PDA

View Full Version : Defense of property


Evander
06-26-2006, 4:05 PM
Hi all new to the site but it was referred to me because of a question I posed on a non-gun related forum.

I have a motorcycle. It has a paging alarm. I want to know the legal ramifications of when the alarm goes off I grab my gun and proceed through the “common areas” of the condo to stop the theft in progress?

I’ve been told by a LEO that I can’t transport a loaded weapon through a common area.

Back to the original scenario, if I had gun in hand, attempted to stop the theft but there were more than one suspect and one of them charged me with a screwdriver, knife, hammer, etc. could I use deadly force?

team06
06-26-2006, 4:29 PM
I asked the Chief of Police part of that very question the other day. The question he respoded with was, "Do you own the condo or rent". Aperantly if you own the condo, then you also own part interest in the common grounds and that falls under being armed on your own property. My question was can I carry from my condo to my unattached garage. Answer was yes.... BUT! He did advise that if someone saw me carrying that a car would roll and they would probably want to talk to me to make sure that I was in fact the owner of the property. I didn't ask about the use of deadly force thing though.

Now to work on the chief on a ccw :-)



Dave Wilson

WolfMansDad
06-26-2006, 4:35 PM
I am not a lawyer (you will probably hear that a lot in subsequent posts), but I did just finish my ccw class.

The law varies from state to state, but in most cases, you are not justified in using deadly force to defend property. You may only use it when there is an imminent threat of death or serious physical injury to yourself or someone else. Utah is an exception. There, you may use deadly force to prevent theft of property.

The law aside, what is the morality (for want of a better word) of killing someone over an object? I do not believe it is right to do so, no matter how expensive or dear to you the object is.

What would I do, if I got notification that my car were being stolen right this minute? Probably call the police. They take their time in after-the-fact report writing, but I've heard they really move for a "crime in progress" call. They LOVE busting the bad guys in the act!

If I were really feeling froggy, I might sneak down to the garage and take pictures of the guys stealing my car (bike, whatever), after I had called the police. That's probably not very smart, however, since you run the risk of getting into a confrontation with them. A jury might conclude that you went down there looking for trouble.

SemiAutoSam
06-26-2006, 4:58 PM
I am not a lawyer (you will probably hear that a lot in subsequent posts), but I did just finish my ccw class.

The law varies from state to state, but in most cases, you are not justified in using deadly force to defend property. You may only use it when there is an imminent threat of death or serious physical injury to yourself or someone else. Utah is an exception. There, you may use deadly force to prevent theft of property.

The law aside, what is the morality (for want of a better word) of killing someone over an object? I do not believe it is right to do so, no matter how expensive or dear to you the object is.

What would I do, if I got notification that my car were being stolen right this minute? Probably call the police. They take their time in after-the-fact report writing, but I've heard they really move for a "crime in progress" call. They LOVE busting the bad guys in the act!

If I were really feeling froggy, I might sneak down to the garage and take pictures of the guys stealing my car (bike, whatever), after I had called the police. That's probably not very smart, however, since you run the risk of getting into a confrontation with them. A jury might conclude that you went down there looking for trouble.

I didn't see in his post where he said he was going to KILL the person attempting to make off with his property.

So the person that broke into a mans house in Sacramento wasn't in the right when he shot the person or persons breaking into his home ?

When enough criminals get themselves shot for trying to steal someones car or break into someones house maybe that will give the criminals a heads UP that gun owners in california aren't afraid to use deadly force to defend their family and personal property.


If we were in TEXAS or New Mexico or Arizona this wouldn't even be an issue the police would back up the law abiding citizen end of story.

glen avon
06-26-2006, 4:59 PM
...So the person that broke into a mans house in Sacramento wasn't in the right when he shot the person or persons breaking into his home?

homes are treated differently.

bwiese
06-26-2006, 5:16 PM
Here goes the "condo or apt complex public areas" thread yet again.

[Aside from using shooting to defend property and not life/limb, which is a whole 'nuther issue - if you shoot someone stealing your car and you're not in reasonable fear of your life, you're screwed...]

The cop is wrong about dependence on ownership vs. rental in the condo situation.

Condo open spaces/common areas and apt open spaces/common areas are equivalent. They are 'public areas' open to access by many (or at least a subset thereof - other residents, approved visitors, tradespeople, etc.) and you can't treat that area like your own home.

Please get Machtinger's "How to Own A Gun in California and Stay Out of Jail".
It deals with this (and many other) issues.

