Game Fishing Forum banner
1 - 20 of 37 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,144 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I don't mean to start a legal thread but I need help. I have been robbed/pickpocketed 3 times in the past 4 month, A total of 4 times in the past 3 years. One time my fiancee and I was followed home, while my fiancee and I went inside we were held up at gun point. My question! Is it legal to shoot! I've been robbed for about $3,000. Anyone who livs on Whidbey IS, crime has gotten bad. That new club "The Element" there was three people shot there on Sat night . Back to my original Q? Is it legal to shoot someone for being in your appt??? Any input would be appreciated. Thanks...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,144 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
I don't mind loosing a wallet or a few Credit cards...I can always cancel the cards. But The crime rate in Oak Harbor is getting out of hand. I have never been held up at gun point until a while back. I do keep a loaded pistol in my appt. Does anyone here notice a difference in the crime rate in Oak Harbor???
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,014 Posts
I can't wait until someone post the answer to your question. I have been trying to figure out if someone comes into, or is in your house, can you defend yourself in any way possible, hence, shoot to kill.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
413 Posts
I have heard some ambiguous advice and look forward to a true answer as well, the advice I have heard is if you feel physically threatened you have a right to defend yourself/family and property, if you do have to shoot don't shoot them in the back while they are running away, etc.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
6,601 Posts
It is my understanding that if you shoot and kill someone they better be 1) inside your home (home invasion) 2) be threatening you with a gun (life or death situation).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,705 Posts
Basically,it comes down to whether you're in immediate life threatening danger.

Things like stealing your fishing gear out of your car at the river don't count.

Coming at you with a fly swatter doesn't count.

You get robbed in front of your house,and the guy is has a knife. He gets your wallet and runs away. You can't get your gun out of the closet and shoot him as hes running away 50yds down the block.

Catching a tweaker stealing your kicker off your boat at 2am,doesn't count.

There is a pretty specific set of circumstances that deadly force is justified.

You need to be DAMN sure that you're in the right before you shoot someone.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
946 Posts
Hunter P said:
There is a pretty specific set of circumstances that deadly force is justified.

You need to be DAMN sure that you're in the right before you shoot someone.
Tup: Tup:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15,119 Posts
Every state has it's own bench mark. I don't think in this state you have the right to use deadly force to protect your property like you do in Texas and other states but you do have a right to use deadly force to protect yourself and your family. Bottom line is if you're the only one standing who's gonna say your life wasn't in jeapordy... wink: But then again......I'm not an attorney but I did stay at a Holiday Inn last week... :mrgreen:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,705 Posts
ImaginThat said:
If they are inside, the old saying 'Dead man tells no tales" only you know how that knife got in his hand :evil:
The you get into more hot water by tampering with a crime scene.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,144 Posts
Discussion Starter · #13 ·
I just want to point out that I hope it doesn't come down to shooting someone. That would be hard to live with. However I have had a gun stuck in my face about a month ago, they were not in my appt . just outside of it after following my fiancee and I home. I had no problems giving them what they wanted. No amount of money is worth my life or the life of my fiancee. it's only a matter of time before these guys start breaking into houses if they haven't already. It may not be my appt that gets broken into I'm just trying to gain some knowledge of the situation. Thanks everyone for your help
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,566 Posts
I cannot have a gun but the filleting knife I was given over there lies in the top draw of my bedside cabinet.

That will sure slice into something pretty quickly.

I have only just touched the top and boy is it sharp.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
56 Posts
This might help you....

Washington State Law: Regarding use of Force

RCW 9A.16.020
Use of force â€" When lawful.


The use, attempt, or offer to use force upon or toward the person of another is not unlawful in the following cases:

(1) Whenever necessarily used by a public officer in the performance of a legal duty, or a person assisting the officer and acting under the officer's direction;

(2) Whenever necessarily used by a person arresting one who has committed a felony and delivering him or her to a public officer competent to receive him or her into custody;

(3) Whenever used by a party about to be injured, or by another lawfully aiding him or her, in preventing or attempting to prevent an offense against his or her person, or a malicious trespass, or other malicious interference with real or personal property lawfully in his or her possession, in case the force is not more than is necessary;

