JavaScript is disabled
Our website requires JavaScript to function properly. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser settings before proceeding.
Guess what, if we started locking up the PARENTS of these little miscreants what do you think would happen? That's right, I wager things would change overnight. You should be made completely responsible for what your kid does, after all you made it you should have to clean up after it. Financial and CRIMINAL responsibility, sound like the ticket to me.


Some kids are just "born bad". I know some STELLAR people who are excellent parents (all over their kid's conduct), but the kid is just demon-seed... you can't jail a parent for THAT.




are you kidding me? we'd have epidemic teenage crime. think about that suggestion for a half a minute longer.


LMAO!!! I'm sure there would be a rash of murdered teens shortly thereafter when the parents got out of the tank, too!
 
The kid in my story was not starting anything. infact If i remember correctly he was crying when the cops came to check out the scene. Ya he probably wont become and vengfull serial killer because of that, but he didnt deserve to feel like he was inches away from death. This is a suburban neighborhood,with cookie cutter houses. Not a few acres and a fence around it. I believe the owner practiced his rights a bit beyond what was needed.

I do love grand torino though. Those bubblegums deserve to be put in place.

So suburban white kid in your yard at night = "just boys being boys", but urban "gangsta" (aka not white) kid teasing a dog = "put a gun in his face"? Is this not a double standard?

Anyway, there has to be more to the story then they guy just happened to be in his back yard, with his rifle, when the kid ran through it. If it's suburbia I'd say that the kid was back there for all for 30 seconds if he was really jumping one fence and running to another. Something made the homeowner come out with his rifle and confront this guy.

I agree that the guy might have taken it too far, but did your buddy jump any more fences after that? I suspect not, so mission accomplished.
 
We had something like that happen I beleive in albany about a year back he was a teen running from the police jumped the wrong fenced and died at the scene....Home owner was not charged....Kid was not armed but dead
 
Or they would have had to have stolen or vandalized over $250 in damages to become a felony.

Third-degree theft. This is considered a gross misdemeanor (minor crime). If convicted of a gross misdemeanor, you can be given a maximum sentence of 365 days in jail and/or a $5,000 fine (subject to change).
 
lippidude
The kid in my story was not starting anything. infact If i remember correctly he was crying when the cops came to check out the scene. Ya he probably wont become and vengfull serial killer because of that, but he didnt deserve to feel like he was inches away from death. This is a suburban neighborhood,with cookie cutter houses. Not a few acres and a fence around it. I believe the owner practiced his rights a bit beyond what was needed.
.

had this happend in southern oregon in say the 80's or 90's even he would have been shot dead and the shooter praised for defending his property
boy's will be boy's???? WTH is that cop out supossed to mean?
so a 16 year old who kills or murders or rape's is just a boy being a boy?

you sir need to grow up and realize that in that "game" you played that you were violating some one's RIGHTS
by going into a yard that was not yours. you gave upp all your rights when you did this.
the kid was crying when the cops showed up? good hope he had dirty draws to.
the RIGHT to defend ones self and property is a RIGHT if you jump into a yard and a dog eats you is that
also going to far??

your not a portland libiral are you by chance?


rant over stuped is as stuped does done
 
Last Edited:
I have not read the responses so this has probably already been said, but the guy with the rifle could have been facing charges himself instead of the teen. Holding someone at gunpoint that has not committed a felony can be seen as kidnapping and coercion. Someone crossing your property line inside of city limits does not constitute reasonable cause to believe you are in physical danger.
 
So a long time ago in high school we used to play this game called fugitive. We would have two teams (cops and fugitives) the fugitives goal was to get from point A to point B on foot without getting caught by the cops( high schoolers with cars). the point of the game is to get to point B without being tagged by a cop.

Where I have a question is, We had a kid whom hopped a fence and attempted to run through a unknown persons backyard to get over the next fence and so on to short cut running down streets. When the kid attempted the second fence he was pulled to the ground and butted in the face by a man with a rifle. the man was the house owner.

I can understand that because some random guy is running through your yard at night and you have every right to know whats up. where it gets sticky is that the man with the rifle held the teenager at gun point taunting him 10 minutes before he finally called the cops and they took the kid off the home owners hands. the home owner had a firm talking to from the cops. Is the home owner actually allowed to hold the kid hostage until the police come?

Personally i thought it was ridiculous that a man living in a suburban neighborhood felt he needed to scare a helpless teen by holding a gun in his face for a half hour. the kid may have been trespassing, but did he have any rights in this situation?

Kid is a factor on the upper end of the dumb ---- scale. A candidate for the Darwin awards. Greydog.
 
I have not read the responses so this has probably already been said, but the guy with the rifle could have been facing charges himself instead of the teen. Holding someone at gunpoint that has not committed a felony can be seen as kidnapping and coercion. Someone crossing your property line inside of city limits does not constitute reasonable cause to believe you are in physical danger.

you can effect a citizens arrest on anyone you observe committing any crime, doesn't have to be a felony. if you're lawfully arresting someone and use excessive force, you're going to be charged for the excessive force- not the arrest. since the verbiage for both Pointing and Unlawful Use expressly exempt those using firearms for self-defense, i think you're going to have a hard time convincing anyone that the elements are met.

it's gonna depend on how vindictive the prosecutor is and how gullible the jury is for the other crimes, but i don't see how you could ever make a case for kidnapping with an otherwise lawful citizens arrest.
 
ok another view

( I will not address the OP that said the kid was dragged off the fence and hit with a rifle,
As that sounds like the home owner was laying in wait and knew the kid was coming ,
Or the kid was lying through his teeth)

you are in the back yard of the home you OWN,
fenced off so that no one can see in your yard because you like your right to privacy.
You just got through cleaning a gun since it was a nice day out.
Since it is your home defense weapon you load it and are ready to go back inside,
When some one jumps the fence and runs toward you.
You don't know how old they are,
You don't know if they have a weapon,
You don't know what their intent is,
You don't know if they have friends coming from another direction, etc etc.
All you know is some one just jumped your fence and is running toward you.

