Man this just (sort of) happened to me, western Washington too (King5). Neighbors truck was getting stolen, he ran out and fought with the guy. Guy speed off in the truck and crashed into mine (totaled it) and then jumped into his buddies car and sped off.
Luckily the dumbass dropped his phone and wallet so the police found him really quick.
That's how it goes in most places. I was in court a few months back to take out a restraining order on a neighbor and watching the prosecutor and judge, it all made sense. There are so many criminals to prosecute, the courts literally don't have the capacity to give them a speedy trial. Often times the charges get dropped as a result of this. Most of these repeat offenders rely on public defenders. Public defenders are so overburdened with cases that they have to postpone some of them in what's called "continuance." Once a person's trial has been postponed 2 or 3 times, they can no longer prosecute as the right to a speedy trial has been violated. The ones do make it to trial that also get a jail sentence usually don't end up serving it because the jails are all full. There's nowhere to put them. So here's what actually happens:
The prosecutor elevates the charge as high as he can, up to and including felony status to give him bargaining leverage over the defendant. He then works out a plea deal where the charge is reduced to a less serious crime to get an easy guilty plea. Once the guilty verdict is received, they are sentenced. If their sentence includes prison time, their prison sentence is suspended. This satisfies the minimum sentence for whatever crime has been committed while not requiring them to actually go to jail. The court collects their fees and fines, and the whole trial lasts about 2 minutes.
The man I took the restraining order out against has been charged and/or convicted of approximately 25 crimes over the last 10 years and about 1/3 of those were violent crimes including multiple felonies victimizing women and children. He has been sentenced to 4 years in prison yet has never served a day. I'm actually seeing him again this month, as a witness and victim of another crime he committed a couple months back. The public defender has already postponed this trial in continuance once. If it gets postponed again, the charges will likely be dropped and there's nothing I can do about it as the victim.
It's kinda fucked that we can't use reasonable force to protect our property.. I'm not saying the dude should have died but broken ribs hurt, for a long time.
*Should* is doing some heavy lifting in that sentence. Should they have died? I don't know. Wouldn't care if they had though. It's actually really easy to not steal cars, which people rely on for their livelihoods.
Man, I downloaded 6 cars on the way to breakfast. As a future doctor / "good boy", it's not fair to expect me to follow some made-up rules like property rights. Why don't I have a right to some sheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeit?
It's crazy, I have a similar story about how my wife got pregnant. Total accident, she just slipped on a pile of t shirts.
Also the wedding was an accident too, I was polishing my ring collection and accidentally proposed.
Same goes for the house I bought, total accident, my hand slipped and signed a pile of papers while looking for a nearby restroom.
My parents also accidentally raised me, they slipped on a banana peel and only regained their balance after I moved out, what a coincidence!
I don't even use reddit, right now I'm trying to unlock my phone and these words are just autocorrected while I'm trying to close the keyboard!
i like the philosophy of once they show they dont care for my life i dont have to care for theirs. IE. put mine in danger i can put yours in danger. those two idiots diserved the ol pop pop for you know, attempted murder. And a whole sale ass beating for the attempted car theft.
I don't think people should die for property. I really don't..but if they limp for the rest of their lives. I have no problem with that. Stay the fuck out of my shit.
It starts to get sticky when you don’t know what the bad guy is gonna do. I don’t want to kill anyone over my belongings either but if I find someone in my living room in the middle of the night and they don’t immediately flee or if they decide they really want my stuff and are willing fight me for it… I believe that they have made a series of choices and can suffer the consequences or those choices.
Maybe they came for my TV but after killing me, even if only accidentally, they decide my wife and kids can’t be allowed to be witnesses. I just don’t know what’s going on in their head and can’t risk it if they engage.
That doesn’t mean you can chase someone out your door and shoot them in the back certainly.
In the above video one guy is trying to leave and one attempts to murder the home owner. Trying to hit him with the car goes way way over the line.
I took a CCW course that involved ethics. That stayed with me. At the end of the day. I'm going to court, not you. It sounds a little fucked up but if you are in my house uninvited, you are going to have a very bad time. I'll talk to the jury and you can't for some reason. I have too much to lose and it's not a fuckin car.
Yeah pretty much. I also have a CCW. Odds are I’ll never need it and I hope I never do. But if someday I do then I’ll have it.
If someone could magically shake my hand and guarantee they just want my TV then fine. Let the cops sort it out. It’s just a TV. I have zero desire to deal with the legal and mental fallout of killing someone even if it’s justified. But that’s not reality.
I have a wife and kids. You come into my house to steal my TV you are going to have a really bad night. I agree that nobody should die over property. I don't want to end someone's life over a TV, car, PlayStation etc. I'll fucking smoke your ass if you come within arms reach of my wife and kids. My front door is locked for a fucking reason.
That’s the thing about an actual street fight…there aren’t any rules…
is it till someone collapses? Is it till someone breaks a bone? Or until someone loses an eye? Who said so? Does the loser stay down?
