Quantcast
  1. Sign up now and join over 35,000 northwest gun owners. It's quick, easy, and 100% free!

Stand Your Ground in a car.

Discussion in 'Legal & Political Archive' started by Meat, Jul 20, 2013.

  1. Meat

    Meat East King County, WA New Member

    Messages:
    16
    Likes Received:
    0
    I recently read that Washington State's Stand Your Ground Law is somewhat ambiguous. Seems like it is more understandable when it relates to you place of residence, but gets kinda 'grey' away from home.

    I feel I understand how it works if someone is breaking into my home and I feel in danger, but with recent events I wonder what I am legally allowed to do in a situation where I am threatened in my car. A scenario would be getting caught up in a crowd protest like we have seen in other cities where a crowd blocks a roadway and threatens the inhabitants of the car.

    I'm pretty sure they are going to see the business end of my 10mm, but I really don't want to go to jail.

    Any comments would be appreciated.
     
  2. orygun

    orygun West Linn Bronze Supporter Bronze Supporter

    Messages:
    3,774
    Likes Received:
    1,953
    If I could drive away, I would. If I can't, I'm not too worried about any laws....
     
  3. Ben Beckerich

    Ben Beckerich NW Oregon Bronze Supporter Bronze Supporter

    Messages:
    3,911
    Likes Received:
    2,323
    Is there a law that says you DO have to retreat in any way at all?
     
  4. renfield

    renfield Portland Active Member

    Messages:
    361
    Likes Received:
    81
    Does it state different responses to attacks by individuals or mobs.
     
  5. ZA_Survivalist

    ZA_Survivalist Oregon AK's all day.

    Messages:
    4,653
    Likes Received:
    5,757
    Bear spray, keep it right next to me while Im driving, have had more than a few crazies wacked out on something approach my vehicle and get irate when I politly tell them I dont have any spare change.. Because all my money is taxed from me to help pay for programs that help folks like them.

    Now that isnt a provocation, its a fact and an honest one.
    If I couldnt drive away, Id use mace, if travel AND mace don't work..Ive got other means of distancing myself.. My last resort; My secondary firearm always rides shotgun.
     
  6. renfield

    renfield Portland Active Member

    Messages:
    361
    Likes Received:
    81
    You could also consider that you're vehicle is a weapon of sorts. You could try to use it to make your way through a mob while making as much noise as possible, or using the door and horn (to draw attention to yourself) as defensive weapons. If you are forced to draw your firearm you could consider shooting to incapacitate rather than killing the assailant.
     
  7. Stomper

    Stomper Oceania Rising White Is The New Brown Silver Supporter

    Messages:
    12,896
    Likes Received:
    19,480
    No, no, no.... that's akin to trying to "shoot the tires out" of a car for whatever reason. If you do that you'd most likely get into even MORE SERIOUS legal trouble than shooting to kill because deadly force is just that, deadly force, and it WOULD be argued that if you shot to "incapacitate" then you either weren't in "legitimate" fear of life and limb, or you could have done something "alterative", or you're a sicko who likes to maim others.

    Then there's the realistic aspect that under a stressful situation (as described above) your fine motor skills go out the window, and taking a "fine aim" to incapacitate is only done in Starsky & Hutch episodes. A center mass aimpoint is about all you can hope for... unless you're Dirty Harry Calahan with the SFPD. ;)
     
  8. Ben Beckerich

    Ben Beckerich NW Oregon Bronze Supporter Bronze Supporter

    Messages:
    3,911
    Likes Received:
    2,323
    Don't shoot to kill, don't shoot to maim. Shoot COM till the threat's not.
     
    feconn and (deleted member) like this.
  9. renfield

    renfield Portland Active Member

    Messages:
    361
    Likes Received:
    81
    I was a professional soldier for 12 years, I've been in non lethal confrontations before where applying appropriate force worked out fine. It seems a bit crazy to think a center mass shot that is likely to kill someone would get me into less trouble than trying to apply non lethal or appropriate force, nor do I want to kill someone over the content of my wallet (though I'm certainly not going to let them take it). Dirty Harry's shots only ever had one outcome regardless of where he hit them! :)
     
  10. Ben Beckerich

    Ben Beckerich NW Oregon Bronze Supporter Bronze Supporter

    Messages:
    3,911
    Likes Received:
    2,323
    If you think you possess an ability or training that sets you apart, that's fine. But the average every day Joe who probably only takes his .38 to the range 3 times a year to fire a box isn't going to have the presence of mind to chose a less-lethal-but-still-debilitating part of the body to shoot at and then accurately do so in whatever time presents itself between the moment he realizes there's a crack-head mid-swing with a baseball bat to his dome and when said bat makes contact.
     
  11. pchewn

    pchewn Beaverton Oregon USA Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    543
    Likes Received:
    289
    If my car gets attacked by an angry mob, the most effective defense is probably to stay in the car and keep the car moving -- even if I have to bump the mobsters out of the way with my car. Getting out or rolling down the window to shoot will probably have less chance of saving my hide than keeping moving and staying in the car.
     
    jim97701, renfield, orygun and 3 others like this.
  12. One-Eyed Ross

    One-Eyed Ross Winlock, WA Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,367
    Likes Received:
    752
    Washington doesn't have a "stand your ground" law. What we have is case law.
     
