There's a Sheriff in FL who says if you shoot and kill someone who breaks into your house there's a zero percent chance that person will re-offend. His department even offers training to make you a more effective marksman. 😁
@@damham5689 Florida not only has a castle doctrine law but it also has stand your ground laws, the sheriff isn’t making anything up, you shoot and kill someone in your house in Florida you won’t face punishment, but if you live in a oppressive state that doesn’t believe in self defense you could stupidly face charges for shooting someone in your own house. If you live in a oppressive state just don’t shoot them in the back, as long as they are facing you just kill them and pretend they attacked you, a dead man can’t give his side of the story.
Under Idaho's Castle Doctrine, updated and strengthened in 2018, you have the right not only to defend your house with lethal force, but also your yard, your place of business, and even your car. Sep 8, 2020
When it came to my tough old rancher father-in-law, if you don't like him shooting your dog, ya might have tried teaching them to not harass livestock. One time after he shoot a guy's dog and this idiot was throwing a fit, he calmly aimed his Winchester and told him to drive away or he would end up just like his dog. I reckon it wasn't a bluff.
Exactly right, if I must I will put a weapon of some kind in there hand.. how ever, if the dog is doing some kind of damage to property then there is nothing to be done... If you are a good pet owner and be out with your pet then you have nothing to worry about...
@@jacobhess4547 you saying it now, but if you actually ho to prison you’re gonna be like f that dog and you will regret it. Your dog isn’t worth more than you even your dog would say it if he could
Sarcasm/joke alert: My late grandad would say "if you shoot him on your porch, you better drag him inside the house before calling the cops". This was a long time ago he said this, so it's just an illustration of how important castle doctrine is and how quickly it can become NOT castle doctrine.
Funny you mentioned that. Responding to a burglary, I once had a fellow officer make that same statement to a homeowner. Of course that was real bad advise by the officer.
I'm sorry we live in a time where we have to warn of a joke. .-. Could have said all that minus the first sentence and would have came out the same to me man. My dad used to say that too lol.
Lived out in the country years (and years) ago. Had the Sheriff jokingly(?) tell my mother if she shot someone "inside" the house, don't put plastic down first.
I love how the victims always have to walk the fine line as to whether or not they are in their legal right to defend their home or family, while the criminals are told to run away safely to do the same crap to another family the very next day or sooner.
What if, someone is stealing your vehicle in the middle of the boonies of Death Valley in the middle of summer, it's 115 degrees in the shade. The car has your water in it, cell phone, personal locator device, etc. You are 20 miles from the nearest building/house, etc. Now you are in jeopardy of death from dehydration. Could you use deadly force to prevent that car theft?
@@michaelsolis9891 I'd say it's a threat against your life, considering the situation, so yeah, I'd use force to stop my vehicle from being stolen... notice I didn't say "deadly" force.
There Are Some Crimes (Like Pedophilia) That Were Punishable By Death In The Middle Evil Times As Well. UNFORTUNATELY There Is Not D e a t h Penalty In The USA For People Like The Ones Mentioned Above, Because Our Society Has Become Evil (Godless) Over The Decades. ALL S e x Offenders Should Be Publicly E x e c u t e d The Same Ways They E x e c u t e d Pedophiles During Medieval Times. E x e c u t i o n That Were Used On Pedophiles During Medieval Times Are: 1) Impalement. 2) Sawing From The Crotch Down To The Head. 3) Castration (This Would Not Be T o r t u r o u s Enough Because They Would D i e Too Quickly). Other Ways To E x e c u t e A S e x Offender Would Be: 1) To Rip Out ALL Of Their Organs With A Meat Hook And The Claw Part Of A Claw Hammer While They Are Alive And Awake (Starting With The Organs That A Person Can Live Without The Longest Except Their Eyes). 2) Quartering Plus 1 (Tie A Rope To Each Leg And Arm And Tie A Rope To The Crotch Area Tie The Other Ends Of The Rope To Horses Or Vehicles). 3) B u r n Them Or B o i l Them Alive. 4) Starve Them To D e a t h. While The Blood Eagle Is My Favorite T o r t u r e Technique; I Would Not Be Good To Use It On A S e x Offender, Because They Would D i e Way Too Fast.
