Poll: CHARGED: Spokane car theft suspect shot dead: Was it legal?

[Gunner3456]

I'm concerned. I really thought that members of this forum would know better than to shoot someone over property only. I suppose that a lot have CHLs and had to pass some test on the law.

When I see someone stealing my property and he's outside my home and leaving and posing no bodily threat to me or someone nearby, I have to let him go. He is now a police and court problem.

Now to those who said that if I do have to make a justifiable shoot that I'd spend the rest of my life with PTSD or something, hogwash. I'd be really worried until a grand jury cleared me, and the DA said I was justified. 15 seconds later I'd be over it, feeling only relief.

I've carried for years and years and thought about this many times. What will it do to me if I have to shoot? It will cause me to be very thankful that I was armed.

 

[kumabear17]

I'm concerned. I really thought that members of this forum would know better than to shoot someone over property only. I suppose that a lot have CHLs and had to pass some test on the law.

When I see someone stealing my property and he's outside my home and leaving and posing no bodily threat to me or someone nearby, I have to let him go. He is now a police and court problem.

I would hope most, if not all of us, realize we are accountable anytime we draw and especially when we shoot. Many of these responses, probably some of mine, are a bit emotional because of the thought some scumbag could steal what I expended my life energy to obtain and, with the way our laws are enforced, they most likely will get away with it. All that being said even you put some "ifs" in your statement. Just because someone is "leaving" doesn't always mean the possibility of a "bodily threat" doesn't still exist. Wouldn't it be great if (1) the people who committed the crimes were left in jail or at least put in jail the first time and not paroled so quickly, and (2) people had a better relationship with law enforcement to a point a mutual trust existed and the idea of asking for on-going education was a possibility. I'm familiar with that kind of relationship having a possibility with some, say, local law enforcement, but it can be the other way to if the guy is a jerk. To shoot or not to shoot isn't always clear cut and that's seems the bottom line to me.

 

[ZigZagZeke]

Pre-crime is real?

The danger posed to the general public by the acts of a fleeing felon is the general justification for the police shooting fleeing felons. It's not pre-crime, it's the continuation of the crime.

 

[dmancornell]

The danger posed to the general public by the acts of a fleeing felon is the general justification for the police shooting fleeing felons. It's not pre-crime, it's the continuation of the crime.

Yet another load of police state BS.

 

[duane black]

I really thought that members of this forum would know better than to shoot someone over property only.

Surprises me a bit as well. It's very likely Washington will full court press you for responding to a auto burglary / car theft like this. Even in the unlikely event you beat the charge and don't end up in prison you will have been through the absolute wringer.

Here is something that occured very close to my neighborhood here in Vancouver. I don't think it would be a stretch to insert auto theft into prowler in this article.

Homeowner appears in court on suspicion of murder | The Columbian

Here is a breif snippet :

Doucette arrived home Tuesday from his job as a security guard, heard a car alarm and saw a prowler trying to break into a car across the street, Thayer said. Doucette confronted the man, and the man attacked him, Thayer said. The shooting was in self-defense, Thayer said.

The incident occurred at about 4 a.m. outside Doucette's home

Murder 2. That doesn't sound like fun.

Someone had mentioned that they worked very hard for their car.... I can appreciate that. Trust me.

Well, Mr. Doucette posted 250,000 dollars bail. The prosecutor had asked bail be set at 500,000 dollars. I can't imagine what his defense is going to cost. Marital strain, work, etc. Civil suit after trial is a real possibility.

All for what ? In my circumstance a Jeep that Wells Fargo has a lien on ?

The folks that say they would drop the hammer; fine by me. I would not convict if I was a juror at your trial. Just realize, more than likely if your life was not in danger, there WILL be a trial. Probably followed up with a civil suit.

 

[ZigZagZeke]

The poll talks about what SHOULD BE, not what IS. We all know the law frowns on shooting fleeing property thieves (unless you're a cop). That wasn't the question.