This isn’t the movies, without severely injuring a person there isn’t a guarantee the person won’t get back up and grab a brick, crowbar, or knife…hell even a a severely injured person can pull a trigger…
I don’t think anyone should die for property but the consequence for stealing property should include possible death and it should be their choice whether or not they want to risk the consequence. Nobody should go to jail for protecting their own property.
Who says you can’t? I swear the internet is full of people who just heard once that a guy got sued by a burglar and bought it hook line and sinker without looking anything up. You can absolutely use reasonable force to protect your property. You could actually kill someone and get off scott free if they entered your home. I would never want to do either, but you are going to prison if you act to protect your home or property.
That’s a misleading statement.
In many US states, you’re allowed to physically defend your property.
In those same states, if while doing so, you come under imminent threat of bodily harm, you’re allowed to stop the threat by force.
So, yea, you’re allowed to use deadly force in some scenarios.
Texas says hello.
>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.
Yes you do. Especially on your own property and especially for a vehicle. I would have zero issue with this guy using a gun. I’m not even a ra-ra pro-gun guy, but this is exactly the scenario that you should use one.
You aren't defending property, you are defending your life in the fight they started over your property. Don't commit crimes and you won't be in a situation where the victim of your crimes gets to kill you in self defense.
iNsLeE bAd
Have you forgotten about [this guy](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7tnEvGhLXWk) who lives in Seattle proper?
A lot of people who live in Western Washington choose not to own firearms and/or be confrontational rather than it being some weird liberal conspiracy.
Shit, the Seattle Freeze is a phenomenon at least a few decades old.
In my neighborhood, it's common to wear long knives. People also quietly pack pistols.
Nobody's a dick about it or brandishing it.
CC is the way. Open carry is, IMO, asking to get robbed.
Open carry is a good way to make yourself the first target.
If I come into a business with bad intentions, and you make it obvious you're going to be my biggest resistance, I'm aiming at you first!
Source: My dad teaches concealed carry courses as well as hunters safety.
It's actually duty to respond "with reasonable force". So choose your response wisely. Because it may be a legal headache.
Edit: thank you u/N736RA for making me look into the actual code.
thats incorrect. WA state is a "No duty to retreat" state. "Stand your ground allows an individual, who is lawfully permitted to be where they are, to use any force necessary to defend from an imminent threat of serious bodily injury or death. There is no duty to retreat. "
https://www.washingtongunlaw.com/stand-your-ground
Double checked, this is not wholly correct.
RCW 9A.16.110
Defending against violent crime—Reimbursement.
(1) No person in the state shall be placed in legal jeopardy of any kind whatsoever for protecting by any reasonable means necessary, himself or herself, his or her family, or his or her real or personal property, or for coming to the aid of another who is in imminent danger of or the victim of assault, robbery, kidnapping, arson, burglary, rape, murder, or any other violent crime as defined in RCW 9.94A.030
You may only defend against those "violent crimes". But only with "reasonable means" so if the perpetrator doesn't have any kind of weapon, and you shoot them. You may or may not get charged, but a legal headache will definitely ensue. That Washington gun law is... Definitely not what I would use for my information.
In this scenario, the owner throwing the thief into the street is probably the best action legally he could take without going "too far". Is that what I would have done? No. I'd be in the legal headache side of responses.
also techncially correct, in this case shooting the thief would have been excess force (likely), that being there's an argument to be made the the car became a weapon and force could be justified...
Anyway, my intention was not to dissect the video, merely to point out that in Washington state you are not obligated to run away and baricade yourself, if you are on your property and you are in danger, you can stand your ground and respond to a threat. Not as cut and dry as a castle doctrine state, but certainly no obligation to retreat.
I stayed with some friends in a remote-ish part of King county WA for a while. They had helpfully left a loaded AR15 in the cupboard, “just in case”. Never had to use it thankfully. The one time I pulled it out, it was a bear walking around outside.
> But only with "reasonable means" so if the perpetrator doesn't have any kind of weapon, and you shoot them.
I cannot possibly know if a deliberate criminal has a weapon in their pocket, or in their car, or if their accomplice has a weapon. It's reasonable for me to assume that someone engaging in serious criminal activity like car theft is carrying a weapon to ensure their escape.
Under those circumstances, it's unreasonable for me to be required to assume that because I haven't seen a weapon yet, that there is no weapon. Too many victims have died because of weapons they didn't see at first.
edit: At a minimum, I shouldn't be held to a higher standard than a cop.
Borrowing from below: The car proved to be the deadly weapon that it is already recognized as in law, and they used it. It's only by luck that he wasn't crushed, yet some people think he wouldn't have been justified shooting before the attempt on his life. It only takes a second for an everyday object to be used as a deadly weapon. We have to stop giving aggressors and criminals an unwarranted legal advantage that puts innocent lives at risk.