I might be anti-death penalty, but I am very pro-self defense and defense of others resulting in fatality. In my eyes, others includes animals, who tend to be of much better integrity than a lot of people out there. I don't give a crap what the law says, if I catch anyone trying to harm or steal my dogs (like the one guy said about cats, mine would be under the bed if anyone came in), I'd give a benefit of the doubt warning first and if nothing changed, I'll make good that m'fer. My animals were all rescues. I caught each one on the streets and I promised them a good home. I kept my word to each one and I'll face consequences to keep my word.
Texas is the most based state. Under Texas Penal Code Section 9.42 you may use deadly force to prevent burglary, robbery, and theft, including to prevent flight after committing these crimes (if you believe you cannot otherwise later recover the property). I believe this is the outlier the lawyer was referring to. I'm offended that other states value a criminal's life more than a law-abiding honest citizen's right to his hard-earned property.
@@tesstkohls7448 I was going to say that. I believe the logic is that at night time it is a lot harder to determine if the prep is armed or has an armed friend hiding in the shadows.
I will use deadly force if I am ever in a situation that I think requires it. And I won't be pondering what the legal ramifications might be or not be at that time.
Personally, I would only use deadly force if it meets the legal requirements. This means meeting the reasonable man standards. If your idea of "thinking it requires it" is not reasonable you 'will', not might, but 'will' go to prison. You must be in 'reasonable' and imminent fear of grave bodily harm or death, had literally no other options, and it was the last resort. You also cannot have initiated the confrontation and in many states have a duty to 1st retreat. If you will not be "pondering what the legal ramifications will be" then you must not care about doing life in prison. To each his own.
@@joedoe7839 OK, well you go ahead and try to stay between the legal lines in a critical situation with not a lot of time to think it over. And you may end up being completely in the right legally speaking but at the same time dead do to that 1 or 2 extra seconds. For me I certainly do not want to go to prison but I would prefer prison to coming out second best in a gun fight.
My only question on take away from this video is? If I can't use deadly force to protect my dog, then why should I ever be prosecuted as a cop killer if I were to stop a K9 unit from attacking me upon command? And no I'm not looking for a reason to do such a thing, just questioning what seems to be a double standard???? Awesome intel as always gentlemen.
yea thats kinda like last week i was at the beach and a cop on a side by side was giving people tickets for riding a side by side on the beach. double standard.
Probably, again, because people value their dogs as people. I'm unaware of what charges would be filed but I imagine it would be something like "Feloniously Destroying Government Property" or "Discharging Firearm in City Limits" or a combination of things. If you're shooting at a K-9 unit, you're shooting at an officer. That is to say, the dog is there to protect and serve the officer the same as his cruiser, vest, gun, etc. Regardless of the charges, you're in deep doo-doo if you shoot anywhere near an officer or their units.
In my state, intentional cruelty to animals is a Class C Felony . Federally, Pres. Trump signed a law making it a Felony at that level as well. My question is are these crimes legally considered to be violent crimes; because if they are then could deadly force in defense of said animal from intentional cruelty be considered justified?
it wasnt trump that did that u know...it was obama...all trump did was increase the time u spend in jail/prison for such a thing. obama made the law or he was the one who proposed the law and got it passed when he was president.
I think a couple of decades back we had an incident (in CO) ruled as lawful self defense after a guy shot someone off of his porch, through his door after he'd been chased into his own house and the would-be assailant made an observable effort to breach the front entrance.