 

[duane black]

The poll talks about what SHOULD BE, not what IS. We all know the law frowns on shooting fleeing property thieves (unless you're a cop). That wasn't the question.

I agree that's what the Poll says.

Thread title says this : Spokane car theft suspect shot dead: Was it legal?

 

[1stklass]

Hmmm, my property will be surrounded by high tensile game fencing that a human body cant fit through, 8 feet tall, large gates at the entrance with reinforced pop up vehicle blockers behind it. I will have a farmed crop(no not marijuana) that is considered extremely valuable behind that fence. My assumption if ANYONE crosses that fence is that they are there to destroy the way i have chosen to support my family. So would i Shoot them? Most likely. Sorry but waiting 15 to 30 minutes for a sheriff to show, most likely isnt gonna work for me. Is that a justified "fear for my life" situation? i believe it is.

 

[Riot]

I would not shoot someone for stealing anything I own...

Even one of your guns?

What really bugs me though is the number of people here who appear to sympathize with the car thief being shot.

What bugs me is the lack of empathy for the fact that regardless of your personal feelings in the mater- if nobody's life is in danger- then every person deserves their day in court.


Let me reitterate that I would have appluaded the man for having Mr. Carjacker in a beaten and unconscious state before he was handed over to the police. But shooting a man for steeling your car you left unlocked and unattended in the driveway?

Yeah, I'm pretty sure you can't shoot a deer in your yard if you put a saltlick out there for him.

 

[1stklass]

Even one of your guns?



What bugs me is the lack of empathy for the fact that regardless of your personal feelings in the mater- if nobody's life is in danger- then every person deserves their day in court.


Let me reitterate that I would have appluaded the man for having Mr. Carjacker in a beaten and unconscious state before he was handed over to the police. But shooting a man for steeling your car you left unlocked and unattended in the driveway?

Yeah, I'm pretty sure you can't shoot a deer in your yard if you put a saltlick out there for him.

What if that person turns out to be a serial car thief that has HAD THEIR DAY IN COURT 20 TIMES ALREADY???
You guys talk about how the justice system is weak and then fall back on it when its convenient for an argument?

 

[Slowpoke]

So let me pose a little different scenario.

Suppose you realize your car is being broken into, and come out to see the thief in said car with it already running. You are in front of vehicle because of the way you backed it in. The thief floors the gas, and heads straight at you.

Do you:

A. Try to jump out of the way so he doesn't run over you?

or

B. Shoot him so that he doesn't run over you (with maybe jumping out of the way when the out of control car gets to you)?

 

[Rotty]

Now to those who said that if I do have to make a justifiable shoot that I'd spend the rest of my life with PTSD or something, hogwash. I'd be really worried until a grand jury cleared me, and the DA said I was justified. 15 seconds later I'd be over it, feeling only relief.

:bsflag:

Ok just for a little clarification, not everyone who is involved in a shooting will suffer from PTSD. But if you think that you will walk away from a shooting without any kind of emotional or mental consequence then either you are delusional or have mental issues and shouldn't be carrying a weapon.

I have been in a number of critical incident situations where I have seen professional tough guys cry like school girls after having to take decisive lethal action. Then I have seen those same professional tough guys struggle for years to follow with the memories.

So excuse me for calling BS on your "it won't faze me one bit" comment. It won't matter if the DA is able to successfully defend you in court or not. You still have to live with it. Your individual ability to come to terms with the incident may allow you to carry on day to day without any issues but you have to recognize the fact that NOT everyone has the ability to do that. For those folks and anyone for that matter involved in a shooting regardless of whether or not a fatality is involved should seek "Critical Incident Stress Counseling". People do weird Sh*t after something like that.

 

[rapgood]

Sure you can. To prevent an arson, especially to an occupied building.

Doesn't this somewhat beg the question, Dave? If one is shooting to prevent an arson of an occupied building, is the shooting in response to the potential damage to the building or, as is just as arguable, is the shooting to prevent harm to the occupants? One is potential injury to property; the other is the potential of "some great personal injury to the slayer or to any such person, and there is imminent danger of such design being accomplished."