  13. Black Dog

    Black Dog Eagle Creek Or Active Member

    Messages:
    202
    Likes Received:
    169
    Bear spray is good but WASP spray is better.(IMO) They will be blinded until they get there eyes washed out. And the can is large and shoots a solid stream about 15 feet. There is no law about discharge of Wasp spray like there is for Bear and Pepper spray.
     
  14. Ben Beckerich

    Ben Beckerich NW Oregon Bronze Supporter Bronze Supporter

    Messages:
    3,911
    Likes Received:
    2,323
    I think probably want to check with a lawyer before incorporating aerosol chemical agent poisons into your "less-lethal" arsenal. Have you read the MSDS for your wasp killer of choice? You can't breath that bubblegum in.
     
  15. renfield

    renfield Portland Active Member

    Messages:
    361
    Likes Received:
    81

    Granted anyone can get caught by surprise regardless of their training or preparation. I was just stating positive actions to take before having to resort to shooting an assailant. Especially given the outcome of this case: http://www.latimes.com/news/nation/...an-marissa-alexander-20130717,0,4248003.story
     
  16. Black Dog

    Black Dog Eagle Creek Or Active Member

    Messages:
    202
    Likes Received:
    169
    And your point. If someone is going to do me bodily harm and I would rather try and get out of it without LETHAL force. I'm going to use something that is going to stop them. So I can get out of there! If they ask for it so be it!

    P.S. I wonder what the differance would be in the lawyer bill. SHOT or SPRAYED.
     
  17. Ben Beckerich

    Ben Beckerich NW Oregon Bronze Supporter Bronze Supporter

    Messages:
    3,911
    Likes Received:
    2,323
    If wasp spray fixes the problem, it wasn't a gunfight to begin with.
     
    renfield and (deleted member) like this.
  18. Caveman Jim

    Caveman Jim West of Oly Springer Slayer 2016 Volunteer

    Messages:
    5,231
    Likes Received:
    8,839
    I would incorporate the grips used with spray paint and have a lighter handy (flame thrower)
     
  19. James 61

    James 61 Clark Co Washington Member

    Messages:
    101
    Likes Received:
    23
    Hope these sections from the RCW help.

    RCW 9A.16.020

    The use, attempt, or offer to use force upon or toward the person of another is not unlawful in the following cases:

    (1) Whenever necessarily used by a public officer in the performance of a legal duty, or a person assisting the officer and acting under the officer's direction;

    (2) Whenever necessarily used by a person arresting one who has committed a felony and delivering him or her to a public officer competent to receive him or her into custody;

    (3) Whenever used by a party about to be injured, or by another lawfully aiding him or her, in preventing or attempting to prevent an offense against his or her person, or a malicious trespass, or other malicious interference with real or personal property lawfully in his or her possession, in case the force is not more than is necessary;

    (4) Whenever reasonably used by a person to detain someone who enters or remains unlawfully in a building or on real property lawfully in the possession of such person, so long as such detention is reasonable in duration and manner to investigate the reason for the detained person's presence on the premises, and so long as the premises in question did not reasonably appear to be intended to be open to members of the public;

    (5) Whenever used by a carrier of passengers or the carrier's authorized agent or servant, or other person assisting them at their request in expelling from a carriage, railway car, vessel, or other vehicle, a passenger who refuses to obey a lawful and reasonable regulation prescribed for the conduct of passengers, if such vehicle has first been stopped and the force used is not more than is necessary to expel the offender with reasonable regard to the offender's personal safety;

    (6) Whenever used by any person to prevent a mentally ill, mentally incompetent, or mentally disabled person from committing an act dangerous to any person, or in enforcing necessary restraint for the protection or restoration to health of the person, during such period only as is necessary to obtain legal authority for the restraint or custody of the person.



    RCW 9A.16.050
    Homicide — By other person — When justifiable.


    Homicide is also justifiable when committed either:


    (1) In the lawful defense of the slayer, or his or her husband, wife, parent, child, brother, or sister, or of any other person in his or her presence or company, when there is reasonable ground to apprehend a design on the part of the person slain to commit a felony or to do some great personal injury to the slayer or to any such person, and there is imminent danger of such design being accomplished; or


    (2) In the actual resistance of an attempt to commit a felony upon the slayer, in his or her presence, or upon or in a dwelling, or other place of abode, in which he or she is.
     
  20. ob1

    ob1 49th parallel Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    597
    Likes Received:
    531
    In the scenario that the OP provides, we have a large number of irrational individuals intent on wreaking random physical harm. I fail to see the utility of a can of any kind of spray.

    Secondly, you would have to roll the window(s) down to use the stuff and if you are able to score a good spray hit on one or two of the attackers, you now have dozens more who will be more intent on revenge for you daring to "profile" their cohorts. If you are indeed stranded in the middle of the "horde" with no avenue of escape.....and use deadly force, you still may not be out of the woods, for the same reason (regardless of your mag capacity).

    Indeed, the mere possession of a non-lethal device could ultimately result in you being required to explain why you didn't use that option before deciding to employ deadly force.

    Remember, you will likely be dealing with attorneys here...who are generally more concerned with proving their points in the courtroom, than the practical considerations that you may have been confronted with at the time.

    Those who choose to waste their time on the local Portland media, may recall a similar story in Portland (82nd & Flavel) about a week before the verdict was announced. Despite the media's predictable unwillingness to report it as racially motivated, two separate individuals were attacked by a mob of 30 to 40 thugs without any apparent provocation.

    Unfortunately, recent comments coming out of the white house and DOJ may be serving more to encourage than reduce the likelihood of such events.