legal use of deadly force

[fuellube3]

I have heard lethal force is permitted in the event you are in fear for your life or someone else, but what about property is it legal to shoot some one who is actively destroying your personal property, or harming a pet (i'm pretty sure they're considered property)

[stacyr07r]

no u can't kill someone destroying your property unless if he is doing it such a way that your life is already in danger.

[shawtypimpin63]

Deadly force can only be used if your life is in emanate danger, life threatening. If he is stealing in your home you can confront him but you can't kill him, unless he comes after you and your life is threatened~

[lucmas]

If he is stealing in your home you can confront him but you can't kill him, unless he comes after you and your life is threatened~

[joshhaley907]

if someone is in my house stealing **** i can use deadly force especially if they infact are bigger than you. this law got ****ed up when a guy broke into someones house cause he got in a car wreck just down the street and his wife was in need of medical assistance and the guy only wnated to use the phone to call 911 the owner came home found the guy in the house with the door kicked in grabbed his side arm and shot the man in the head.

if the guy is bigger than u and u dont know what he/she is doing im pretty sure ud feel indangerd for your life.

[james49]

if someone brakes into your home belive me you are threatened.....

[joshhaley907]

Only if you live in mountain view. or muldoon

[cahoonzie]

Sorry, lethal force is NOT permissible in the event another is destroying or stealing your PERSONAL property. Sorry to blow other's perceptions but recent decisions seem to indicate that even an invasion of your home with the entent to commit larceny is not enough to justify lethal self defense.

The perpetrator MUST imminently or actually commit a dangerous felony (rape your wife) within your home before you are justified in using lethal force in protecting your 'CASTLE". What a shame.

[scott715us]

Sorry, lethal force is NOT permissible in the event another is destroying or stealing your PERSONAL property. Sorry to blow other's perceptions but recent decisions seem to indicate that even an invasion of your home with the entent to commit larceny is not enough to justify lethal self defense.

The perpetrator MUST imminently or actually commit a dangerous felony (rape your wife) within your home before you are justified in using lethal force in protecting your 'CASTLE". What a shame.

An automatic presumption of serious injury/death is assumed under TN's self-defense "Castle Doctrine" law. I do not need to see him committing a felony or even observe a weapon to use lethal force under our self-defense law involving my home. Although I partially agree about the use of deadly force involving property, when it comes to the home, I'm not aware of many states who are not similar to Tennessee's. Can you cite an example?

[cahoonzie]

Not true. Deadly force may be used only where the user believes that the intruder (of his/her home "castle) is trying to commit a felony, and ALSWO believes either that the intruder has employed or threatened th use of DEADLY FORCE, or that the dwelling's inhabitants will be exposed to SUBSTANTIAL DANGER OF SERIOUS BODILY HARM. Thus where a homeowner has no reasson to believe that a burglar is armed, or thretens bodily harm to the inhabitants, he is not allowed to shoot.

That is, unless the intruder is in the act of raping or committing some other dangerous felony, you may not use your gun (use deadly force). I know this sounds "crazy" but it is the wording of the Model Penal Code which is now adopted by just about every state.

Here is your Cite: M.P.C. Sect. 3.06(3)(d)(ii).

[scott715us]

Not true. Deadly force may be used only where the user believes that the intruder (of his/her home "castle) is trying to commit a felony, and ALSWO believes either that the intruder has employed or threatened th use of DEADLY FORCE, or that the dwelling's inhabitants will be exposed to SUBSTANTIAL DANGER OF SERIOUS BODILY HARM. Thus where a homeowner has no reasson to believe that a burglar is armed, or thretens bodily harm to the inhabitants, he is not allowed to shoot.

That is, unless the intruder is in the act of raping or committing some other dangerous felony, you may not use your gun (use deadly force). I know this sounds "crazy" but it is the wording of the Model Penal Code which is now adopted by just about every state.

Here is your Cite: M.P.C. Sect. 3.06(3)(d)(ii).

It is NOT true for all states. Like I said in my last post, under TN law, there is a PRESUMPTION of serious bodily injury or death when the person your using the deadly force against forcibly enters a residence, business, or vehicle...TN Code Annotated 39-11-611....

(b) (1) Notwithstanding § 39-17-1322, a person who is not engaged in unlawful activity and is in a place where the person has a right to be has no duty to retreat before threatening or using force against another person when and to the degree the person reasonably believes the force is immediately necessary to protect against the other's use or attempted use of unlawful force.

(2) Notwithstanding § 39-17-1322, a person who is not engaged in unlawful activity and is in a place where the person has a right to be has no duty to retreat before threatening or using force intended or likely to cause death or serious bodily injury, if:

(A) The person has a reasonable belief that there is an imminent danger of death or serious bodily injury;

(B) The danger creating the belief of imminent death or serious bodily injury is real, or honestly believed to be real at the time; and

(C) The belief of danger is founded upon reasonable grounds.

(c) Any person using force intended or likely to cause death or serious bodily injury within a residence, business, dwelling or vehicle is presumed to have held a reasonable belief of imminent death or serious bodily injury to self, family, a member of the household or a person visiting as an invited guest, when that force is used against another person, who unlawfully and forcibly enters or has unlawfully and forcibly entered the residence, business, dwelling or vehicle, and the person using defensive force knew or had reason to believe that an unlawful and forcible entry occurred.

Your statement DOES NOT apply to all states.

[cahoonzie]

Scott: Your points are well taken as to TN. But, I must question the wording"and the person using defensive force knew or had reason to believe that an unlawful and forcible entry occurred". Sounds to me like this TN Statute is strictly using the COMMON LAW definition of "defense of one's castle". Now, I happen to agree with this interpretation of use of deadly force. I am just saying that most all states have adopted the MPC. Thank goodness, TN has not! Great post Scott.

[chengnuo]

no u can't kill someone destroying your property unless if he is doing it such a way that your life is already in danger.

Cheap WOW Gold eu
Buy Cheap WOW Gold eu

[sharone]

If there is some guy in my apartment I'm not going to wait and see if he only wants to wreck my property. I'll do what is necessary to protect myself since presumably I couldn't outrun them. My pet would be considered 'defense of others' as opposed to property as far as using lethal force but it wouldn't come to that because she can run faster and hide in more places than I can.

[Acrips]

What if the person damaging my property is wounded or dead in the course of my trying to stop that person? Because when i try to stop that person there will surely be a collision between us.

Regards,
Arcrips
Get latest updates about
Criminal Law Activity from
Home