4290
4291

Smart move (i.imgur.com)

dustofoblivion123 が 投稿

並べ替え:
ベスト
トップ新着論争中古い順Q&A
あなたは単独のコメントのスレッドを見ています。

残りのコメントをみる →

[–]zpridgen75 0ポイント1ポイント  (25子コメント)

Wrong! The fleeing felon rule permits the use of force, including deadly force, against an individual who is suspected of a felony and is in clear flight. Force may be used by the victim, bystanders, or police officers.

[–]Darkdemize 20ポイント21ポイント  (9子コメント)

fleeing felon rule

This Wikipedia article says that deadly force is generally excluded, at least in the US. I think you would have a hard time justifying shooting a purse snatcher in the back.

[–]Zoomington 5ポイント6ポイント  (1子コメント)

It depends on what state you're in. In CA shooting a thief in the back will 100% get you jailed and sued. In Texas its totally okay to shoot someone as they flee with your property I believe.

[–]marino1310 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

I think thats only on your property. If they are fleeing you can attack them but you cant shoot them unless they are on your property I think.

[–]NotA_Sheep 0ポイント1ポイント  (1子コメント)

I've heard that posing a danger to other people can justify it. If the purse snatcher drove off recklessly towards of crowd of babies then it might be okay.

[–]MistingFidgets 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

But then you could be shooting towards a crowd of babies depending on the angles. So make sure those babies are also committing felonies as well.

[–]pitchingataint 1ポイント2ポイント  (4子コメント)

That's why you shoot them in the butt. That way it won't be murder but it'll sure as shit be hard to sit for a while.

[–]cessage 1ポイント2ポイント  (3子コメント)

Dead men can't sue you

[–]pitchingataint 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Why would they? They have two butt holes now!

[–]addakorn 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Their estate can though

[–]zpridgen75 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

If you are shot under the basis of the castle doctrine you can't sue anyone. If you are injured or killed while committing a crime neither you nor your family have any legal right to sue.

[–]flammable71 6ポイント7ポイント  (1子コメント)

That rule used to apply to police, not regular citizens. All states that I am aware of have repealed it.

[–]Seicair 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

Michigan has that law as of my last concealed carry class. The instructors strongly warned us that it might not hold up in court though.

[–]FeministChicksDigMe 23ポイント24ポイント  (5子コメント)

Wrong! Under U.S. law the fleeing felon rule was limited in 1985 to non-lethal force in most cases by Tennessee v. Garner, 471 U.S. 1. The justices held that deadly force "may not be used unless necessary to prevent the escape and the officer has probable cause to believe that the suspect poses a significant threat of death or serious bodily harm to the officer or others." (See I can copy from Wikipedia too.)

[–]wingchild 4ポイント5ポイント  (2子コメント)

Stepping out of Wikipedia for a goddamned minute, the "rule" also varies from state to state. There is no federal guidance on the "fleeing felon rule" and many states have nothing like that coded in law.

I'd recommend knowing your local laws before you shoot someone in flight. Or before you shoot somebody at all. Or just generally, so you know what's going on where you live, you know?

Where I'm at, I'm not allowed to shoot someone in flight. I can shoot to stop a felony being committed upon myself or someone else, and we've got a castle law doctrine that grants a lot of leeway to shootings in the home, or when threatened in a "place where we have no duty to retreat" etc etc, but there isn't any law in my state that lets me shoot someone fleeing a scene.

[–]Mister_Bloodvessel 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

http://www.cnn.com/2016/04/27/us/tulsa-deputy-manslaughter-trial/

[–]jpb225 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

There is no federal guidance on the "fleeing felon rule"

Actually, Tennessee v. Garner applies to every state. It's a SCOTUS ruling that established a constitutional limitation on use of force by the state. No state law can permit use of force in a way that violates that rule. Of course that's a floor, not ceiling, so a state can have more restrictive rules. In any case, it's irrelevant here, since it only applies to state actors, and not to private citizens.

[–]Seicair 1ポイント2ポイント  (1子コメント)

Is purse-snatching a felony though? Or just a misdemeanor?

[–]craker42 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

I think it depends on how much money is involved.

[–]kirial 0ポイント1ポイント  (4子コメント)

Thank you for your input, I was actually unaware of that. Morally however, I don't know how you can justify shooting a man in the back as they run if you no longer think they are a threat. Is a human life worth a wallet? Shoot them if they make you fear for your life, but if the danger is no longer present then you absolutely shouldn't, in my opinion.

[–]zmiaota -1ポイント0ポイント  (3子コメント)

I'm just of the opinion that someone who goes around stealing purses and wallets at knifepoint doesn't deserve to live.

[–]kirial 4ポイント5ポイント  (2子コメント)

I get what you're saying, anyone who does that is probably a waste of life who isn't going to be changing their ways anytime soon. But some people do change and end up being better people in the end. I used to work with an ex con, who did some seriously fucked up stuff before he got caught and went to jail, who is now a really hard worker and all around a good guy. He's the perfect example of a reformed man. Might not happen very often, but some people are capable of change and can end up being contributing members of society. It's not up to you or I to decide if the dude who stole your wallet is worthless. If he is a threat, by all means kill him. But if the encounter is over and he's running away, you do not need to, and it's my belief you should not do so just because you think the person doesn't deserve to live. Just because they are a scumbag now doesn't mean they can't change their ways. Just my two cents.

[–]brainmydamage 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Many would argue that it doesn't happen often because our penal system is more concerned with vengeance and punishment than rehabilitation and reform.

[–]Mister_Bloodvessel 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Bottom line is we aren't judge, jury, and executioner. There are enough self-righteous fools who would be happy to impose their idea of law or morality to be unnerving. If you are in immediate danger, defend yourself with force. But if the person is straight up fleeing, there is no cause for deadly force.