Matt C
06-26-2006, 5:18 PM
Since you are taking a firearm with you, you must realize the possiblility of a shootout with the person trying to steal your bike. Is it worth a shootout for you to do this? If so, go for it, I would. It might be a really good idea to holster that weapon and cover it with a shirt before running outside however.

Legally, I think you would be covered a few different ways, but the advice you need about laws should come from the lawyer that will have to defend his interpretation of them in court if you get arrested.

FYI, you can't shoot someone for stealing your bike, but presentation of deadly force is ok while arresting a person for attempting that offense, if thats what you really want to do. And of course if he pulls a deadly weapon, you can defend yourself.

VeryCoolCat
06-26-2006, 5:44 PM
I've always wondered, I'm not a rich guy, and certain things I cannot replace or will take me a month to replace and to me, my car is irreplacable atm.

What would you do in this situation. You live in an apartment, your laptop is both a signicant part of your life and job and holds a couple of things that you would consider sensitive.

If you wake up come to your living room to see someone with laptop in hand and its not a small guy, its a pretty big guy not someone you could physically take. He takes off running for the door you have a loaded shotgun in your hands.

OF COURSE, you cannot shoot him even though he is in your place of residence as shooting in the back is a no no.

Assume he gets outside with your valuables and takes off running what would you do, what could you do? Maybe fire in the air but then you would get in trouble for discharging a weapon and even then he would probably keep running.

What would/should you do?

homerm14
06-26-2006, 5:53 PM
The use of deadly force to defend property is not allowed. If you confront someone and they attack you with deadly force you can defend yourself. You are in a very dangerous area. A laywer could say you were looking for a fight by brining a firearm with you. A DA may indite and may not. You may be charged with possesion of a loaded firearm, you may not. You may be charged with homicide, and a jury may convict you or may not. Your best action would be to call the police. You also need to remember criminal action is not the only thing you need to worry about. The person you shoot may sue you or if deciesed there family may sue you. Is your property worty all of that? There are a lot of factors to think about before making a split second life or death decision.

glen avon
06-26-2006, 5:56 PM
If you wake up come to your living room to see someone ...

that is when you are allowed to shoot and the law says so.

saki302
06-26-2006, 9:02 PM
The gun is used to DETER and ARREST the suspect. Would you suggest he run out there with milk and cookies and a napkin?

A taser device would be good for ONE perp, but if there are two or more- well, there's a reason cops carry guns. I suppose cops carry guns to kill people too, right?

-Dave

FreedomIsNotFree
06-26-2006, 9:21 PM
If you knew a crime was being committed then you could perform a citizens arrest. When performing a citizen arrest you are allowed to have a loaded firearm. When performing a citizens arrest for a felony, such as car burglary, you are allowed to use force, not deadly force unless within the law, just like a police officer would.

From your example you only heard the car alarm. Under those circumstances you would be violating the law if you leave YOUR HOUSE OR APARTMENT into ANY COMMON AREA with a loaded firearm.

socalguns
06-26-2006, 9:21 PM
The law aside, what is the morality (for want of a better word) of killing someone over an object? I do not believe it is right to do so, no matter how expensive or dear to you the object is.
What if its a pacemaker? Can't live without it :cool:

FreedomIsNotFree
06-26-2006, 9:23 PM
Then why does he want to have a gun with him? The only purpose to carry a gun (other than being on the way to the range or the gunsmith) is to shoot at someone, which shows intent to kill someone.


Nonsense. The only difference is that the guy would likely spend many years in a Texas or New Mexico or Arizona jail.


Wrong. He could be performing a citizens arrest if he knew a crime was being committed.

FreedomIsNotFree
06-26-2006, 9:29 PM
The law aside, what is the morality (for want of a better word) of killing someone over an object? I do not believe it is right to do so, no matter how expensive or dear to you the object is.




Really? Isn't it a matter of context? What if a man was stealing the last of the food you and your family had and your family would starve without it? Would you NOT use deadly force to defend "property"?

SemiAutoSam
06-26-2006, 9:30 PM
What if its a pacemaker? Can't live without it :cool:

Wouldnt the thief / perp need a scalpel to steal a pacemaker ? and that would be either unauthorised surgery or assault ?

onley11
06-26-2006, 9:38 PM
Guns stay inside unless you have a legitimate, immediate fear for your safety.

