Armed robbers can now kill victims in self defense and not be charged with murder

[Polishprince]

It really depends on the state.

in progressive jurisdictions like the Tremendous State of Alabama, 2 robbers went into a store and the clerk wasted one of them.

The survivor got sentenced to the electric chair for the murder of his compadre, and was pissed about it.

Commit a felony, and you are responsible for the deaths of anyone who gets killed in it. Its called "felony murder".

 

[Jarlaxle]

Well.....

There will be a lot of robbers and criminals dead....I think....you don't need to be an Einstein to see the outcome of this shitty unfair law.

And the downside is?

 

[SavannahMann]

It really depends on the state.

in progressive jurisdictions like the Tremendous State of Alabama, 2 robbers went into a store and the clerk wasted one of them.

The survivor got sentenced to the electric chair for the murder of his compadre, and was pissed about it.

Commit a felony, and you are responsible for the deaths of anyone who gets killed in it. Its called "felony murder".

True. The laws of the state matter. But even the reddest State would have trouble with this.

The baddie had fled. He no longer presented a threat to the Clerk who pursued the Baddie outside and opened fire.

You could argue fleeing felon, but the clerk is not a cop and states don’t give that sort of power to the average citizen.

The robbery is history. It is a matter for the police. It is not relevant to the Clerk coming out to get the guy.

It isn’t a single event. It is two events, sequential, but not connected.

In Georgia, if the Robber had died, the clerk would be facing murder charges. Hell in Georgia we can’t even place someone under citizens arrest.

 

[CHAZBUKOWSKI]

In reality the deciding factor was most likely race aka..........the robber black the store clerk white.....that would be my analysis of the situation.

Hmmm. Your analysis would be wrong

 

[martybegan]

True. The laws of the state matter. But even the reddest State would have trouble with this.

The baddie had fled. He no longer presented a threat to the Clerk who pursued the Baddie outside and opened fire.

You could argue fleeing felon, but the clerk is not a cop and states don’t give that sort of power to the average citizen.

The robbery is history. It is a matter for the police. It is not relevant to the Clerk coming out to get the guy.

It isn’t a single event. It is two events, sequential, but not connected.

In Georgia, if the Robber had died, the clerk would be facing murder charges. Hell in Georgia we can’t even place someone under citizens arrest.

It's a matter for the police if the police AND the prosecutors do their job, and right now in places like California, they are not doing that.

 

[SavannahMann]

It's a matter for the police if the police AND the prosecutors do their job, and right now in places like California, they are not doing that.

Oh bullshit. California jails are overcrowded. California prisons are overcrowded. They are arresting and prosecuting so many they don’t have anywhere to keep them.

 

[westwall]

Oh bullshit. California jails are overcrowded. California prisons are overcrowded. They are arresting and prosecuting so many they don’t have anywhere to keep them.

They just closed three prisons.

DURRRRRR

Have you always been this stupid or do you have to work at it?

 

[skye]

And the downside is?

The downside of dead criminals?

No downside I guess.

 

[SavannahMann]

They just closed three prisons.

DURRRRRR

Have you always been this stupid or do you have to work at it?

No. They announced they are closing one and stopping the contract or private prison.

You see. It cost money to operate such things.

Planned Closure of Chuckawalla Valley State Prison

State will support local community and workforce with an economic resiliency plan and workers will be offered transfers to nearby facilities SACRAMENTO — A

www.cdcr.ca.gov

Money the legislature isn’t able to give.

It goes back to the bill signed by Arnold.

Never mind. You won’t deal in truth.

 

[westwall]

No. They announced they are closing one and stopping the contract or private prison.

You see. It cost money to operate such things.

Planned Closure of Chuckawalla Valley State Prison

State will support local community and workforce with an economic resiliency plan and workers will be offered transfers to nearby facilities SACRAMENTO — A

www.cdcr.ca.gov

Money the legislature isn’t able to give.

It goes back to the bill signed by Arnold.

Never mind. You won’t deal in truth.

Try reading the SF Chronicle article from 6 days ago. They are outright closing three, and parts of three others.

But, you don't deal in facts.

 

[Failzero]

Midsommar at the Minimart

 

[martybegan]

Oh bullshit. California jails are overcrowded. California prisons are overcrowded. They are arresting and prosecuting so many they don’t have anywhere to keep them.

And that's the fault of who?

Who's been running the State for decades?

Overcrowded doesn't mean they have all the bad people locked up, it says nothing about the population of bad people, just that they don't have enough room for all the bad people.

 

[Batcat]

This is the world we now live in.

California robbery suspect killed store clerk, not charged with murder; victim didn’t act in self-defense: DA

James Williams, 36, opened fire on the robbery suspects as they were fleeing before one fatally shot him in the leg and chest, authorities said

A man accused of killing a California gas station clerk during a "botched" robbery will not face a murder charge because the victim had opened fire on the suspect despite his life not being in danger, officials said Thursday.

James Williams, 36, was killed during an early Saturday morning gunfight with Ronald Jackson Jr., 20, at a Chevron in Antioch, Fox San Francisco reported.