Texas! We are that state... SUBCHAPTER D. PROTECTION OF PROPERTY Sec. 9.41. PROTECTION OF ONE'S OWN PROPERTY. (a) A person in lawful possession of land or tangible, movable property is justified in using force against another when and to the degree the actor reasonably believes the force is immediately necessary to prevent or terminate the other's trespass on the land or unlawful interference with the property. (b) A person unlawfully dispossessed of land or tangible, movable property by another is justified in using force against the other when and to the degree the actor reasonably believes the force is immediately necessary to reenter the land or recover the property if the actor uses the force immediately or in fresh pursuit after the dispossession and: (1) the actor reasonably believes the other had no claim of right when he dispossessed the actor; or (2) the other accomplished the dispossession by using force, threat, or fraud against the actor. Acts 1973, 63rd Leg., p. 883, ch. 399, Sec. 1, eff. Jan. 1, 1974. Amended by Acts 1993, 73rd Leg., ch. 900, Sec. 1.01, eff. Sept. 1, 1994. Sec. 9.42. DEADLY FORCE TO PROTECT PROPERTY. A person is justified in using deadly force against another to protect land or tangible, movable property: (1) if he would be justified in using force against the other under Section 9.41; and (2) when and to the degree he reasonably believes the deadly force is immediately necessary: (A) to prevent the other's imminent commission of arson, burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, theft during the nighttime, or criminal mischief during the nighttime; or (B) to prevent the other who is fleeing immediately after committing burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, or theft during the nighttime from escaping with the property; and (3) he reasonably believes that: (A) the land or property cannot be protected or recovered by any other means; or (B) the use of force other than deadly force to protect or recover the land or property would expose the actor or another to a substantial risk of death or serious bodily injury.
I asked an experienced defense lawyer that works for USCCA about the perimeters of self-defense in front and outside of my home in Southern CA. He said all the way to the sidewalk. So I believe I'm legally allowed to conceal carry from inside my home to my backyard and driveway, as well as front yard.
I think people are asking the question "When is it okay to shoot someone" is because of the double standard and holes our justice system and laws have. They're wanting to make sure they have the best chance possible in the aftermath of pulling the trigger. So yes, I say ask that question because it is going to help us have that best chance because I, as a law abiding citizen, have to follow a set of rules. While the criminal, will not.
This is weird So everything I worked for is for criminals And my life is worthless if to a criminal Criminals have all the rights Law abiding citizens have no rights
The whole system is corrupt and needs a complete overhaul. Criminals have ZERO rights. They gave them up when they decided to be criminals. Screw the "law"!
I want to know if it’s legal in most states to present a firearm (say at the low ready) if you catch someone breaking into your car or trying to steal your dog or other property? It doesn’t seem fair that I should have to physically engage with someone to try to prevent them from stealing something from me. They may have a weapon and I could get killed before I even have a chance to react if I don’t have a weapon at the ready.
I can tell you as per the state of Florida bc I didn’t draw my firearm after a neighbor drew his that apparently if you’re on your own property and you don’t aim the weapon at someone you can do whatever you want with it
if you choose to use pepper spray I highly recommend you look into bear spray it is a much more concentrated form of pepper spray, some people are not affected by pepper spray and to my knowledge because bear spray is much stronger those same people will be affected.
Knowledge is always needed.. some people think they superman with a pistol, they have no business carrying.. a gun should be carry for defense not offense! (My grammar its terrible, i know)
You mention the use of "non-deadly" force. Could you go over various forms of this? Could air guns that fire pepper pellets or mace be consider non-deadly force?
Also, be careful - "proper" air guns like pellet or BB guns likely will count as deadly force in court already, and even airsoft may if it appeared like a real firearm. I guess you can legally shoot the intruder with a Nerf gun, but it may increase your own danger.
I carry a pocket size can of pepper spray, Might switch to gel. Also carry "Other" items. I like to have options before jumping right to pulling a weapon on some one.
Good discussion. Strangely enough I enjoy your videos most when you are giving the advice; once you bring in the attorneys I have to re-analyze what I think I heard. Funny…probably ought to invent a magnum-powered, taser round for the double barreled shot gun. Seems more reasonable to elevate the capability of non-lethal force just a tad bit for these scenarios.