Pepper Spray and discresion are good for checking outside. That way you don't have to put your gun away before you call the pd. If I caught you in my car I season the hell out of you, and beat your buddy with my 6c cell maglight. Batons are illegal in CA.:D

(ok, ok, I usuallly check bumps in the night with a little more artillery in addition to the above, but it's for self defense only, not arrests. I also have been properly trained in use of force in a former life , don't try this at home kids.):rolleyes:

xrMike
06-27-2006, 7:47 AM
Nonsense. The only difference is that the guy would likely spend many years in a Texas or New Mexico or Arizona jail.Nope. In Texas it's perfectly legit to defend your PROPERTY with a gun. You don't have to be in fear of your life (like you do here in California).

http://volokh.com/posts/chain_1125597101.shtml

There are certainly many important moral and pragmatic arguments about the propriety of citizens' use of deadly force to defend property or to restore order, especially when the normal go-through-the-proper-channels means of protecting property or deterring crime are absent. Texas law (see secs. 9.41-9.43), for instance gives citizens a fairly broad right to use deadly force to defend both their property and, in many instances, others' property, even under normal conditions.

xrMike
06-27-2006, 8:04 AM
Also, here is the exact wording of Texas law on that issue:

http://www.self-defender.net/law3.htm

A person is justified in using deadly force against another to protect his property to the degree he reasonably believes the force is immediately necessary to prevent the other's imminent commission of arson, burglary, robbery, theft during the nighttime or criminal mischief during the nighttime, and he reasonably believes that the property cannot be protected by any other means."

"A person is justified in using deadly force against another to pervent the other who is fleeing after committing burglary, robbery, or theft during the nighttime, from escaping with the property and he reasonable believes that the property cannot be recovered by any other means; or, the use of force other than deadly force to protect or recover the property would expose him or another to a substantial risk of death or serious bodily injury. (Nighttime is defined as the period 30 minutes after sunset until 30 minutes before sunrise.)"

MotoGuy
06-27-2006, 9:38 AM
that is when you are allowed to shoot and the law says so.

In California you can't shoot someone for breaking into your house. That shooting in Sacramento was justified becasue the lady tried to attack the home owner.

There was a case were a guy came home drunk, couldn't get his keys to work (cuase it was really his neighbor's house), crawled through a window and was shoot by the neighbor. The neighbor went to jail.

Bottom line, buy one of those tasers that shoot probes.

Matt C
06-27-2006, 10:05 AM
In California you can't shoot someone for breaking into your house.

Wrong, if someone uses force to enter your home you are assumed by the law to be in fear for your life and thus justified in using deadly force.

MotoGuy
06-27-2006, 10:13 AM
Wrong, if someone uses force to enter your home you are assumed by the law to be in fear for your life and thus justified in using deadly force.

Does that mean if they enter through an unlocked door/window they didn't use force?

abearden
06-27-2006, 2:59 PM
Hmm, didn't you just post this over on SCS? Didn't everyone over there tell you "it sucks, but you can't legally do it in California?"

Evander
06-27-2006, 11:45 PM
Hmm, didn't you just post this over on SCS? Didn't everyone over there tell you "it sucks, but you can't legally do it in California?"

Yep. But I really wanted to hear the answer "sure carry your gun through common areas to protect your property" too bad I didn't get that here either. Time to post on www.gunhaters.net and see what response I get.

Thanks all for the replies. I guess I'm in the market for some strong pepper spray. For how much I love living in CA it sure has some effed up laws.

socalguns
06-28-2006, 2:26 AM
Only the internal kind :)

gmcem50
06-28-2006, 9:42 AM
Yep. But I really wanted to hear the answer "sure carry your gun through common areas to protect your property" too bad I didn't get that here either. Time to post on www.gunhaters.net and see what response I get.

Thanks all for the replies. I guess I'm in the market for some strong pepper spray. For how much I love living in CA it sure has some effed up laws.

So get yourself a CCW and be done with it. What is your county of residence?

Pokey
06-28-2006, 10:17 AM
The way it was taught to me is this:
You shoot in defense of property or principal, you're probably going to jail.
You shoot in defense of life, you're probably not

Either way is going to cost you AT LEAST $10-15K. Is that piece of property worth it?
This doesn't even begin to include the moral and psychological aspects.

Just my $0.02

Evander
06-28-2006, 11:10 AM
So get yourself a CCW and be done with it. What is your county of residence?


Los Angeles Co. I read on packing.org that there are 1642 CCW permits in LA county for 9,400,000 people. I think my chances are kind slim.


I'd like the thank everybody for their replies and pointing me to some very informative thread and books. Pretty cool site think I'll hang around a bit.