The Antioch Police Department said a gas station employee called to report a person had been shot at the Extra Mile mini-mart just after 2 a.m. When officers arrived, they found a man with a gunshot wound to the head inside the store.

"Officers at the scene were able to determine that the victim was an employee-clerk at the service station and was held-up at gunpoint during what appears to be a 'botched robbery,'" a police statement said. Williams was working inside the store when he was confronted by two suspects, one of whom was identified as Jackson, who was allegedly armed with a gun. Williams then pulled out his own weapon. Jackson allegedly ran out of the store, while dropping cigar packages, and was shot. Williams kept firing as Jackson was on the ground before Jackson allegedly returned fire and killed him, the news report said.

"He didn't deserve this, and he was such a good guy, family man," Annette Matamoroz, Williams' girlfriend and co-worker who was in the store when he was killed, told the news outlet. Jackson was not charged with murder because under the law, the killing could be considered self-defense, authorities said.

The Contra Costa County District Attorney's Office said Williams pursued Jackson despite the threat of bodily harm or injury had subsided. "In the eyes of the law, Mr. Williams' actions ceased to be self-defense when Mr. Williams pursued Mr. Jackson and the other suspect with a firearm and continued to pursue Mr. Jackson after he shot him," Contra Costa County District Attorney Diana Becton said in a news release.

"The legal distinction is clear: when your property and life are being threatened, an individual is legally justified in using deadly force in self-defense," she added. "However, once the threat of harm has dissipated, the victim of a property crime cannot then use deadly force to reclaim stolen property."

Antioch investigators submitted their findings to the district attorney's office, which instead "elected to charge Jackson with robbery, possession of stolen property, and a firearm enhancement, but declined to charge him with murder," police said.

"The members of the Antioch Police Department extend their condolences to the family and friends of Mr. Williams," the department said.

This is the Clown World we live in now.

State laws may differ.

In Florida concealed carry classes taught …

You have the right to use lethal force while someone is attacking you with the intent and the ability to put you in the hospital for a long period of time or six feet under but not when he breaks off the attack and runs. If you follow him and threaten to severely injure or kill him, he has the right to use lethal force against you.

PSA: Don't Chase Criminals

A recent trend involving armed citizens chasing down fleeing criminals has resulted in physical and legal ramifications. This practice should be avoided.

www.usacarry.com

***snip***

Giving Chase Changes the Legal Dynamic​

After a crime is committed, even if it involves armed robbery, once a criminal actor flees the situation the crime is over. Your desire for retribution or revenge has nothing to do with it in the eyes of the legal system. Once the threat is over, the justification for lethal force is over. If you pursue a fleeing criminal that just stole something from you, the law now sees you as the aggressor that is starting a separate fight. You might not like it, but this is how the law views the circumstance.

Being the aggressor that starts the problem is never good for you under the scrutiny of the legal system. Upon making contact with a fleeing criminal actor, you will be held accountable for any force that transpires. If everything goes well and you tackle and detain a robber or shoplifter you may be hailed a good Samaritan. What if things get violent and you end up using force? What happens if that action results in significant injury or death for the fleeing criminal? You may face severe legal repercussions.

Chasing criminals, in general, is a no-go for the citizen. Not only is it incredibly dangerous for all involved, but it is also legally precarious. Unless the fleeing criminal has an innocent person in their hands, there is no legal justification for it. In the event of witnessing a robbery or shoplifting, be a good witness. That means call the police, and provide a good description, if possible. Leave the task of chasing criminal actors to those in uniform.

 

[Persuader]

State laws may differ.

In Florida concealed carry classes taught …

You have the right to use lethal force while someone is attacking you with the intent and the ability to put you in the hospital for a long period of time or six feet under but not when he breaks off the attack and runs. If you follow him and threaten to severely injure or kill him, he has the right to use lethal force against you.

PSA: Don't Chase Criminals

A recent trend involving armed citizens chasing down fleeing criminals has resulted in physical and legal ramifications. This practice should be avoided.

www.usacarry.com

***snip***

Giving Chase Changes the Legal Dynamic​

After a crime is committed, even if it involves armed robbery, once a criminal actor flees the situation the crime is over. Your desire for retribution or revenge has nothing to do with it in the eyes of the legal system. Once the threat is over, the justification for lethal force is over. If you pursue a fleeing criminal that just stole something from you, the law now sees you as the aggressor that is starting a separate fight. You might not like it, but this is how the law views the circumstance.

Being the aggressor that starts the problem is never good for you under the scrutiny of the legal system. Upon making contact with a fleeing criminal actor, you will be held accountable for any force that transpires. If everything goes well and you tackle and detain a robber or shoplifter you may be hailed a good Samaritan. What if things get violent and you end up using force? What happens if that action results in significant injury or death for the fleeing criminal? You may face severe legal repercussions.

Chasing criminals, in general, is a no-go for the citizen. Not only is it incredibly dangerous for all involved, but it is also legally precarious. Unless the fleeing criminal has an innocent person in their hands, there is no legal justification for it. In the event of witnessing a robbery or shoplifting, be a good witness. That means call the police, and provide a good description, if possible. Leave the task of chasing criminal actors to those in uniform.