(4) Whenever reasonably used by a person to detain someone who enters or remains unlawfully in a building or on real property lawfully in the possession of such person, so long as such detention is reasonable in duration and manner to investigate the reason for the detained person's presence on the premises, and so long as the premises in question did not reasonably appear to be intended to be open to members of the public;

(5) Whenever used by a carrier of passengers or the carrier's authorized agent or servant, or other person assisting them at their request in expelling from a carriage, railway car, vessel, or other vehicle, a passenger who refuses to obey a lawful and reasonable regulation prescribed for the conduct of passengers, if such vehicle has first been stopped and the force used is not more than is necessary to expel the offender with reasonable regard to the offender's personal safety;

(6) Whenever used by any person to prevent a mentally ill, mentally incompetent, or mentally disabled person from committing an act dangerous to any person, or in enforcing necessary restraint for the protection or restoration to health of the person, during such period only as is necessary to obtain legal authority for the restraint or custody of the person.

[1986 c 149 § 2; 1979 ex.s. c 244 § 7; 1977 ex.s. c 80 § 13; 1975 1st ex.s. c 260 § 9A.16.020.]

Notes:
Effective date -- 1979 ex.s. c 244: See RCW 9A.44.902.

Purpose -- Intent -- Severability -- 1977 ex.s. c 80: See notes following RCW 4.16.190.

RCW 9A.16.040
Justifiable homicide or use of deadly force by public officer, peace officer, person aiding.


(1) Homicide or the use of deadly force is justifiable in the following cases:

(a) When a public officer is acting in obedience to the judgment of a competent court; or

(b) When necessarily used by a peace officer to overcome actual resistance to the execution of the legal process, mandate, or order of a court or officer, or in the discharge of a legal duty.

(c) When necessarily used by a peace officer or person acting under the officer's command and in the officer's aid:

(i) To arrest or apprehend a person who the officer reasonably believes has committed, has attempted to commit, is committing, or is attempting to commit a felony;

(ii) To prevent the escape of a person from a federal or state correctional facility or in retaking a person who escapes from such a facility; or

(iii) To prevent the escape of a person from a county or city jail or holding facility if the person has been arrested for, charged with, or convicted of a felony; or

(iv) To lawfully suppress a riot if the actor or another participant is armed with a deadly weapon.

(2) In considering whether to use deadly force under subsection (1)(c) of this section, to arrest or apprehend any person for the commission of any crime, the peace officer must have probable cause to believe that the suspect, if not apprehended, poses a threat of serious physical harm to the officer or a threat of serious physical harm to others. Among the circumstances which may be considered by peace officers as a "threat of serious physical harm" are the following:

(a) The suspect threatens a peace officer with a weapon or displays a weapon in a manner that could reasonably be construed as threatening; or

(b) There is probable cause to believe that the suspect has committed any crime involving the infliction or threatened infliction of serious physical harm.

Under these circumstances deadly force may also be used if necessary to prevent escape from the officer, where, if feasible, some warning is given.

(3) A public officer or peace officer shall not be held criminally liable for using deadly force without malice and with a good faith belief that such act is justifiable pursuant to this section.

(4) This section shall not be construed as:

(a) Affecting the permissible use of force by a person acting under the authority of RCW 9A.16.020 or 9A.16.050; or

(b) Preventing a law enforcement agency from adopting standards pertaining to its use of deadly force that are more restrictive than this section.

[1986 c 209 § 2; 1975 1st ex.s. c 260 § 9A.16.040.]

Notes:
Legislative recognition: "The legislature recognizes that RCW 9A.16.040 establishes a dual standard with respect to the use of deadly force by peace officers and private citizens, and further recognizes that private citizens' permissible use of deadly force under the authority of RCW 9.01.200, 9A.16.020, or 9A.16.050 is not restricted and remains broader than the limitations imposed on peace officers." [1986 c 209 § 3.]


RCW 9A.16.050
Homicide â€" By other person â€" When justifiable.


Homicide is also justifiable when committed either:

(1) In the lawful defense of the slayer, or his or her husband, wife, parent, child, brother, or sister, or of any other person in his presence or company, when there is reasonable ground to apprehend a design on the part of the person slain to commit a felony or to do some great personal injury to the slayer or to any such person, and there is imminent danger of such design being accomplished; or

(2) In the actual resistance of an attempt to commit a felony upon the slayer, in his presence, or upon or in a dwelling, or other place of abode, in which he is.

