Defending Property During a Riot?

[SWalt]

WE ARE NOT IN TEXAS. That said... God bless America. Long live the Republic.

LOL....my short answer was gonna be "move to TX". In CA, threat of force is what you might get away with. Actual use of lethal force to protect property, sorry, SOL in CA.

[lone shooter]

Found it. http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/s...2&postcount=26

Yes, it's P.C. 197 that Kolo589 has posted above.

[GreaterFool]

Tough question indeed. Really, i think the situation dictates the action. I'd run scenarios in my head and do drills of many different scenarios. That way I'm more prepared if/(God forbid) when it happens. But i dont own a business or run one. I just live in my home.

[Jimi Jah]

Even if you are exonerated by the courts, you might face a civil lawsuit to be decided by an affirmative action jury, 50% plus one, pretty poor odds.

In Califonia, you might be better off killing yourself, but that's illegal too.

[geoint]

Who cares? You guys really going to hesitate if a mob is threatening your family? **** the law. I'm dropping bodies.

Amen.

Ill expand that to threatening my home. Hopefully my interpretation is irrelevant and I never have to make a decision as to whether or not I will defend it. But... Im just saying, if I have to make that decision, Im not letting anyone past me into my home or to damage my home without fighting with everything I got.

If it comes to is, keep an eye out for idiots with cameras and neutralize them first, then recover the camera after the shooting is done and discreetly bury all bodies


Ok that second little paragraph is satire lol but seriously, CYA or that *** will become the property of some prison rapist.

[iMigraine]

I hope when I get called for jury duty the case involves someone defending their property during a riot. Even though the shooter was defending his/her property, I would never convict them during a time of a riot. Riots are by nature unpredictable. Therefore, you better have reasonable fear for your life if you decide to pull a trigger.

[The Last American Hero]

You can't protect your property with deadly force.

In Rent-A-Cop class they stress that you really can't do much except "call the cops".

Example: If your employer IDs a piece of his stolen property sitting in the open back of an employee's pickup in the company parking lot and your employer tells you to retrieve it, can you legally do so? No.

A few exceptions under "shop keeper's privilege".

In other words, you better be able to articulate a fear of bodily harm to yourself or others.

Citizen's Arrest for all sorts of crimes is another issue.

[toadman]

This is a good question. My solution is to not live or have a business in areas prone to racial violence, and then have insurance to cover your losses.

In California, I am very hestitant to resort to using a firearm, knowing that the police, prosecutors (local, state and federal) will line up to prosecute me for the slightest infraction for protecting myself and my family.

Very good advice. I would also tell them they should just be independently wealthy so they could live anywhere they want & even if they had any losses they would have enough so it would matter.
Most of these small business owners are just eeking out a living. They can't afford to move to better areas where the rent is much higher. Insurance companies won't even offer coverage in what they consider high risk areas or if they do the premium is so high they can't afford it.
I deal with many small business owners in what is considered high risk area.
Most are very good people just trying to make a small living for their families. They'd rather not live & work in the areas that they do. Their business's are their entire lives. They have nothing else to fall back on if they lose it.

[APV]

so I wonder why there was no reports of anybody trying to defend their properties during Ferguson and Baltimore riots? There were lots of nice looking pictures of citizens guarding their businesses in Ferguson mostly in downtown when the first most violent wave of riots was over and in Baltimore locals staying in front of the police (not sure protecting the police or protecting from the police) after the first wave of looting and burning was over same as in the first case. There were no reports of any kind of organized defense during the most violent first days in both Ferguson and Baltimore, though it is hard to believe that locals were really caught by surprise by riots judging by posts of calguners that personally familiar with those areas.

[ARDude]

In California you can ONLY use deadly force when you or another persons life is in immanent danger. Not property or belongings.

It's also about articulation. If you can articulate to law enforcement that you were in fear for your life, and the evidence backs your story, you should be fine.

On the other hand, with our silly laws, you may not be guilty of manslaughter/murder, but you could be violating firearm laws depending on the circumstances.

[bigbearbear]

This is from the Handgun safety Study Guide:

Permissible Use of Lethal Force in Defense of Life and Body
The killing of one person by another may be justifiable when necessary to resist the attempt to commit a forcible and life-threatening crime, provided that a reasonable person in the same or similar situation would believe that (a) the person killed intended to commit a forcible and life-threatening crime; (b) there was imminent danger of such crime being accomplished; and (c) the person acted under the belief that such force was necessary to save himself or herself or another from death or a forcible and life-threatening crime. Murder, mayhem

Note that "mayhem" is considered a life-threatening crime. I'm not a lawyer and am not qualified to give legal advice, but based on that, I believe you can use deadly force to defend yourself against rioters.

[desertrider]

Who cares? You guys really going to hesitate if a mob is threatening your family? **** the law. I'm dropping bodies.

This is the only appropriate answer.

[titan2]

this question puzzles me too. OP is talking about riots. If the mob goes wild and the crowd is big probably the only way to stop them is to start taking attackers down with firearms with a choice either to be dead if you do not shoot or get arrested later if you shoot.
I recall a news report after New Orleans events when 5 or 6 off duty cops were charged later for shooting at the crowd of looters when they tried to stop ongoing robbery. Speaking of the law a possible charge for the same case may vary from nothing to several good years and it all depends on a judge, prosecutor and depth of your pockets to cover lawyers expenses. Speaking of a mob attack scenario if you decide to shoot then most probably later all survived attackers will claim to happen innocent bystanders. I would say it is quite a dilemma.

Have a GoPro somewhere on you....video tape the innocent bystanders as they crash through your doors/windows....

[Mirac]

If I'm on the inside and the window/door gets broken and a "person" is climbing in... They are there to Hurt/Harm/make Lame/Kill me. I will not wait until they do that and then carry out my property.
Each one will have to step over the body before them.

[Decoligny]

If you don't want to shoot the SOB then club him with your gun. Hit him with pepper spray. Kick him in the nuts.
Why is it that shooting is the only option?

If you get close enough to fight a rioter, you are close enough to lose a fight with a rioter, or be swarmed by the rioters friends.

If someone has broken into my place of business, after being warned that I am armed and will defend myself, they are an imminent threat to me. Most likely they used something to break a window or pry a door open and still have it in their hand. It is a weapon, and I would be in fear for my life.

BANG.