So what about using a firearm to protect a business?

[PiratePast40]

Put a cot in the shop, its now a place you could sleep. They come back tell the cops you went out for a piss came back they were there. I know around here some umm creative means to justify have been used.

But as many have said do not shoot if they are fleeing, that there is a major prosecutors dream especially those like Prozanski . So think about the fact he is a Prosecutor and if you faced him how would you have done what you did ?

Luckily something like this wouldn't land in traffic court, but yes, some idiot that thinks like Prozanski would be trying to give the perp every break possible while going after you.

 

[Garg]

Do they still sell rock salt 12 ga shells??

 

[Monica Cowles]

I just did a brief search of the Washington state code. From what I read, you're allowed to use reasonable force (there's a big gray area for you) in the defense of persons or personal property. I don't see that that personal property has to be at your residence, so it would appear you can protect your personal property elsewhere too.

Here is one excerpt - of course it would be best to consult someone with real expert legal advice. I wonder if @Monica Cowles might be familiar with the Washington state law concerning self defense of persons and property and would care to weigh in?

"Familiar" is a term to be used VERY loosely... I am certainly no legal expert. However, here are a couple codes that may apply to IronMonster's situation....interpretation is up to you, but it seems to be generally understood that in WA State one can use force to defend property, even leading to deadly force. And, if IronMonster is sleeping in his shop, his shop becomes his dwelling, thus there may be a bit more wiggle room in the law for defending your 'castle'...however, I would make sure you were defending yourself, and not just your property.

WA W.P.I.C. 17.02 It is a defense to a charge of [use of force] that the force [used][attempted][offered to be used] was lawful as defined in this instruction. [The [use of][attempt to use][offer to use] force upon or toward the person of another is lawful when [used][attempted][offered] in preventing or attempting to prevent a malicious trespass or other malicious interference with real or personal property lawfully in that person's possession, and when the force is not more than is necessary.]

The person [using][or][offering to use]the force may employ such force and means as a reasonably prudent person would use under the same or similar conditions as they appeared to the person, taking into consideration all of the facts and circumstances known to the person at the time of [and prior to] the incident.

State v. Bland, 116 P.3d 428 (WA Ct. App. 2005) Although the use of deadly force is not justified to expel a mere nonviolent trespasser, under certain circumstances necessary force may include putting a trespasser in fear of physical harm. In defense of property, there is no requirement to fear injury to oneself.

I'm reminded of a story told by an LEO during a Use of Force class; Homeowner, who was home sick from work, was woken up during the day by noises coming from downstairs. After getting his gun, he sneaks downstairs to find a punk on his hands and knees unplugging his stereo/large screen TV equipment in order to pack it off. Homeowner quietly tiptoes up behind the thief, put the gun to the back of his head, and blew his face off. When the cops arrived to ask what happened, the homeowner states, "The bum was stealing my sh**!!"

Any ideas on where the homeowner now resides, and why?

 

[oknow]

this is not the place to get legal advice.
this is a place to get opinions and we know what opinions are like.
everyone has one and they all stink. even mine.

 

[Stomper]

Especially yours... You've got dog breath.