Stealing my generator...providing food and heat for my family ?

The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana

Member Benefits:

  • Fewer Ads!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • eldirector

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    10   0   0
    Apr 29, 2009
    14,677
    113
    Brownsburg, IN
    Thank you to those that had something helpful to add. (jd4320t, LEaSH, and shibumiseeker)

    The generator would have to be outside due to the exhaust. Assume it is chained to a large tree...they came with bolt cutters and a chainsaw.

    What I am hearing from some here is that it is ok to leave the safety the house to go outside to use deadly force to protecty property? Is it ok to do that in Indiana for something that is outside of your house yet on your property?

    Would it be percieved more acceptible given the fact that this is providing the electricity that the family needs to survive this hardship?
    Indiana "Use Of Force" laws:
    Indiana Code 35-41-3

    If your genset is close enough to the house to be providing power, it is most likely within your "curtiledge". You are within your rights to use deadly force to prevent or terminate the unlawful attack or entry onto your "curtiledge".

    Put your genset behind a fence, and therefor inside your yard, and the case becomes much clearer.

    I don't think the fact it is providing power during an emergency has any real legal bearing, but I could be wrong. A genset chained to a tree well away from the house is just property. You can use reasonable (but not deadly) force to protect your property.

    In reality: I wouldn't fault you one bit (especially if I was on your jury) for defending your family from thieves.
     

    youngda9

    Master
    Rating - 100%
    7   0   0
    Thank you shibumiseeker. I am no lawyer and I am trying to understand.

    The above law says 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"
    But then there is the caviat that says (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).

    But subsection A says you can use "reasonable force". And it says use "deadly force" to
    prevent serious bodily harm, etc.

    I am finding it confusing how it is written. I'm not sure if it says "deadly force" is "reasonable" to protact "property" where there is not a threat to serious bodily injury.
     

    ThrottleJockey

    Shooter
    Rating - 100%
    2   0   0
    Oct 14, 2009
    4,934
    38
    Between Greenwood and Martinsville
    Thank you shibumiseeker. I am no lawyer and I am trying to understand.

    The above law says 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"
    But then there is the caviat that says (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).

    But subsection A says you can use "reasonable force". And it says use "deadly force" to
    prevent serious bodily harm, etc.

    I am finding it confusing how it is written. I'm not sure if it says "deadly force" is "reasonable" to protact "property" where there is not a threat to serious bodily injury.
    Reasonable force becomes deadly force when they turn towards you and begin an approach/charge. IMO. Or since it is just you against TWO BIG THUGS committing a felony, wouldn't killing them be reasonable? Honestly I don't care what is defined as reasonable or deadly. In the op situation where help is only days away, I will use my gun for the same reason I bought it. To kill those that threaten the well being of me and my family.
     

    shibumiseeker

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    52   0   0
    Nov 11, 2009
    10,759
    113
    near Bedford on a whole lot of land.
    Thank you shibumiseeker. I am no lawyer and I am trying to understand.

    The above law says 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"
    But then there is the caviat that says (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).
    But subsection A says you can use "reasonable force". And it says use "deadly force" to
    prevent serious bodily harm, etc.

    I am finding it confusing how it is written. I'm not sure if it says "deadly force" is "reasonable" to protact "property" where there is not a threat to serious bodily injury.

    Reread the bit I wrote at the bottom of that post. Two big burly guys present a threat of serious bodily injury, and if they choose to escalate the force involved your right to defend yourself AND your property increases.

    If you just went out and shot them while they were trying to steal your generator you'd be in a less tenable situation, but you STILL might not get prosecuted, or you might. You are fully legally allowed to stop someone from trying to steal your stuff. Period.

    The problem is you want a black and white answer and the law is not black and white, nor is the legal system. You can have the exact same scenario in one jurisdiction and get a medal for giving scum what they deserve, and the next county over you could spend 20 years behind bars for the exact same actions.

    In this case the law is more in your favor, but there is no guarantee. I've given you as good an answer as I can, if you want more than that I'm out of it.
     

    youngda9

    Master
    Rating - 100%
    7   0   0
    Reasonable force becomes deadly force when they turn towards you and begin an approach/charge. IMO. Or since it is just you against TWO BIG THUGS committing a felony, wouldn't killing them be reasonable?
    Yes, but as I saw it...I would have been initiating & escilating the confrontation. I came out of the safety of my house to stop this.

    I wasn't sure how to interpret the law WRT deadly force on your property since I'm not sure that is covered under "dwelling, curtilage, or occupied motor vehicle"

    The law seemed to state "reasonable force" WRT property.
     
    Last edited:

    youngda9

    Master
    Rating - 100%
    7   0   0
    Reread the bit I wrote at the bottom of that post. Two big burly guys present a threat of serious bodily injury, and if they choose to escalate the force involved your right to defend yourself AND your property increases.
    So you don't view leaving the safety of my home, with a firearm, to confront 2 BGs as "escalate(ing) the force involved" on my part?

    They only presented a threat to my physical safety upon me approaching them, thus escilating the situation to a possible life threatening encounter.

    Calling the cops and sitting tight is not an option here since their is no travel on the roads.
     

    Jack Ryan

    Shooter
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Nov 2, 2008
    5,864
    36
    So it is OK to use deadly force for stealing property from me? This is what I'm hearing?

    It seems like I'm getting a lot of sarcasm and not any honest replys...dissapointed.


    You should probably bookmark this in your favorites so you can link the judge directly to this thread at the trial.:dunno:
     

    youngda9

    Master
    Rating - 100%
    7   0   0
    What you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.

    Wow, Jack... two posts now, #15 and #29, you've shown us all your better side, while providing absolutely nothing helpful...perhaps it's just the postwhore in you that can't be controlled.
     