I'm curious what their answer would be if the animal was a medical necessity. My understanding is that service animals are seen as an extension of yourself. Someone trying to harm the dog would then be seen as an attack on you, in that interpretation. Would love to know the answer on that one.
If they are trying to get away, let them get away. That’s the problem… bad people getting away with it only to try again and again. Why are the criminals a protected class and their victims the targets for prosecutors???
@@mrchildgrownold3852 I’m 33 now back when I was 15 it’s summer break living in south Florida and I’ve just gotten back from a trip with my father from New Jersey. My parents are divorced so my dads living elsewhere. I’m dropped off exhausted from the trip it’s 4 in the morning I don’t hear the glass shattering or the door kicked in. I wake up to my mother screams I rush out and into the hallway and see four or five dark silhouettes over my mothers now muffled screams. I do as any young boy would do…I act without thinking and charge straight into them and I start swinging still exhausted and now dazed from just waking a teen against four or five grown men hardened criminals what do you think the outcome was? It’s not good…
I have a disability and copd, noway I can run after the person that steals my dog, let alone fight. So am I suppose to watch my dog, my best friend get stolen just to get abused by someone?
What I'm getting out of this video is you can use reasonable force to protect your property, car, or pet dog. However if the bad person (male or female) then decides to attack you with a weapon or becomes a deadly threat to you. Then and only then you can use deadly force. Scenario. Some shitard is grabbed fluffy or is stealing your car or stuff from the car you can yell at them and pull them out of the car with your hands or knock them on their butt and if they attack you with a weapon then you can protect your self. And if they run away just curse at them and hurl insults about their mothers but don't shoot them. Right
Please review Texas state law on Property defense as the common interpretation is that you can shoot in property defense. I was mostly interested in reading this law during the summer riots and was concerned about arson/attempted arson of my home.
What do you do if someone approaches your vehicle in a threatening manner but you don’t see weapon? I only ask because this happened to me earlier today
My pet is my family and I will absolutely protect them to the best of my ability at all times. I don't consider a dog and a car to be anywhere near the same ballfield.
Seems like a good idea to keep a less-than-lethal form of force like pepper spray/gel and of course verbal commands. I’d have my firearm, a leather sap(impact weapon) and pepper gel to discourage them from continuing.
I am a company otr truck driver. I carry a loaded handgun for protection. I drive most of the 48 states. I know this is against company policy. But, I can always get another job. If I'm forced to use it to stop an attacker. Does the castle doctrin laws apply to me? If I'm in a gun unfriendly state. Will I get a weapons charge?
In WA state himicide is justifiable "In the actual resistance of an attempt to commit a felony upon the slayer, in his or her presence, or upon or in a dwelling, or other place of abode, in which he or she is." RCW 9A.16.050 Given the "or" logic only one of these conditions must be true, would stealing a car (a felony) not qualify under the commiting a felony "in his or her presence" part?
I bet this is a popular question 😂 I hope every gun owner can become familiar with this though. It’s pretty important stuff! 5:34 - most important part to learn!
There seems to be a common answer to all of these questions, being roughly "There is no situation where you CAN shoot someone, but there are situations where you HAVE to shoot someone, and the law recognizes that"
@@viiltelijamurhaaja7225 im not going to explore other options that might get me maimed or killed. I can safely dispatch said person with a few rounds and not be in any danger.
Please define “great bodily harm”. Every time you discuss these topics you always say “or great bodily harm” but then stress all of your answers in terms of “fear of imminent death. So, I’m disabled and can’t run away, a guy decides something I’ve said or looked at “wrong” and begins to approach me, he is unarmed but obviously intends to beat me, and my expectation is that he will beat me to a pulp, even more so if he is with a group of guys. Can I defend myself before he hits me? Do I have to wait for him to repeatedly hit me? Because he isn’t using a weapon to attack me at all, can I even defend myself against him at all?
