That sucks. In Oklahoma wouldn't the person who stole the car wind up with the charges? Seems logical, I steal your car, you shoot at me trying to defend yourself/property, a stray bullet hits someone else because of my actions. I may be way off base, but the "shooter" should not be facing charges.
The way I understand the law.....you are only justified to shoot if your life (or someone else's life) is in imminent danger. Someone stealing your stuff is not threatening your life, pissing you off yes, but you are not going to loose your life because of it. And you are responsible for that bullet and the destruction it may cause from the time you start it moving down your barrel till it stops again, wherever that may be.
Yep, the ole boy is indeed toast.
Yep, the ole boy is indeed toast.
And in Washington State too, yup, he might as well start bending over now.
I feel for the family and friends of the woman. This is a terribly sad event.
He might not get hit with the absolute most serious charges possible, but I am sure he will be a felon after this. When I got my carry permit I was told every round has a lawyer attached to it. Guess this is what they meant.
No, because in OK you can only respond with like force. Non-deadly vs non-deadly, deadly force is justified when presented with deadly force. Secondly, the use of a firearm is only if your life is in danger and there is no other option, its there to protect life and only life, never property. If the car had tried running the guy over, he might have a chance, as your defending life. But remember rule 4 of firearms, be sure of your target and whats beyond it. You are responsible for your projectile until it stops.
Not really... if you are in fear of imminent death or great bodily harm, you are justified in the use of deadly force in the state of OK. If you can reasonably justify this, it doesn't matter if the "perp" was armed or unarmed. Plenty of precedent out there.
However... according to the castle doctrine, if someone has illegally made entry into your home, you do not have any requirement.
This situation, whether a licensed carrier or not, is a bad one for the shooter - he is going to go to jail. Ref: Jerome Ersland. Firing a gun at someone running or driving away is going to make it very very difficult to convince ANYONE you were in imminent fear of death or great bodily harm.
only if the shooter is a cop.
There is also not a requirement when protecting an OCCUPIED vehicle or business. But was really just discussing laws that would be applicable under these circumstances. Man shoots at motor vehicle. Unless his kid, wife, etc was in the car, or the car was trying to run him or someone else over, it's not a justified shoot.
Similar threads
