Rules of Engagement

[AJMD429]

.
Like it or not, there ARE Rules of Engagement we do have to deal with and obey...

https://wibc.com/142303/police-man-who- ... th-murder/

Even if the guy manages to avoid prison time he will be bankrupted with legal expenses, and never be able to legally own a firearm again.

On top of that, he'll probably have the thieves family stalking and trying to kill him for the rest of his life.

At least the criminal won't steal any more cars, or even waste a bunch of society's resources with prison and counselling and whatever moocher-welfare programs he was on.

[JimT]

The Rules of Engagement are different from State to State.

Texans have the right to use deadly force against someone else when that person is using unlawful deadly force against you. Using deadly force must be immediately necessary and reasonable for it to be justified.

Additionally, you are generally permitted to use deadly force against someone if you believe it is needed to prevent someone from imminently committing: 

Aggravated kidnapping
Murder
Sexual assault,
Aggravated sexual assault
Robbery
Aggravated robbery

from https://charlesbankerlawoffice.com/when ... -in-texas/

[Ray]

There are so many nuances and vagaries in "the law" that it confounds and confuses even those....and especially those whose business it is. Write a state attorney's office for clarification on a subject and they reply that they cannot offer legal advice, consult an attorney.

I know in my state there were some profound changes in 2006 and 2009 in regards to lethal force. Thie was the era when you heard "castle doctrine" and "stand your ground" every night on the news. The codes were changed including elements of both those themes. The real impetus behind those changes were actually defense against the crimes of carjacking.

Police and prosecutors felt obligated to charge good folk based on obscure daddy bush and clinton era laws against shooting into or out of a vehicle..... so-called "drive-by shooting" prevention statutes. You get caught at a light in a dark and lonely ghetto and feel obligated to thwart getting you and yours dragged out of your vehicle and you find yourself under arrest. There was a method to the regulatory madness if you will. They piled felonious charges with the suggestion of a plea to a misdemeanor to save your gun and voting and jury rights, keeping the feds. off of their backs. The new laws corrected these problems and went as far as sanctioning lethal force "to prevent any degree of burglary and/or robbery" . That really put the brakes on criminal activity as you can imagine. But.....

Back to carjacking. In its classic sense it is technically robbery thus you can use arms (in my state) to thwart it. Grand theft auto in the absence of a victim is not precisely robbery. This is what happened in the instance you cite. The gross hypocrisy is that a gendarme would have done the same thing but would have used the "2,500 lb. deadly moving weapon" justification apparently not available to the defendant in this case.

Even with my state's "any degree of burglary/robbery", good folk have still been charged. " just plain thieving " often includes crimes that are neither legally burglary or robbery. Also the statutes mention "to prevent". The thief fleeing with the loot is often (but not always) a burglar or robber but lethal force after the fact has prompted indictments. Omar or Fatima down at the stop and rob convenience store is shocked to learn that they cannot legally shoot shoplifters.

Back to carjacking. Even before the new laws, astute barristers/solicitors successfully defended clients. The old codes allowed lethal force to prevent/stop the act of arson. Often ghetto carjackings begin with the panhandling ruse of unsolicited windshield washing. The defense attorney argued that the spray bottle or bucket could have reasonably contained a flammable fluid.

[Pisgah]

State laws do vary, and a wise man knows his state's law. I follow my own law, which is plain and simple: if a miscreant is armed and I feel he is a genuine threat, I shoot; if I come out of a store and he's driving away, no weapon displayed and not trying to run me down, I make a police report and file an insurance claim. In most states, that's good enough...

[1894cfan]

RE shoplifting...buildings are required to have auto water sprinklers in case of fire. How about setting up sprinklers that shoot out tear gas with manual switches/buttons behind EVERY register and various other spots around the establishment? Oh, and have all employees carry tear gas masks on their persons, just in case!

BTW, just picked up what is called a Carjacker Crossdraw holster from andrewsleather.com in Florida. Hope they're still in business after the hurricanes.

[Sixgun]

The guy deserves whatever is coming to him. It's somewhat common for a law abiding individual to get in the wrong car if they look the same....If crimes like that are allowed to go on, we will all lose our rights. What that guy did was a stain on the gun rights culture......

It's only a car....now if there was a kid or anyone else in the car that changes the equation.

Personally, I would have shot the tire out and took my chances...

[4t5]

If your in a town where a reporter can't spell the word FENCE correctly, well you don't stand a chanse.