The Right to Protect Your Property

[jensend]

what no one has mentioned is that it could have turned out a whole lot differently and tragically if the thief had a gun and they had to shoot it out. go ahead and pull a gun if you're being robbed but then don't be surprised if you're staring at one from the wrong end.

[farmers_son]

Yes things can go wrong. For me though, the point is did this fellow do anything wrong in chasing down the bad guy and stopping him. I think he did what he had to do and if I was in the same situation (hope I never am) I might have done the same. This guy should not be having to hire lawyers and be dragged through the court system. The thief is the bad guy, not the farmer.

Like what are you supposed to do? Just hide in the house and let these bad guys clean you out? Yes things could go wrong but things already were going wrong. If you see three bad guys in your yard or even out in the field stealing cattle do you break the law if you give chase?

Where I live there is not even good cell phone coverage and I do not carry a cell phone so if I see thieves in the field I cannot even call the cops. Really it is a minimum of 3/4 hours for police to arrive if they just tear out here. You could expect 1 1/2 or more hours a lot of times because they could easily be busy on the far end of their area. And if the theft simple involved cattle the police might not even come. Should I be dragged before a judge if I chased someone stealing my cattle or my vehicles or other personal property? If I gave chase and rammed their vehicle with my vehicle does that mean I am the bad guy and should be charged with dangerous driving? I guess if they shot at me I might give up the chase (there is not usually much time to reason out a response when you are in the middle of it) but I also might shoot back if I happened to have a gun with me and I might shoot first but it is unreasonable for the law to expect me to just do nothing which seems to be the situation with this fellow.

We have to be able to defend our own property ourselves. If I have to use a firearm to stop a chase that should not make me the criminal.

In this instance the law does not seem to know the difference between the bad guy committing a crime and the farmer defending his property. The interpretation of the law must take into consideration the realities of living in rural areas and that is not being done here.

We have to be able to defend our own property ourselves. And if the law puts restrictions on what we can or cannot do to protect our property then the thieves and criminal element will simply capitalize on that.

[vagabonddreamer]

actually jensend...GF did deal with that very scenario in his original post...this is a difficult subject because the variations on what MIGHT happen are endless...it becomes a personal philosophy on what the best course of action is...I suppose the only way you can truly avoid ALL confrontation is to go away and let the theives fill their boots...

i guess what FS and the rest of us are more bent about...is that the law seems to be treating the farmer as the criminal...did he actually SHOOT the theif or did he discharge the firearm?? i am still unclear about that...

life is all about choices and i dont begrudge anyone for making their own in any given situation...i can tell you i would have done the same thing...vs

[farmers_son]

There were two shots fired and the bad guy was wounded. He had non life threatening injuries, was treated in hospital then released.

[silverback]

Can any of you pansies tell us why the crime and assault rates go down in jurisdictions that allow people to carry concealed firearms?

[per]

I'll try my best sarcasm here. Because the side arms are registered?lol

[wilagro]

I have a gun beside my bed at all times and am prepared to use it. Too many gas thefts and rural break=ins around here.

I have a right to defend my property and I will exercise it as best that I can. If I had to blow out a few tires to stop a thief then that is what I would do with no regrets.

The police should use good judgement when it comes to situations similar to that of Mr. Knight and give the landowner the benefit of the doubt.

[may-be]

fs. You are right about the law being unreasonable. Not only it seems we cannot protect our property but also yourself. Had a situation where a person went insane for no reason in my house. Threw the person out but he broke back in. Figured the best course of action was to phone the police to escort the person out of here. WHAT A MISTAKE. I was also charged for assault,thrown in a cold cement cell for a day,had my guns taken away and a long hard time getting them back. I only hit this person for self defence. This left me with a sore body, damages in my house,lawyers bills,time in jail and court, plus missed my hunting season and a run around getting my guns back. The other person just had to goe to anger management. Makes me think to serve and protect is not for the inocent. Now what to do if a similar situation like that arises again? The law could not answer that question...pathetic isn't it...

May-Be

[bombay_43]

This is a no brainer for me! I side with FS as well! No difference if the person was in your bedroom picking through your belongings, or out in your yard picking up your things. They are taking something that belongs to you. You don't know if they are or are not armed.
If they don't want to be shot (dead or wounded) they shouldn't be somewhere they don't belong! I don't believe GF has ever been in a similar situation either, or his attitude would be different.
I think it is far easier to kill someone,(if given the right circumstances), than to do nothing, and allow the intruders to do with you or your family, what ever they choose!
Our laws have to change! Don't condemn the innocent for protecting their own!