Can You Shoot Him?

[Delmar]

How about shooting a tire out of the SUV? Kind of hard to flee real fast, in a getaway car, with a flat tire.

[HCAman]

Originally Posted by Delmar

How about shooting a tire out of the SUV? Kind of hard to flee real fast, in a getaway car, with a flat tire.

I was going to ask this but Delmar already did, Is this legal?

[Shay]

Originally Posted by Delmar

How about shooting a tire out of the SUV? Kind of hard to flee real fast, in a getaway car, with a flat tire.

What are the benefits and what are the risks?

Even if everything goes perfectly, all you have done is diminished their ability to flee. You have done nothing to diminish their ability to fight.

[Delmar]

Originally Posted by Shay

What are the benefits and what are the risks?

Even if everything goes perfectly, all you have done is diminished their ability to flee. You have done nothing to diminish their ability to fight.

If I disable his vehicle, I have diminished his ability to get away with my property! That really is the point, isn't it? And if he wants to fight, I still have seven rounds in my pistol.

[VUPDblue]

Originally Posted by Delmar

If I disable his vehicle, I have diminished his ability to get away with my property! That really is the point, isn't it? And if he wants to fight, I still have seven rounds in my pistol.

If you point the pistol in his general direction and fire a shot, you've used deadly force. Wether or not you hit him is irrelevant. At the very least you could/should be charged with reckless endangerment or one of the ordinances that prohibit discharging a firearm.

[Delmar]

Originally Posted by VUPDblue

If you point the pistol in his general direction and fire a shot, you've used deadly force. Wether or not you hit him is irrelevant. At the very least you could/should be charged with reckless endangerment or one of the ordinances that prohibit discharging a firearm.

So you are saying that discharging my weapon in such a situation is a crime, unless I am physically threatened? Is grabbing a person to prevent him from taking my stuff OK, or could I be charged with assault?

[critter592]

Since I don't have enough posts to PM yet GL what is the website from you sig line? Tactical Firearms Training, LLC. I can't seem to find it with a Google search. So many other websites come up with similar key words.

[LPMan59]

i would say youre in trouble.

1) the law says you can use deadly force to repel an attack on your occupied vehicle. the car was empty and you were not in fear of death or GBH.
2) shooting in the leg is legally no different than shooting in the chest in that both are considered deadly force. see #1
3) you talked to the cops. bad idea.

better to have eaten some sour grapes and given the cops the license plate number and descriptions of the perps.

[finity]

Yes, you will have legal problems...according to the letter of the law. OTOH, it is always up to the prosecuting attorney whether to file charges. You may get lucky.

In IN you can't use deadly force to protect property.

You can use REASONABLE force but not deadly force. Shooting at someone, whether you "aimed for the calf" or COM, is using deadly force.

OTOH, if you confront them with reasonable force & they then escalate the encounter to imminent threats of SBI or death, then you can use deadly force at that time since you are now using deadly force to protect YOURSELF not your PROPERTY.

IC 35-41-3-2
Use of force to protect person or property
Sec. 2. (a) A person is justified in using reasonable force against another person to protect the person or a third person from what the person reasonably believes to be the imminent use of unlawful force. However, a person:
(1) is justified in using deadly force; and
(2) does not have a duty to retreat;
if the person reasonably believes that that force is necessary to prevent serious bodily injury to the person or a third person or the commission of a forcible felony. No person in this state shall be placed in legal jeopardy of any kind whatsoever for protecting the person or a third person by reasonable means necessary.
(b) A person:
(1) is justified in using reasonable force, including deadly force, against another person; and
(2) does not have a duty to retreat;
if the person reasonably believes that the force is necessary to prevent or terminate the other person's unlawful entry of or attack on the person's dwelling, curtilage, or occupied motor vehicle.
(c) With respect to property other than a dwelling, curtilage, or an occupied motor vehicle, a person is justified in using reasonable force against another person if the person reasonably believes that the force is necessary to immediately prevent or terminate the other person's trespass on or criminal interference with property lawfully in the person's possession, lawfully in possession of a member of the person's immediate family, or belonging to a person whose property the person has authority to protect. However, a person:
(1) is justified in using deadly force; and
(2) does not have a duty to retreat;
only if that force is justified under subsection (a).

[40calPUNISHER]

I would say shooting him in the leg is a no-no.

Q: What if instead of shooting him, you attempt a citizens arrest? If he struggles and starts to fight back (resists arrest), could you shoot him then?