OT USE OF DEADLY FORCE DISCUSSION - How to TRY and prevent our trucks from being stolen

[SnowBlaZR2]

To be clear, I'm firmly in the corner of escalation of force. If someone comes on my property to commit a crime, it's not unlikely that there will be a confrontation. How far that goes is up to the aggressor. I'd rather they run away.

Either way, I better get some sleep. Washing my truck first thing in the morning, and we know that I'll need at least a month to finish.

 

[SnowBlaZR2]

skipped ahead from page 2 to see that this is now a discussion about gun laws by guys who aren't lawyers. lol who gives a ****

I'd think anyone who carries a firearm would give a sh*t about gun laws.

Maybe not.

 

[Shots]

I didn't say you had to use it's but if you are going to display your weapon in an altercation as someone is breaking into your vehicles then you should be doing it with the intent to use it. If you draw your weapon then you do so with intent to use it. ...

There's a wide gap between being prepared to use a firearm and having intent to use a firearm.

I'm in agreeance with SnowBlaZR2 on this. Semantics as it may be, if you're going to bring a weapon, you better be prepared to use it. That doesn't have to mean you intend to use it.
*Intent to use it, would suggest you're walking out the door guns blazing, or planning to put rounds on anyone you see.
*Prepared to use it, suggests you have it ready at hand and are willing to use it if needed.

That said:

If I'm in my house and I go out to investigate my truck alarm going off, my motion lights turning on, or whatever, I'm well within my rights to do that. If I'm confronted, I'm within my rights to defend myself, including with deadly force if necessary.

This use of force is only justifiable if necessary.
Someone stealing your tuck is not justifiable use of deadly force. This thread is about people stealing your truck and what you can do to prevent it. If the criminal attacks you, things have changed and it's a different story.
The mention of having your gun when you go out was implied as a means to intimidate the thief and/or eliminate them (said in jest I'm sure). I don't remember the exact post, but someone mentioned waiting with your gun, for them to show up, or something like that. They didn't imply the gun was in case the thief attacked them, it seemed to me that the commented was implying the use of the gun as intimidate technique to scare off the thief. That is why I said it's over the top. Maybe I've misinterpreted the meaning, but it wasn't conveyed as a defensive measure and a gun should not be carried for intimidation to protect a thing. Carrying it as a tool to protect yourself or others is completely different. I absolutely agree with that. People, yes. Truck, no.

To be clear, I'm firmly in the corner of escalation of force. If someone comes on my property to commit a crime, it's not unlikely that there will be a confrontation.....

This is where we differ, unless I've misinterpreted your meaning as well.
I'm not going to back down from a fight, but if I can de-escalate the situation I will. Maybe you were only referring to your assessment of use of force, not that you intend to escalate force. Sorry, I'm not the best with interpretation some times.
Anyway, I will absolutely intervene if someone is on my property to commit a crime, but I wouldn't say it would be likely that there will be a confrontation. Unless you simply meant that you would confront them, not that you intended to physically engage them. In which case, we don't differ there.
If the criminal can be deterred and/or apprehended with little to no force, then I'm going that way if at all possible. And like you, I'd be happy if they simply ran away and didn't come back.

 

[Le_Slacker]

If you run out of the house with a weapon, it’s premeditated

 

[HSKR R/T]

I'm in agreeance with SnowBlaZR2 on this. Semantics as it may be, if you're going to bring a weapon, you better be prepared to use it. That doesn't have to mean you intend to use it.
*Intent to use it, would suggest you're walking out the door guns blazing, or planning to put rounds on anyone you see.
*Prepared to use it, suggests you have it ready at hand and are willing to use it if needed.

That said:

This use of force is only justifiable if necessary.
Someone stealing your tuck is not justifiable use of deadly force. This thread is about people stealing your truck and what you can do to prevent it. If the criminal attacks you, things have changed and it's a different story.
The mention of having your gun when you go out was implied as a means to intimidate the thief and/or eliminate them (said in jest I'm sure). I don't remember the exact post, but someone mentioned waiting with your gun, for them to show up, or something like that. They didn't imply the gun was in case the thief attacked them, it seemed to me that the commented was implying the use of the gun as intimidate technique to scare off the thief. That is why I said it's over the top. Maybe I've misinterpreted the meaning, but it wasn't conveyed as a defensive measure and a gun should not be carried for intimidation to protect a thing. Carrying it as a tool to protect yourself or others is completely different. I absolutely agree with that. People, yes. Truck, no.


This is where we differ, unless I've misinterpreted your meaning as well.
I'm not going to back down from a fight, but if I can de-escalate the situation I will. Maybe you were only referring to your assessment of use of force, not that you intend to escalate force. Sorry, I'm not the best with interpretation some times.
Anyway, I will absolutely intervene if someone is on my property to commit a crime, but I wouldn't say it would be likely that there will be a confrontation. Unless you simply meant that you would confront them, not that you intended to physically engage them. In which case, we don't differ there.
If the criminal can be deterred and/or apprehended with little to no force, then I'm going that way if at all possible. And like you, I'd be happy if they simply ran away and didn't come back.