Not in the majority of states boyo.....california is one of the few states where the stupid law is applicable.

Common Sense and Common law says a perp in the process of comitting a crime or fleeing the crime scene has no legal right to claim self defense.

 

[Batcat]

Not in the majority of states boyo.....california is one of the few states where the stupid law is applicable.

Common Sense and Common law says a perp in the process of comitting a crime or fleeing the crime scene has no legal right to claim self defense.

The concealed weapons classes I mentioned in Florida were 20 years ago. I am not sure what they are teaching today.

I tried to research the subject but most of the information I found dealt with law enforcement chasing a subject.

I did find this article:

Florida Law on Self-Defense | Use of Deadly and Non Deadly Force

Under Florida Law, self-defense is a type of affirmative defense that can excuse or justify the use of deadly or non-deadly force. Applies to crimes of violence where there is a reasonable belief of imminent bodily harm.

www.husseinandwebber.com

***snip***

Alternatively, the person who provokes the initial attack may nonetheless claim self-defense if: (1) in good faith, he or she withdrew from physical contact, (2) clearly indicated to the other person that he or she desired to withdraw and terminate the use of force, and (3) despite the communication and withdrawal, the other person continued or resumed the use of force.

Now the last thing I want to do in this world is shoot someone but I will if attacked by someone who is determined to inflict great bodily harm or death. If they chose to run I am not going to follow them. Once they start running away they pose no serious threat to me.

 

[Persuader]

The concealed weapons classes I mentioned in Florida were 20 years ago. I am not sure what they are teaching today.

I tried to research the subject but most of the information I found dealt with law enforcement chasing a subject.

I did find this article:

Florida Law on Self-Defense | Use of Deadly and Non Deadly Force

Under Florida Law, self-defense is a type of affirmative defense that can excuse or justify the use of deadly or non-deadly force. Applies to crimes of violence where there is a reasonable belief of imminent bodily harm.

www.husseinandwebber.com

***snip***

Alternatively, the person who provokes the initial attack may nonetheless claim self-defense if: (1) in good faith, he or she withdrew from physical contact, (2) clearly indicated to the other person that he or she desired to withdraw and terminate the use of force, and (3) despite the communication and withdrawal, the other person continued or resumed the use of force.

Now the last thing I want to do in this world is shoot someone but I will if attacked by someone who is determined to inflict great bodily harm or death. If they chose to run I am not going to follow them. Once they start running away they pose no serious threat to me.

Well...most likely but they could change their mind......irregardless they will not forgo their criminal activities....they will just do the same thing over again somewhere else....such animals are a threat to society and anyone that eliminates one should be honored.

 

[Batcat]

Well...most likely but they could change their mind......irregardless they will not forgo their criminal activities....they will just do the same thing over again somewhere else....such animals are a threat to society and anyone that eliminates one should be honored.

Good point.

 

[miketx]

This is what the left want.

They are not going to like the results when they start getting killed themselves.

Sooner the better

 

[Batcat]

This is what the left want.

They are not going to like the results when they start getting killed themselves.

Once the attack ends so does the justification for the use of lethal force. Therefore if the victim of the first attack chases and opens fire on the attacker in the first attack we have a brand new situation and a new attacker and victim.

PSA: Don't Chase Criminals

A recent trend involving armed citizens chasing down fleeing criminals has resulted in physical and legal ramifications. This practice should be avoided.

www.usacarry.com

***snip***

Giving Chase Changes the Legal Dynamic​

After a crime is committed, even if it involves armed robbery, once a criminal actor flees the situation the crime is over. Your desire for retribution or revenge has nothing to do with it in the eyes of the legal system. Once the threat is over, the justification for lethal force is over. If you pursue a fleeing criminal that just stole something from you, the law now sees you as the aggressor that is starting a separate fight. You might not like it, but this is how the law views the circumstance.

Being the aggressor that starts the problem is never good for you under the scrutiny of the legal system. Upon making contact with a fleeing criminal actor, you will be held accountable for any force that transpires. If everything goes well and you tackle and detain a robber or shoplifter you may be hailed a good Samaritan. What if things get violent and you end up using force? What happens if that action results in significant injury or death for the fleeing criminal? You may face severe legal repercussions.

Chasing criminals, in general, is a no-go for the citizen. Not only is it incredibly dangerous for all involved, but it is also legally precarious. Unless the fleeing criminal has an innocent person in their hands, there is no legal justification for it. In the event of witnessing a robbery or shoplifting, be a good witness. That means call the police, and provide a good description, if possible. Leave the task of chasing criminal actors to those in uniform.

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

This is the world we now live in.

California robbery suspect killed store clerk, not charged with murder; victim didn’t act in self-defense: DA

James Williams, 36, opened fire on the robbery suspects as they were fleeing before one fatally shot him in the leg and chest, authorities said

Everything written above is accurate and the reason for this decision is in the very first line of the story. Your robbery victim opened fire on the robbery suspects as they were fleeing. That is not self-defense no matter how much you wanted to ahoot or you or anyone else feels they may have deserved it.