Homeowner steals burglar's van as they try to rob his house

[MR_MADHATTER]

Every state is different when it comes to self defense.
Most do require that you attempt to flee if you have the means and ability to do so. You do not have to flee if you are in your own home or on your own property. Most states use the reasonable man theory of self defense. Would a reasonable man feel he was in fear for his life in the same situation. And remember a 6'5" 225 lbs man is going to be different than a 5'0" 98 lb woman. Also, defense means defense. If you subdue the assailant that is it. If you continue you then become the aggressor and can be charged with assault. For example if you take a knife away from your attacker and he stops or attempts to flee then you must stop. If you then chase him down and stab him you will go to jail for attempted murder or murder.
These are just general and each state is different. It would not hurt you to look up your states laws regarding self defense and commit them to memory.
Apache

That's why I like Texas law so much. I think it should be the standard. All you have to remember are the words "I was in fear for my life", or if it's dark, there are no questions asked. Just shoot the frakker in the head and don't worry about it.

Deadly Force in Defense of Person

"A person is justified in using deadly force against another if he would be justified in using force under Section 9.31 of the statute when and to the degree he reasonable believes that deadly force is immediately necessary to protect himself against the other's use or attempted use of unlawful deadly force, if a reasonable person in the same situation would have not retreated. The use of deadly force is also justified to prevent the other's imminent commission of aggravated kidnapping, murder, rape or robbery."

Defense of Another Person

"A person is justified in using deadly force against an attacker to protect another person if he would be justified to use it to protect himself against an unlawful attack and he reasonably believes his intervention is immediately necessary to protect the other person from serious injury or death."

Deadly Force to Protect Property

"A person is justified in using deadly force against another to protect his property to the degree he reasonably believes the force is immediately necessary to prevent the other's imminent commission of arson, burglary, robbery, theft during the nighttime or criminal mischief during the nighttime, and he reasonably believes that the property cannot be protected by any other means."
"A person is justified in using deadly force against another to pervent the other who is fleeing after committing burglary, robbery, or theft during the nighttime, from escaping with the property and he reasonable believes that the property cannot be recovered by any other means; or, the use of force other than deadly force to protect or recover the property would expose him or another to a substantial risk of death or serious bodily injury. (Nighttime is defined as the period 30 minutes after sunset until 30 minutes before sunrise.)"

Protection of the Property of Others

"A person is justified in using force or deadly force against another to protect the property of a third person if he reasonably believes he would be justified to use similar force to protect his own property, and he reasonably believes that there existed an attempt or actual commission of the crime of theft or criminal mischief." "Also, a person is justified in using force or deadly force if he reasonably believes that the third person has requested his protection of property; or he has a legal duty to protect the property; or the third person whose property he is protecting is his spouse, parent or child."

Reasonable Belief

"It is not necessary that there should be actual danger, as a person has the right to defend his life and person from apparent danger as fully and to the same extent as he would have were the danger real, as it reasonably appeared to him from his standpoint at the time." "In fact, Sec 9.31(a) [of the Penal Code] expressly provides that a person is justified in using deadly force against another when and to the degree he reasonably believes the force is immediately necessary."

[MR_MADHATTER]

Wow, I just read the California law concerning self defence. You basically don't have a right to self defence unless you are a criminal commiting a crime and you think the person you are robbing, raping, or assaulting is gonna hurt you back. Then you can kill them and they will let it go as self defence. Isn't that wonderful? They are planing to make a law that says you must have special "gun liability insurance" if you own a gun. It will pay $1,000,000 to a crook if you shoot them in self defence.

Over my dead body!!!! Literally!!


I'll have to put up a separate post about this B.S.

[{CLR} Major.Massacre]

Wow, I just read the California law concerning self defence. You basically don't have a right to self defence unless you are a criminal commiting a crime and you think the person you are robbing, raping, or assaulting is gonna hurt you back. Then you can kill them and they will let it go as self defence. Isn't that wonderful? They are planing to make a law that says you must have special "gun liability insurance" if you own a gun. It will pay $1,000,000 to a crook if you shoot them in self defence.

Over my dead body!!!! Literally!!


I'll have to put up a separate post about this B.S.

You should watch the movie "Felon" scary stuff.