If you don't have your weapon out with intent to use it's then you have only brought for the intimidation factor, which goes back to "brandishing" the weapon.

 

[SnowBlaZR2]

This use of force is only justifiable if necessary.
Someone stealing your tuck is not justifiable use of deadly force. This thread is about people stealing your truck and what you can do to prevent it. If the criminal attacks you, things have changed and it's a different story.

The mention of having your gun when you go out was implied as a means to intimidate the thief and/or eliminate them (said in jest I'm sure). I don't remember the exact post, but someone mentioned waiting with your gun, for them to show up, or something like that. They didn't imply the gun was in case the thief attacked them, it seemed to me that the commented was implying the use of the gun as intimidate technique to scare off the thief. That is why I said it's over the top. Maybe I've misinterpreted the meaning, but it wasn't conveyed as a defensive measure and a gun should not be carried for intimidation to protect a thing. Carrying it as a tool to protect yourself or others is completely different. I absolutely agree with that. People, yes. Truck, no.

I can't speak to every single state, but every state I'm familiar with allows for nondeadly force to protect property. I'm perfectly within my rights to use nondeadly force to prevent my truck from being stolen from my property.

Someone who comes onto my land looking to commit a felony will absolutely be confronted. From that point, they can flee or they can escalate. There are a multitude of outcomes from that scenario that could result in deadly force being completely justified (armed thief, multiple attacker, disproportionate force, etc).

As for carrying a firearm for intimidation, I spent some time last night explaining over and over again how simply carrying a firearm around your property doesn't inherently meet the definition of brandishing (intimidation). I can't speak to anyone else's intent, but that's not why I carry a firearm. Ever.

This is where we differ, unless I've misinterpreted your meaning as well.

I'm not going to back down from a fight, but if I can de-escalate the situation I will. Maybe you were only referring to your assessment of use of force, not that you intend to escalate force. Sorry, I'm not the best with interpretation some times.
Anyway, I will absolutely intervene if someone is on my property to commit a crime, but I wouldn't say it would be likely that there will be a confrontation. Unless you simply meant that you would confront them, not that you intended to physically engage them. In which case, we don't differ there.
If the criminal can be deterred and/or apprehended with little to no force, then I'm going that way if at all possible. And like you, I'd be happy if they simply ran away and didn't come back.

As I said, there will be a confrontation. I'd be hopeful that the outcome is the attacker would flee. That's what I'd prefer, and I'm batting a thousand so far on that one.

But, it's also entirely possible that the attacker would choose to escalate. In that case, I don't see deadly force as over the top.

 

[SnowBlaZR2]

If you run out of the house with a weapon, it’s premeditated

Where? According to?

 

[HSKR R/T]

I can't speak to every single state, but every state I'm familiar with allows for nondeadly force to protect property. I'm perfectly within my rights to use nondeadly force to prevent my truck from being stolen from my property.

Someone who comes onto my land looking to commit a felony will absolutely be confronted. From that point, they can flee or they can escalate. There are a multitude of outcomes from that scenario that could result in deadly force being completely justified (armed thief, multiple attacker, disproportionate force, etc).

As for carrying a firearm for intimidation, I spent some time last night explaining over and over again how simply carrying a firearm around your property doesn't inherently meet the definition of brandishing (intimidation). I can't speak to anyone else's intent, but that's not why I carry a firearm. Ever.


As I said, there will be a confrontation. I'd be hopeful that the outcome is the attacker would flee. That's what I'd prefer, and I'm batting a thousand so far on that one.

But, it's also entirely possible that the attacker would choose to escalate. In that case, I don't see deadly force as over the top.

"Simply carrying a firearm around your property" would not be intimidation. If you walk out of your house to confront a would be thief carrying a weapon, then it is for intimidation.

 

[SnowBlaZR2]

"Simply carrying a firearm around your property" would not be intimidation. If you walk out of your house to confront a would be thief carrying a weapon, then it is for intimidation.

Having a firearm doesn't constitute intimidation anywhere in the country.

I'll also say that if you (not you specifically, but generally) ever carry a firearm to intimidate someone, you need more training and an adjustment to your mindset.

 

[HSKR R/T]

Having a firearm doesn't constitute intimidation anywhere in the country.

I'll also say that if you (not you specifically, but generally) ever carry a firearm to intimidate someone, you need more training and an adjustment to your mindset.

