When liberal DAs won't prosecute "low level" crimes like shoplifting, expect those crimes to increase. Maybe it is a "make work" thing with them, given that some of their "big money" sponsors profit in civil disruption.
You don't know the laws in your state, do you? And most folks would not take a life to protect an object. There are exceptions, but what people say they "would do" is not always what they actually do. I wouldn't want to live with the aftermath of having done such a thing.
Here is what our State Law says (Colorado): In Colorado, this scenario would likely fall under our statutes governing the use of force in defense of premises and also property, and that can be found under the Colorado Revised Statutes. In such a case, one may use the degree of physical force reasonably necessary to stop the trespass or prevent a theft or criminal tampering with property, but may use deadly physical force only in self-defense, as covered by the self-defense statute; that is, when necessary to defend against death, serious bodily injury, or a serious crime against the person.
Not necessarily! But, some people could interrupt this law one way, while others could interrupt it a different way. The law doesn't state "no deadly force can be used". Note the words "doesn't say". So..........
My 1/2 brother has told me, and would tell anyone.........."if someone breaks into my home, I will shoot to kill, no matter what the law states".
Very true, John, BUT, for his age (76), I would definitely consider him "macho". Now, whether he carries or not, I don't know. But, would he do something if he seen a shoplifter leave a store without paying? I truly believe he would, gun or no gun. IOW, as he has told me numerous times, "I'm not afraid to die".
Not to my 1/2 brother, whether he's at home or in a store. Believe me, John, I know my 1/2 brother and, myself, I'm not anything like him.
Maybe you ought to reread what you said in that post. necessary to defend against death, serious bodily injury, or a serious crime against the person.
I only jumped in this thread because (1) I cannot tolerate others being misinformed of the laws governing the use of deadly force, and (2) I cannot tolerate others being misinformed over the demeanor of gun owners. Those who are curious should look up the statutes in their state. Regarding taking another human life, most police officers who are forced to do so in the line of duty never get over it, even when 100% "justified" while protecting their own lives or the lives of the innocent. No one wants to be in that position. It's great to chest-thump in the theoretical, but it's only the small minority, and it's only for show. Regarding your effort to enforce consistency...there are moving targets even the best of marksmen cannot hit.
Long as they can get away with it they will do it. Americans don't stand up for thei LEO's or their laws so what do we expecct? Also we do need more programs for LEO's to deal with the stress of living in such a crazy times. I hear that so many cops are getting out of the profession that they are hiring just about anyone including some felons. Hope that was fake news.
Even if it were legal (which thankfully, it is not) shooting a thief coming out of Lowes, Walmart, or any large store is a very unsafe idea, period. There are always a lot of people around who could be hurt or killed if shooting starts. The thief might also have a weapon, and if someone shoots at him, then he would be shooting back, and innocent bystanders would very likely be hit and possibly killed. Stopping someone from stealing a television is NOT worth risking someone’s life, under any circumstances. Even the police will usually pursue the criminal and try to arrest him at a safer place for the public than in a large and busy store parking lot.
I think it was your home town (Atlanta) that started putting felons on the police force well over a decade ago.