@uscca, can you make a video on defending yourself against a group of attackers? Do you have to fight 5 people if they punch/kick you at the same time (getting jumped) or can you use pistol to equalize a group of attackers?
Most burglars try to break in when the homeowner is absent (typically during the day, when most of us are at work). If one comes breaking into your home late at night, when you're present, then it's reasonable to assume that this person intends to do you harm. In that case, one must assume that the burglar is armed. Therefore, it makes sense to shoot first. That is, unless he sees you and tries to flee.
According to what I was just taught in Utah that is a no to breaking into your car, stealing your dog, ect. Utah sees items or property like that they are replaceable. If it’s in your house or in your attached garage not a detached garage. You have every write to drop them they are in your house as they are a threat until they are outside your house.
I kinda wonder what the case becomes if it's a service dog. They're more than just property at that point as they are generally a medical necessity or at least a health "accessory" without a better term. And if it's something like a dog for low blood glucose level that could in fact be immenant threat if serious bodily harm or death. Just a thought
Hi Kevin. Love your channel! I have a question though. I live in NYS (unfortunately). Is it true in NYS if you should use deadly force that was found legally justifiable, that you will still be arrested initially and have to provide an attorney for yourself and go to court? I had a friend who was being menace on the road and had two gentlemen chase him down on the road and then ran him off the road, then boxed him in with their vehicles and one driver jumped out and was pounding on my friends vehicle window yelling “I’m going to cut you to pieces”, which was verified with the 911 call my friend placed, so to stop this my friend merely showed (not pointed) his handgun to the attacker through the window and when the police got to the scene they arrested my friend and charged him with illegal possession of a handgun (he is licensed legally to conceal carry by the way) and he has racked up 20k in legal bills defending himself so far. So I know this is two separate incidences, but my question is this: If you are found justified in using deadly force will you still have to defend yourself in a court of law, thus incurring 20k or more in legal fees if you hire your own attorney?
Any thoughts on reasonable/justified escalation of force scenarios? BTW, nice use of curtilage. Isn't curtilage utilized more often in expectation of privacy cases than castle doctrine?
NO... Before we even start. UNFORTUNATELY, nowadays, if your life is not in danger, then you cannot use fatal force. We might expand this meaning a bit, to prevent "crime sprees", lawlessness in an area, etc.
Makes me curious: Can I treat a threat against my dog as a potential threat to me? In a situation where, hypothetically, some assailant attacks my +100lb German shepherd confined to my yard. Can I treat it as a threat because big, scary dog and the person doesn't seem to care?
2nd question... reasonable force VS. deadly force... bat to the head vs. 9mm to a calf or biceps?... I kid but what's the scale... tasers, bear spray, bats, guns... etc..
Question: If you issue a Verbal Warning, does that demonstrate that you do NOT believe there is an immediate threat, and could that weaken your Self-defense Claim?
Can you use less-lethal rounds in these situations? For example can I use salt shot in a shotgun or rubber bullets in a handgun, which is not "lethal Force", to stop someone from stealing my motorcycle? Or is Mace and taser the only option here
Is the house doctrine rule apply if the assailant breaks my door down and comes in my house, run at me with a deadly weapon, can I use deadly force to take down the assailant?
I understand that it's people defense not stuff defense. But what if someone is breaking into your unoccupied vehicle and you have firearms or other sensitive items in said vehicle? I never leave sensitive items or firearms in my vehicle but I know some people do leave a handgun in the center console.
There are 2 scenarios not included in this discussion. 1 - a child is in the car waiting or asleep(you go into a kwiki mart for a drink). 2 - a weapon such as a extra pistol or rifle is locked in the car/trunk.
I have a question....I ride a motorcycle and I'm usually Caring my edc when I'm riding. so if someone is trying to run me off the road can I defend myself ???