You can deny it all you want, but you don't walk out to confront someone, with a visible weapon, and not think it's for any intimidation to have them not want to come at you. Yes, it's for your protection as well, but most of that "protection" is to use it as a deterrent, which means you want the other person to be too scared to do anything. Which is intimidation

 

[SnowBlaZR2]

You can deny it all you want, but you don't walk out to confront someone, with a visible weapon, and not think it's for any intimidation to have them not want to come at you. Yes, it's for your protection as well, but most of that "protection" is to use it as a deterrent, which means you want the other person to be too scared to do anything. Which is intimidation

Nope. It's for my protection. Period.

As I've said a few times, the hope is they decide to take off. Even better if that happens before they even see me or what I have with me.

I can't stress enough how bad of an idea it is to carry a firearm if your goal with it is to intimidate someone.

 

[HSKR R/T]

Nope. It's for my protection. Period.

As I've said a few times, the hope is they decide to take off. Even better if that happens before they even see me or what I have with me.

I can't stress enough how bad of an idea it is to carry a firearm if your goal with it is to intimidate someone.

I conceal carry. That is not for intimidation because nobody knows I have it until I need it. Walking out of your house to confront a would be thief, openly displaying a weapon is for it to be a deterrent first and foremost. You can try and deny it all you want, but you know it's true

 

[SnowBlaZR2]

I conceal carry. That is not for intimidation because nobody knows I have it until I need it. Walking out of your house to confront a would be thief, openly displaying a weapon is for it to be a deterrent first and foremost. You can try and deny it all you want, but you know it's true

Do you think people who carry openly do so to intimidate others?

There's nothing intimidating about seeing a firearm.

 

[HSKR R/T]

Do you think people who carry openly do so to intimidate others?

There's nothing intimidating about seeing a firearm.

Yeah, that's why cops get called all the time for people legally open carrying. Just happened in my town with a guy walking to his house with a compound bow during bow season for turkeys

 

[SnowBlaZR2]

Yeah, that's why cops get called all the time for people legally open carrying. Just happened in my town with a guy walking to his house with a compound bow during bow season for turkeys

What was he convicted for? Do you live your entire life around the ignorance of others?

 

[HSKR R/T]

What was he convicted for? Do you live your entire life around the ignorance of others?

He wasn't convicted of anything, but the cops were called and he was questioned because people were concerned about him walking around with a bow.

 

[SnowBlaZR2]

He wasn't convicted of anything

Sounds about right.

 

[Shots]

If you run out of the house with a weapon, it’s premeditated

Again siding with SnowBlaZR2 on this. If you're running out of the house with a weapon as a means to defend yourself and they attack you, then no it's not intent to use or premeditation. It's a response to their aggression and you had the foresight to prepare for such a contingency. Premeditation would be if you planned on shooting them regardless of their actions when you encountered them.

Although it's not premeditated, I would argue on your point that if you feel the criminal may escalate to the level of lethal force (hence needing to take your gun) you probably shouldn't be running outside to confront them. Double edged sword I guess. It's defensive but you could have stayed inside and prevented the need to defend yourself.
I get the idea of taking the gun for defensive purposes but if you think the situation will rise to that, why put yourself in that position? I'm not going to knowingly put myself in a situation that I suspect may escalate to a deadly force encounter over a truck. At that point, I'm just going to let them take the truck.
You may be completely justified in your use of force if things escalate, but you still have to live with what you do. Some people will be completely comfortable with knowing that the criminal escalated it to that, but I would have issues with knowing that I put myself in the position that allowed them to escalate it, when I could have just as easily stayed in the house.

If you don't have your weapon out with intent to use it's then you have only brought for the intimidation factor, which goes back to "brandishing" the weapon.

"Simply carrying a firearm around your property" would not be intimidation. If you walk out of your house to confront a would be thief carrying a weapon, then it is for intimidation.

I can certainly understand your perspective on this, but it's not entirely that straight forward, and likely how I misunderstood SnowBlaZR2 on previous posts too.
A few things to consider. If you're home, and hear someone trying to take your truck, I doubt you have a holster on hip to secure the gun in. So where else are you going to put it? I'm not a tv gangster so I'm not putting a loaded weapon in my waistband. It's in a holster or in my hand. So if I'm going out with a gun, it's in my hand. Held at my side or low ready, yes, but in hand just the same. If you come out with it pointed at the person, I'd agree that's brandished and/or intended as an intimidation tool.
The other thing to consider, even if you did have a holster on your hip. If you're taking the gun with you, I would assume you suspect things may go sideways. In which case a gun in the holster is going to take longer to get on target than one in hand. This is why police clear a building/residence with the gun in their hand, not holstered. They're not trying to intimidate the intruder, and obviously prefer to take them into custody. However, they need to be ready to respond if that person should respond with lethal force. SnowBlaZR2 is describing the same thing, just as a private citizen confronting the thief instead of waiting for police to arrive. I don't recommend that for the previously given reason, but I get it.