Will you
A. wait and ask what he wants?
B. wait to see what he does?
C. ask if he will be brining a friend?
Or
D. defend yourself!

Did fence jumper have ability to hurt or harm?
Not sure do to close and sudden proximity, that leads to opportunity,
Is fence jumper within 21 feet when he lands and is running at you?
That leads to jeopardy in this kind of case with these kind of facts
161.225¹

Use of physical force in defense of premises

(1) A person in lawful possession or control of premises is justified in using physical force upon another person when and to the extent that the person reasonably believes it necessary to prevent or terminate what the person reasonably believes to be the commission or attempted commission of a criminal trespass by the other person in or upon the premises
(2) A person may use deadly physical force under the circumstances set forth in subsection (1) of this section only:
(a) In defense of a person as provided in ORS 161.219 (Limitations on use of deadly physical force in defense of a person); or
(b) When the person reasonably believes it necessary to prevent the commission of arson or a felony by force and violence by the trespasser.
(3) As used in subsection (1) and subsection (2)(a) of this section, "premises" includes any building as defined in ORS 164.205 (Definitions for ORS 164.205 to 164.270) and any real property. As used in subsection (2)(b) of this section, "premises" includes any building. [1971 c.743 §25]



Also


161.255¹

Use of physical force by private person making citizen's arrest
(1) Except as provided in subsection (2) of this section, a private person acting on the person's own account is justified in using physical force upon another person when and to the extent that the person reasonably believes it necessary to make an arrest or to prevent the escape from custody of an arrested person whom the person has arrested under ORS 133.225 (Arrest by private person).
(2) A private person acting under the circumstances prescribed in subsection (1) of this section is justified in using deadly physical force only when the person reasonably believes it necessary for self-defense or to defend a third person from what the person reasonably believes to be the use or imminent use of deadly physical force. [1971 c.743 §31; 1973 c.836 §339]
 
you can effect a citizens arrest on anyone you observe committing any crime, doesn't have to be a felony. if you're lawfully arresting someone and use excessive force, you're going to be charged for the excessive force- not the arrest. since the verbiage for both Pointing and Unlawful Use expressly exempt those using firearms for self-defense, i think you're going to have a hard time convincing anyone that the elements are met.

it's gonna depend on how vindictive the prosecutor is and how gullible the jury is for the other crimes, but i don't see how you could ever make a case for kidnapping with an otherwise lawful citizens arrest.
To a degree you can...but if you do something like is described in the OP you will very likely find yourself on the wrong end of the law. You are only allowed to use reasonable force that is equatable to the situation. And the offense has to be serious enough to warrant arrest. Pulling a firearm on a minor that simply crosses your property line is a big no-no. Most any attorney will tell you that a citizens arrest is one of the most legally risky acts you can engage in and it is best left to the authorities. They are protected to a degree from retaliatory law suits...you are not.
 
With all these answers I have to start picking up that weekly arrest paper you guys have in OR. I bet I see some of you in it.................

It's the internet...people talk a bigger game here than they would act in real life. In real life they usually use better judgment because there are actual consequences.
 
No kidding. You can't point a gun at someone sneaking around your property. Is that fair? No. He runs to the cops, files criminal charges, files civil charges, your home is searched, all your guns/ammo is taken pending your trial, you go broke with attorney fees to try and stay out of jail ... yes defending your property is a nice challenge indeed. Some people forget that we never really 'own' any property anyway. Land, including the land your home is on, is always the dominion of the state to do with as they wish.
 
I would have never called the law. To put a real scare into him I would have had him start digging a hole in the back yard.

Just make sure to call 811 for a locate to come out, otherwise you might hit a utility and be fined for failing to locate before digging :p

On a side note, I have had to do this before when I actually owned my own house. The house had a previous owner which was in to all sorts of bad stuff, and attracted the wrong crowd. I have had to have the previous owner, and lots of his clients either ran off with the 870 or held and arrested. Fully fenced yard, locked, with no trespassing signs, so they had to jump the fence to get in. Had that house broken into, between me with my shotgun and my 2 dogs, we managed to keep the house pretty sound, and carted off a lot of those criminals off to jail. And yes they were all repeat criminals, they were just out and trying to do some more.
This was in Washington.

I agree with the owner, maybe not with the taunting, but who's to say the kid wasn't being a smartass?
 
FWIW, it isn't considered trespassing if the person unknowingly enters the property. There must be intent to knowingly enter the property against the wishes of the property owner. Knowledge can be from a verbal "stay off my lawn", but fences or signs are legally inferred as the same thing as verbal notice.

So by climbing the fence, it did become trespassing.
 

Upcoming Events

Tillamook Gun & Knife Show
Tillamook, OR
"The Original" Kalispell Gun Show
Kalispell, MT
Kids Firearm Safety 2 Class
Springfield, OR
Teen Rifle 1 Class
Springfield, OR

New Resource Reviews

New Classified Ads

Back Top