I know there is always a what if. But if the perpetrator has turned to run away, but if they have turned to run away. But are shooting a gun towards you as they run, . You shoot them clearly in the back but.they were running away?
The only time to use "deadly force" is if you "reasonably believe" your life is in danger. Period. Somebody robbing your car while you are approaching it from the shopping mall does not give you the right to become the "grim reaper". Only if you "reasonably believe" your life is in danger can you use deadly force. The term "reasonably believe" is not a subjective (person standard) term, it's an "objective standard". This means that a jury of your peers would have to place themselves in your shoes and believe they are you. Then, the jury, after being placed into your shoes, must believe that you had the right to use deadly force. In conclusion, do not use deadly force unless you, or your loved one's life is in danger of immediate bodily harm. The exception? If a person is about to seriously harm or kill and innocent bystander for no obvious reason, you may, depending on the circumstances, have the right to intervene. Just because you carry a gun does not give you the right to use your own person ethics. We all must abide by the "reasonable person standard". That standard is difficult to define. But you will know it when it confronts you with deadly force. This is coming from a lawyer with over 42 years of personal injury legal (not criminal law) experience.
Texas Penal Code 9.41 allows deadly force top stop arson, robbery, burglary, or aggrevated robbery. if it's night time then theft or criminal mischief as well
Yeah we know that. Everyone knows that. That's why crime is low in Texas. No criminal wants to get shot by you or your neighbor. We in blue states don't have that right anymore. We also must attempt to flee before we can defend ourselves.
@@humanbeing-001 don't worry. Crime is going way up in Austin. Always has been in Houston and down on the border. But at least we're not one of those other states that doesn't let you clap cattle rustlers
"...just let them get away." Is this also what police do? If a burglar is caught by a cop in a car or house and the burglar just walks away, is the cop not supposed to use force to stop them since the threat is not active anymore?
QUESTION?:: what if someone is trying to steal my dog and I try to stop them with NON- DEADLY FORCE, and they pull out a knife, bat , or a gun then can I use DEADLY force? Or if I try to stop them with NON- DEADLY FORCE and two or three of their friends get out of the car and they all start beating me up, then can I use DEADLY force???
Can you discharge a weapon to convince someone comitting a crime, that you want them to comply. ie A guy stealing your dog and you put a round thru his rear window.
What if your dog is a extremely high dollar, highly trained, medical service animal? There are many service dogs that can detect and help with health issues that could lead to your own death or disability.
What if your standing in line at a gas station/store and A. A single perpetrator comes in armed and pointing it at the clerk, justifiable to shoot if your just standing in line and he pays no attention to you and is clearly there for the money. And B. If multiple perps enter the store, same layout except this time they demand everyone on the floor and you get an opportunity to get a clear clean shot on all perps.... justifiable?
You're allowed to use deadly force to protect others from a deadly threat, as for the second scenario, deadly force is still authorized, as there is a deadly threat to others or yourself. You have no indication that they intend to leave witnesses. If there is a firearm in play, deadly force laws apply and you would be allowed to engage.
0:15 - criminal defense attorney: 1:40 - no deadly force 4 stealing property allowed. 1:50 - depends on how far castle doctrine law extends in ur state. 6:15 - dog stealin 8:57 - reasonable force only 2 stop dog theft.
question... if you catch a burglar in your garage can you "citizen arrest" them until the police arrive?... the only speed bump I see is... unlawful imprisonment...
I'm in SC, stand your ground to me means exactly what it's says. So why in most cases that I have read will the good guy who shot a bad guy breaking in his home where his wife and kids are sleeping get put in handcuffs and sent to jail? Is this what happens all the time or I'm just reading the wrong way. It almost makes a defender think twice before shooting. That can cause me and my family death. Please clarify. I did join your legal team, just in case.
Years ago in Ohio, when duty to retreat was law, a guy shot an unarmed criminal that broke in, he ran out of the house, the owner shot him in the back outside of the home and wasn’t charged, they charged accomplice with murder, how was that able to happen?