....I can't stress enough how bad of an idea it is to carry a firearm if your goal with it is to intimidate someone.

100% agree with this.
Clearly I had misunderstood some of your earlier posts, because this doesn't match how I took those. My apologies for the confusion.

Yeah, that's why cops get called all the time for people legally open carrying. Just happened in my town with a guy walking to his house with a compound bow during bow season for turkeys

Wow, you need to move to the mid-west. People carrying guns and bows here all the time and nobody bats an eye. Pistols on the hip (open carry) going to target shoot or just because they can, rifle/shotgun carried or slung while walking to where you're going to go hunt or target shoot. No issues at all. If some city slicker does call the cops, the police just drive if you're carrying it properly (ie not point it at people). Not questioned, or harassed and definitely not charged with anything.
I forget sometimes that people live in areas where seeing a gun is "scary". Around here, it's just like seeing someone carrying a fishing pole. Which I guess in those urban areas is probably uncommon too.

 

[HSKR R/T]

Again siding with SnowBlaZR2 on this. If you're running out of the house with a weapon as a means to defend yourself and they attack you, then no it's not intent to use or premeditation. It's a response to their aggression and you had the foresight to prepare for such a contingency. Premeditation would be if you planned on shooting them regardless of their actions when you encountered them.

Although it's not premeditated, I would argue on your point that if you feel the criminal may escalate to the level of lethal force (hence needing to take your gun) you probably shouldn't be running outside to confront them. Double edged sword I guess. It's defensive but you could have stayed inside and prevented the need to defend yourself.
I get the idea of taking the gun for defensive purposes but if you think the situation will rise to that, why put yourself in that position? I'm not going to knowingly put myself in a situation that I suspect may escalate to a deadly force encounter over a truck. At that point, I'm just going to let them take the truck.
You may be completely justified in your use of force if things escalate, but you still have to live with what you do. Some people will be completely comfortable with knowing that the criminal escalated it to that, but I would have issues with knowing that I put myself in the position that allowed them to escalate it, when I could have just as easily stayed in the house.



I can certainly understand your perspective on this, but it's not entirely that straight forward, and likely how I misunderstood SnowBlaZR2 on previous posts too.
A few things to consider. If you're home, and hear someone trying to take your truck, I doubt you have a holster on hip to secure the gun in. So where else are you going to put it? I'm not a tv gangster so I'm not putting a loaded weapon in my waistband. It's in a holster or in my hand. So if I'm going out with a gun, it's in my hand. Held at my side or low ready, yes, but in hand just the same. If you come out with it pointed at the person, I'd agree that's brandished and/or intended as an intimidation tool.
The other thing to consider, even if you did have a holster on your hip. If you're taking the gun with you, I would assume you suspect things may go sideways. In which case a gun in the holster is going to take longer to get on target than one in hand. This is why police clear a building/residence with the gun in their hand, not holstered. They're not trying to intimidate the intruder, and obviously prefer to take them into custody. However, they need to be ready to respond if that person should respond with lethal force. SnowBlaZR2 is describing the same thing, just as a private citizen confronting the thief instead of waiting for police to arrive. I don't recommend that for the previously given reason, but I get it.


100% agree with this.
Clearly I had misunderstood some of your earlier posts, because this doesn't match how I took those. My apologies for the confusion.


Wow, you need to move to the mid-west. People carrying guns and bows here all the time and nobody bats an eye. Pistols on the hip (open carry) going to target shoot or just because they can, rifle/shotgun carried or slung while walking to where you're going to go hunt or target shoot. No issues at all. If some city slicker does call the cops, the police just drive if you're carrying it properly (ie not point it at people). Not questioned, or harassed and definitely not charged with anything.
I forget sometimes that people live in areas where seeing a gun is "scary". Around here, it's just like seeing someone carrying a fishing pole. Which I guess in those urban areas is probably uncommon too.

I'm still standing by my opinion that if you are taking a gun with you to confront a would be thief, the intimidation factor of having the gun visible is a factor in why you brought it with you, to deter them from escalating. Because unless you witness the thief having their own weapon, you can't really claim "self defense" if they aren't actively threatening you personally.


I am in the Midwest. Nebraska has open carry laws, and is a large hunting state. But living inside city limits there are still those snowflakes who get offended or scared of any type of weapon they don't understand. When I "load up" to go hunting, I try not to make it obvious I am loading my truck up with guns. Luckily being parked in the garage this is easy to do, but at my old house I didn't always have that luxury.

As for the police, not all of them are hunters to be able to understand. In this instance the "concerned caller" who reported the guy claimed he was being "suspicious" around a school. But there are elementary schools in almost every neighborhood. And since it was a 911 call, they have to respond.

 

[SnowBlaZR2]

We're in a completely new thread now?

This is getting old.