At what point are you justified 2 use force?

[Tanis143]

I guess the easiest way to judge is this: Am I likely to be injured? If no, then escape or just wait them out and work it out with insurance. If their force escalates and the potential of someone in the car being injured rises, then my own escalation of force kicks in.

 

[HoLeChit]

Not to be that guy, but there are way too many variables to be able to make an accurate decision based on your info. Are you a 75 year old guy 120 pounds in a Prius and scared for your life, or are you a 300 pound ruff neck in a fullsize truck with a cool head and decent amount of training?

My point is how do you perceive the threat? Not how you perceive the threat talking to a jury, but how do you God's honestly perceive the threat. You and I are different and will perceive it differently. Keep that in mind.

Some shithead jumps on the hood of my truck and I can drive away? Time to let that Hemi breath child. As protective of my truck as I am, I do have insurance and a family to protect, so no, I'm not smoking the unarmed purpled haired daddy hating fool climbing on my truck. Will I have my weapon at the ready should the situation escalate and I can't safely move traffic out of my way? Think of it like this and ask yourself "can I get out of the area without being hurt or killed?" If your (not mine) answer is yes, well you have your answer. You would be surprised how well you can bug out with a fullsize truck if needed.

Most vehicles today have automatic locks when you reach speeds of 10ish. Mine does. If it doesn't, get a new vehicle or lock your doors before you leave he house. That will stop a lot.

Use the use of force step ladder. Always be one step higher than the other guy.

What rockchalk said.

in my head, if I can escape, that’s what I’m going to do. Shooting someone that is attacking your vehicle, in a riot/mob situation, is just going to agitate the mob. In somwewhere like Oklahoma, you’re likely not the only person on the street with a firearm, and unlike you, the other person just has one target. It’s best to run/get away when you can. If I am immobilized, I’m gonna need to see a window broken, door opened, or a firearm drawn in my direction before I open up fire. Firing a weapon within the confines of a car sucks anyways, I’m going to avoid doing so for as long as possible.

 

[AKguy1985]

Anyone want to weigh in on this?? I'm not a lawyer but the second he punched out her window it's game on


https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.fo...nt/TY3X6JAHLRFAHH2Z42QAPNM62U/?outputType=amp

 

[ricco]

If I can find it I may post the closing arguments from the Edgecomb trial last week.

In the closing argument the prosecutor said that when Edgecomb punched Clearman through the open car window had Clearman (the victim in this case) responded with deadly force (I don't remember his exact words but it amounted to deadly force) it would be Clearman on trial and not Edgecomb.

Just something to consider.

 

[ratski]

If I can find it I may post the closing arguments from the Edgecomb trial last week.

In the closing argument the prosecutor said that when Edgecomb punched Clearman through the open car window had Clearman (the victim in this case) responded with deadly force (I don't remember his exact words but it amounted to deadly force) it would be Clearman on trial and not Edgecomb.

Just something to consider.

Wondering if this relates to the video above? She stated that she had glass in her lap and that indicates he broke something.

However, punch and release would probably just be assault with various add ons (I'm not an attorney)
Once he lets go and releases, there is no longer a real threat as he backs off.

Punch, grab and hold, different story as long as contact maintained. (my thoughts)

Now, if he punches through a closed window, they may see that as an extension of "Castle Doctrine" but I think it would be a hard sell to a DA/jury to claim "justifiable" if he was no longer across your threshold and had released his hold on you.

Dave

 

[Bixby Sooner53]

Several different CCW instructors told me a good rule is if you can defuse the situation by leaving, do it. Drawing a weapon should be absolutely last resort and then only to protect yourself or someone else against potential bodily harm. The courts these days don't seem to want to apply that same reasoning to protecting property, though it used to be commonplace.

 

[GnometownHero]

Personally, if an unhinged raging person grabs my door handle, he lit the fuse, if that person immediately recognizes by my respone and lets go and steps back, that person and others with him might not get shot. If they up the rage, I up the response

 

[ssgrock3]

This again... From OKs statutes:
A person who unlawfully and by force enters or attempts to enter the dwelling, residence, occupied vehicle of another person, or a place of business is presumed to be doing so with the intent to commit an unlawful act involving force or violence.

Unlike the “Make My Day” doctrine which provides protections in one’s home against intruders, “Stand Your Ground” doctrine does not require that the person invoking it be at their dwelling, but only that they have a right to be legally present at the location of the confrontation.


According to OK law, if someone tries to enter my vehicle they're getting multiple lead based Covid injections into the chest. And it's legal. Here's a little read for everyone who wondered.

https://www.oklahoma-criminal-defense.com/crimes/oklahoma-self-defense-doctrines

bruh, I like your style...Lead covid shots...fing aye

 

[ricco]

Defending property in the 1800's when a lot of state laws were first written was very different than today. As an example, they would kill horse thieves because to put a person on foot a great distance from help was the same as killing that person outright. Food wasn't as easy to come by as it is today and stealing a persons food, depending where it happened was likely to result in the person starving. Laws on theft have changed because the consequences of that theft have typically changed.

 

[ricco]

How a statute is written won't keep a Prosecutor from trying to put you in prison. "Stand Your Ground" laws won't keep you from being prosecuted. "Castle Doctrine" laws won't keep you from being prosecuted. All the self defense laws ever written won't keep you from being prosecuted. People seem to think that a statute will protect them from prosecution, those people are very wrong. In states without a Grand Jury system the Prosecutor will make the decision whether or not to try you. In states with a Grand Jury system ONLY the Prosecutor presents his/her reason for prosecuting you, hence the term from New York State chief judge Sol Wachtler "a grand jury would 'indict a ham sandwich,' if that's what you wanted."