally Posted by BikerRN
BTW: I know how to legally turn that 30 minute response time in to three minutes, and it's available for anyone to do, LEO or not.
Well, that'd be to have the wife call 911 again and lie, "I think my husband just shot the guy; remember when you come that the guy with the gun is the good guy.

Personally, here I usually have a DVD camera handy and charged, so I'd probably slam the door on his legs, and then start filming his egress. Even if he simply fled, he'd be limping. If he wanted more than that, well....
__________________
Stevie-Ray
Join the NRA/ILA
I am the weapon; my gun is a tool. It's regrettable that with some people those descriptors are reversed.
Stevie-Ray is offline  
Old July 7, 2009, 09:12 AM   #198
jfrey123
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 7, 2006
Location: Reno, NV.
Posts: 1,026
Wow, looks like this party is over already, but felt compelled to add my .02:


State of Nevada allows for any person to make an arrest of a suspected criminal. State of Nevada also allows for defense of ones property, which I'm sure plays along with the "reasonable amount of force". I'm not one to shoot and ask questions later, but I wouldn't be able to sit and watch, hoping the police come. I'd be hands on somewhere, probably whooping some sort of hiney.

So I'm different from the primary example. I'm not going to be gun drawn when I walk out the door, so when he looks at me and says "no", I'm going to reply "um.... YES!" and proceed to yank him from out of my car by his exposed legs, mount him and hold him like a high school wrestler (familiar turf for me).




NRS 171.104 Arrest defined; by whom made. An arrest is the taking of a person into custody, in a case and in the manner authorized by law. An arrest may be made by a peace officer or by a private person.

NRS 171.126 Arrest by private person. A private person may arrest another:

1. For a public offense committed or attempted in his presence.

2. When the person arrested has committed a felony, although not in his presence.

3. When a felony has been in fact committed, and he has reasonable cause for believing the person arrested to have committed it.
__________________
Rock out with your Glock out!
jfrey123 is offline  
Old July 7, 2009, 10:26 AM   #199
OldMarksman
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 8, 2008
Posts: 1,854
Quote:
State of Nevada allows for any person to make an arrest of a suspected criminal.
I believe you will find that all states except North Carolina provide for citizen's arrests under at least some circumstances.

There are two problems: (1) you have to know what you are doing, and how, to avoid the risk of criminal prosecution, and (2) (probably much more serious) your civil liability may exceed your net worth by several fold.

When sworn officers make an arrest, they have approved procedures and rules of engagement to help ensure not only that their actions are proper but also that the evidence protects them to the greatest extent practical from charges of wrong-doing--and they are trained. Even so, a perp and his lawyer may allege that unlawful force was used.

Both the cost of the defense (which could be stratospherical) and the cost of any out-of-court settlement or civil judgment (either of which could be astronomical) are borne by the taxpayers.

Not so for the citizen.

Twist his arm to hold him, and listen to the experts whose fees you will probably end up paying describe afterward how said action on your part has impaired his earnings ability, prevented his spouse from enjoying consortium, etc.

Hold him and discover that he is having a seizure and see what develops.

Attorneys I know strongly advise against trying a citizens arrest. I won't even think about it.

Further, before the law here was changed to shield citizens from civil liability stemming from a legally justifiable use of deadly force, attorneys advised that while one who had lawfully defended himself against forcible home invasion, for example, might easily avoid criminal sanctions (his requirement is to show reasonable doubt), the invader's family might nonetheless become wealthy at the citizen's expense (their burden is a preponderance of the evidence).

It is said that the law was amended because that had been happening. Helps in a self defense case. Not when you are detaining someone.

I'm sure that many will think the laws are unreasonable--that they favor the "BG" over the "law abiding citizen".

But we found a long, long time ago that we have to have laws to prevent one person from violently attacking another in a dispute over property, for example, to keep gangs from running our neighborhoods, to keep the crooked sheriff and his co-conspirators from extorting money from the ranchers, and to keep bad policemen from doing bad things to the "good guys." That's why each and every one of us is guaranteed due process. That's why we have police departments, prosecutors, courts, and attorneys, both civil and criminal. That's why we have contracts, deeds of title, etc., not to mention laws about theft, robbery, rape, murder, counterfeiting---and justifiable homicide.

Sorry for the rant, but a lot of people seem to believe that if they have a gun, they are always the "GGs" and that everyone else is a "BG," and that any constraints on their behavior are unreasonable.

Quote:
State of Nevada also allows for defense of ones property, which I'm sure plays along with the "reasonable amount of force".
Do you know of anywhere in the country in which that is not true?
OldMarksman is offline  
Old July 7, 2009, 12:54 PM   #200
Hornett
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 1, 2006
Posts: 569
My money is on the wrestler.
__________________
Guns don't kill people, Jack Bauer kills people.
Hornett is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:21 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2013 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.14496 seconds with 7 queries