And there is no specificity about a "violent" felony in 050...just "a felony." Rape, Robbery, armed robbery, arson, kidnapping.

.050(2) reads, "upon or in a dwelling, or other place of abode, in which he or she is." The way I read it is that the injury to the "dwelling or other place of abode" is qualified by the subordinate clause "in which he or she is," implying that the real danger sought to be prevented primarily is to the occupants and only secondarily to the building (if, indeed, the statute proscribes damaging the building, at all). I completely agree with you that the statute contains no specificity with respect to violence. In your examples, however, robbery (and armed robbery), rape and kidnapping all implicate violence (by statutory definitions). Arson in the first degree also implicates violence to a person or persons, but arson in the second degree does not. Clearly, not all felonies implicate violence. Similarly, not all felonies implicate injury to a person or persons. E.g., it is reported that the harassing of Bigfoot, Sasquatch or other undiscovered subspecies is a felony punishable by a fine and/or imprisonment (really!). Assuming the accuracy of the reporting, no reasonable construction of .050 would justify shooting a harasser simply for Messin' With Sasquatch.

Either way, .050 is replete with ambiguity.

Admittedly, I did not research the case law as to how 9A.16.050 has been interpreted by the courts. I based my suppositions purely on the (somewhat inartful and imprecise) language in the statute.

 

[Rotty]

harassing of Bigfoot, Sasquatch or other undiscovered subspecies is a felony punishable by a fine and/or imprisonment (really!). Assuming the accuracy of the reporting, no reasonable construction of .050 would justify shooting a harasser simply for Messin' With Sasquatch.

Ya but what if Sasquatch is the one stealing your car? Can I shoot him then?

 

[Nick Burkhardt]

The Washington State Legislature and Supreme Court have "made it clear that" a person should not be charged with murder or manslaughter "when they are defending themselves, their property, or against a felony, unless the prosecution has sufficient evidence to prove the absence of any of the defenses to a jury beyond a reasonable doubt."

So yes it is justified. No I would not shoot someone over property outside of my home.

 

[1stklass]

The key word you guys are missing here is "PROWLER". When he is at your house whether he is stealing your car or breaking into it he is a PROWLER.... Its a scary word that makes even liberals quake in their boots. Say it with a little growl and all of a sudden they imagine a black masked person waiting to harm you. The statement should not just be "i was in fear for my life" it should go on to say, "because that PROWLER was SKULKING around my house up to no good

 

[ConcealedCarrie]

The poll talks about what SHOULD BE, not what IS. We all know the law frowns on shooting fleeing property thieves (unless you're a cop). That wasn't the question.

I was wondering when someone was going to mention that.

 

[Grommit327]

I have zero....absolutely zero empathy for a person who is taking the malicious action of stealing from me for what I have worked my *** off to get. At that point they are no longer a human but simply another rat that came out of the sewers. Yes I have a harsh outlook on the world

 

[Riot]

What if that person turns out to be a serial car thief that has HAD THEIR DAY IN COURT 20 TIMES ALREADY???
You guys talk about how the justice system is weak and then fall back on it when its convenient for an argument?

How would you know any of this prior to the shooting unless you recoignized the guy? In which case you should be able to positively identify him for police and have the situation resolved, correct?

 

[Darkhades]

You should have the right to defend your self and your property with deadly force, why? The reason why you should is because even though they are items they are also tied to your way of life and in some cases life or death. If my car is stolen and this is my way to work I could end homeless and in large amounts of debt. Some would say this is far fetched but I have seen it happen first hand to this family were there car was stolen and it was there only thing they could afford because they had a special needs child. they end up moving into a homeless shelter and that was the last I heard from them. I am sorry I will not let anyone take anything from me that I spent part of my life time to get through my hard work. I am willing to kill and die over those things because they are who I am, I am not saying if someone steals a car stereo from me I am going to hunt them down and take them out no. But I will never just let anyone take anything from me with out a fight and if it ends in one of us dead then I can live or die knowing that.