[1975 1st ex.s. c 260 § 9A.16.050.]
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
56 Posts
Forgot to include this:

RCW 9A.16.110
Defending against violent crime â€" Reimbursement.


(1) No person in the state shall be placed in legal jeopardy of any kind whatsoever for protecting by any reasonable means necessary, himself or herself, his or her family, or his or her real or personal property, or for coming to the aid of another who is in imminent danger of or the victim of assault, robbery, kidnapping, arson, burglary, rape, murder, or any other violent crime as defined in RCW 9.94A.030.

(2) When a person charged with a crime listed in subsection (1) of this section is found not guilty by reason of self-defense, the state of Washington shall reimburse the defendant for all reasonable costs, including loss of time, legal fees incurred, and other expenses involved in his or her defense. This reimbursement is not an independent cause of action. To award these reasonable costs the trier of fact must find that the defendant's claim of self-defense was sustained by a preponderance of the evidence. If the trier of fact makes a determination of self-defense, the judge shall determine the amount of the award.

(3) Notwithstanding a finding that a defendant's actions were justified by self-defense, if the trier of fact also determines that the defendant was engaged in criminal conduct substantially related to the events giving rise to the charges filed against the defendant the judge may deny or reduce the amount of the award. In determining the amount of the award, the judge shall also consider the seriousness of the initial criminal conduct.

Nothing in this section precludes the legislature from using the sundry claims process to grant an award where none was granted under this section or to grant a higher award than one granted under this section.

(4) Whenever the issue of self-defense under this section is decided by a judge, the judge shall consider the same questions as must be answered in the special verdict under subsection (4) [(5)] of this section.

(5) Whenever the issue of self-defense under this section has been submitted to a jury, and the jury has found the defendant not guilty, the court shall instruct the jury to return a special verdict in substantially the following form:

answer yes or no
1. Was the finding of not guilty based upon self-defense? . . . . .
2. If your answer to question 1 is no, do not answer the remaining question.
3. If your answer to question 1 is yes, was the defendant:
a. Protecting himself or herself? . . . . .
b. Protecting his or her family? . . . . .
c. Protecting his or her property? . . . . .
d. Coming to the aid of another who was in imminent danger of a heinous crime? . . . . .
e. Coming to the aid of another who was the victim of a heinous crime? . . . . .
f. Engaged in criminal conduct substantially related to the events giving rise to the crime with which the defendant is charged?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,610 Posts
zach said:
I'm no attorney, I just play one on TV wink:

However, if you can keep yourself out of the situation in the first place it would be best. I would suggest you move to a place that is not nearby a military installation. Due to the low quality of people that join the military the areas around all bases are seedy.

I know I didn't answer your legal question but hopefully there is a bit of wisdom here for you.
I have a bit of wisdom for you jackass...There are a ton of Military personnel on this site, including Gator_79, and myself. I have given 13+ years for this country. Before you attack the quality of people that serve this nation, grab a tall frosty glass of shut the HELL up and have a drink asshole.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,952 Posts
The Weazle said:
zach said:
I'm no attorney, I just play one on TV wink:

However, if you can keep yourself out of the situation in the first place it would be best. I would suggest you move to a place that is not nearby a military installation. Due to the low quality of people that join the military the areas around all bases are seedy.

I know I didn't answer your legal question but hopefully there is a bit of wisdom here for you.
I have a bit of wisdom for you jackass...There are a ton of Military personnel on this site, including Gator_79, and myself. I have given 13+ years for this country. Before you attack the quality of people that serve this nation, grab a tall frosty glass of shut the HELL up and have a drink asshole.
I agree with you Weazle. I am not military, but I have deap respect from those who have served. Thanks for your service and ignore that LAME comment!

Back to Gator's original question. The piece of advice I have is that if you have to shoot to defend yourself or your family, make sure you are willing to take a life. The person who is attacking you will not hesitate. If you don't think you can pull the trigger, don't pull the gun!!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,144 Posts
Discussion Starter · #20 ·
Well said Weazel. I agree with you 100% I have been in for 10 years and I'm re-inlisting next week. There are a lot of good guys in the military, including many that are on this sit, but it just seems that the crime rate and drug use here on Whidbey IS is getting worse.
 
1 - 20 of 37 Posts
Top