    Bond 281

    Sharpshooter
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jan 4, 2011
    590
    16
    Broomfield, CO
    So you don't view leaving the safety of my home, with a firearm, to confront 2 BGs as "escalate(ing) the force involved" on my part?

    They only presented a threat to my physical safety upon me approaching them, thus escilating the situation to a possible life threatening encounter.

    Calling the cops and sitting tight is not an option here since their is no travel on the roads.

    Personally I would view you leaving to confront them with a firearm as reasonable force, especially given the scenario. As I read it, reasonable force in defending property is perfectly legitimate. If in the course of using reasonable force the thieves gave you cause to use deadly force, I think the blame would be upon them. I don't think hardly any jury in the state would convict you. I personally would vote not guilty if you shot them in the back as they ran off.
     

    jeremy

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    7   0   0
    Feb 18, 2008
    16,482
    36
    Fiddler's Green
    2 large men come and try to steal the generator. This generator is providing the above things for the dad and his family (small children). The father, armed, approaches the men.

    If he allows them to get away with the generator then the family might go hungry or be without heat for who knows how long in the 10 below weather. There will be suffering, much of it...not sure about death because it is uncertain when power will be back on and when the roads will be cleared.

    What can he legally do?

    If you can out pace the German Shepherds while carrying it off...

    You can have the dang thing... ;)
     

    youngda9

    Master
    Rating - 100%
    7   0   0
    If you can out pace the German Shepherds while carrying it off...

    You can have the dang thing... ;)

    That is funny...but German Shepherds can also be perceived as "assault with a deadly weapon" if the owner were to turn them loose on the robbers...essentially the same scenario as with a firearm. But if they just happened to be roaming the yard and gnawed on the bad guys that would be a different story :yesway:
     

    ThrottleJockey

    Shooter
    Rating - 100%
    2   0   0
    Oct 14, 2009
    4,934
    38
    Between Greenwood and Martinsville
    IMO, reasonable force sometimes IS deadly force. I may face prosecution for my actions in that situation but my defense attorney will be well paid to make any legal argument I may need in court. IMO if deadly force is used it should be just that and dead men don't talk. If someone is charging you when you left the safety of your home to investigate trespassers or noises and you feel in fear for your life then KILL THEM. I cannot condone lying but I'm just saying......."I was attacked by two thugs, I was in fear for my life. I shot them." 'nuff said?
     

    JRPLANE

    Marksman
    Rating - 100%
    14   0   0
    Jan 8, 2009
    182
    18
    Hagerstown, Indiana
    force

    confront them, with the rest of the family armed and ready at the windows, the would be thieves will be out numbered by many. Disable thier car and make them wait for the cops in the cold!
     

    moischmoe

    Sharpshooter
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Apr 14, 2010
    442
    16
    Noble County, IN
    IC 35-41-3-2
    Use of force to protect person or property
    Sec. 2.
    (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.

    Subsection (b) states a person can use deadly force to terminate the other person's unlawful entry of the person's curtilage.

    In United States v. Dunn, the Supreme Court identified four factors as critical when assessing the limits of curtilage: "the proximity of the area claimed to be curtilage to the home, whether the area is included within an enclosure surrounding the home, the nature of the uses to which the area is put, and the steps taken by the resident to protect the area from observation by people passing by."

    I believe curtilage needs to be a fenced in area (possibly requiring a privacy fence), that is close to the house, and is used by the owner as an outdoor extension of their house. A patio would be a good example. It's like another room of your house, except it's outside. It's a place were you can sit, cook, eat, or relax, just like you would do inside your house.

    Just my :twocents:. I'm not a lawyer, nor have I stayed at a Holiday Inn.
     

    jedi

    Da PinkFather
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    51   0   0
    Oct 27, 2008
    37,887
    113
    NWI, North of US-30
    No, No, No......
    A generators exhaust is much hotter that a dryer.
    You need twin walled pipe at the least.
    Don't do something foolish.
    Keep it outside.

    Listen to this boys & girls! Generators need to stay OUTDOORS period.

    What you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.

    Wow, Jack... two posts now, #15 and #29, you've shown us all your better side, while providing absolutely nothing helpful...perhaps it's just the postwhore in you that can't be controlled.


    Jack is just very, very salty as of late. There is an "ignore" option on INGO if you need to use it.


    Subsection (b) states a person can use deadly force to terminate the other person's unlawful entry of the person's curtilage.



    I believe curtilage needs to be a fenced in area (possibly requiring a privacy fence), that is close to the house, and is used by the owner as an outdoor extension of their house. A patio would be a good example. It's like another room of your house, except it's outside. It's a place were you can sit, cook, eat, or relax, just like you would do inside your house.

    Just my :twocents:. I'm not a lawyer, nor have I stayed at a Holiday Inn.


    You got that just about right. Sadly curtilage has not been very well defined in Indiana Law or Indiana court cases. The general idea is it's the area outside of your home that use use and is some-what private. Patio right outside you backdoor is considered curtilage MORE than the bench you have out on the front lawn near the sidewalk.
     

    jeremy

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    7   0   0
    Feb 18, 2008
    16,482
    36
    Fiddler's Green
    That is funny...but German Shepherds can also be perceived as "assault with a deadly weapon" if the owner were to turn them loose on the robbers...essentially the same scenario as with a firearm. But if they just happened to be roaming the yard and gnawed on the bad guys that would be a different story :yesway:

    Depends on the Training the Dogs have...

    My outside dogs are taught to maintain their Territory...
    The inside dogs are actually trained just a little bit more...

    I think getting Dog Bitten for stealing a generator is fair...
     
    Top Bottom