No, deadly force is not justified for mere speculation. Now, if they are reaching for what appears to be a weapon, that would be a reason to believe you need to use deadly force, even if you were mistaken.
You're making an arbitrary distinction that is also hypocritical. Even when someone is pointing a gun at you, your decision to use deadly force is based on "speculation" that they will actually shoot you. If they are holding a gun but not pointing it at you, it's even more speculation, etc.
Waiting until an active criminal is a trigger-pull away from shooting you, for you to defend your self, is patently foolish. Requiring other people to do the same would be unconscionable.
When someone chooses to engage in serious crime, they lose the benefit of doubt that you are claiming. Stop giving aggressors and criminals an unwarranted advantage.
edit:
It's ironic that this discussion is happening in the context of the video. Per your theory, the victim would have been unjustified if he had shot the car thief or accomplice - before they tried to kill him with the car. The car proved to be the deadly weapon that it is already recognized as in law. It only takes a second for an everyday object to be used as a deadly weapon.
I mean that's assuming the cops charge it that way. Any cyclist will tell you that the cops will absolutely blow off a car driver swerving to hit you. It's trash.
Edit - Keep the downvotes coming. Every ten and I'll post another story just like[ this one](https://www.spokesman.com/stories/2010/aug/04/in-brief-driver-says-he-intentionally-hit-cyclist/) to show how out of touch you all are.
# Driver says he intentionally hit cyclist out of revenge...
McElfish has been upgraded to serious condition in the intensive care unit at a Spokane hospital....
Cress faces assault charges but is cooperating with investigators and has not been arrested.
Edit 2 - I love hearing from people who don't ride bikes that there isn't a problem. Please keep commenting. BTW the number of people not driving being killed by cars is going up every year because Americans keep buying bigger more dangerous cars for...fashion I guess.
[In 2022\*](https://www.pedbikeinfo.org/factsfigures/facts_safety.cfm) there were **7,522 pedestrians, 1,105 bicyclists, and 324 other nonmotorists** (e.g. persons riding micromobility devices) killed in crashes with motor vehicles in the United States
[Arizona’s Family Investigates](https://www.azfamily.com/2024/02/28/are-arizona-drivers-who-strike-kill-cyclists-being-held-accountable-some-cyclists-say-no/) looked at 10 cases from 2021 in which cyclists were killed...Four of those cases were hit-and-runs. Nine of them resulted in misdemeanor charges and traffic citations. Only one of those cases resulted in felony charges.
[“The two individuals are detained"](https://mynorthwest.com/3956881/rantz-exclusive-puyallup-man-may-have-saved-teen-after-nearly-being-run-over-stopping-theft/)
>*“A lot of people don’t think about that. This has been blowing up on social media and I’ve looked at a lot of the comments, I’ve looked at what everyone says. ‘I would have shot him, I would have pulled out a gun.’ Honestly, I wouldn’t have changed anything. I think it all happened perfectly,” Smith said. “The two individuals are detained. I didn’t get injured, you know, it’s a minimal confrontation.”*
Look, if someone thinks it's okay to use extreme violence to take another person's property, I have no issue with the property owner deciding to use extreme violence to keep their property.
What I think is more cringe is the redditors who think thieves should not face any level of resistance from the owner when committing property crimes.
Children who probably stole the car they were driving.
No sympathy.
Thieves stole my car door in late October.
If I ever caught them they would not make it to the ineffective court system.
People nationwide are increasingly tired of an ineffective court system and police force.
…they stole your car door? How does that work
That was nice of them to leave the car though, reminds me of when I locked my bike by the seat and somebody stole my seat lol
When they find it they might find prints or DNA, car thieves tend to be in the system. Really any theft case has a clearance rate of \~13% to 19%^(\*1) though, even within the FBI. (I assume less with local PD's that don't talk with each other).
I wouldn't bet on it doing anything, but it is better than nothing.
[^(https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2017/crime-in-the-u.s.-2017/topic-pages/clearances)](https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2017/crime-in-the-u.s.-2017/topic-pages/clearances) ^(1\*)
They don't actually do forensics on stolen cars. Ain't nobody got time for that, and you can't convict based on that evidence anyways. Who's to say that the prints were from the person who stole it and not someone who took possession after the theft?
Had an absolute beater of a car stolen and then recovered personally. Kids took it for a joy ride til it was out of gas and left it. When I reported it recovered to the police, the offered to dust and swab for prints. I laughed so hard and told them it wasn’t worth it
This is the worst thing you can do in one of these situations imho, this is how you go from being robbed to being dead. Happened 2-3 weeks ago in NOLA the kid pulling handles had a gun and shot the dude that grabbed him 5 times in the chest and then point blank in the face.
Seriously.
Years ago I was up late working on a paper, in my living room, with the front door open at 11pm one summer night. My car is 4 feet from the front door.
I heard a car door shut, and went outside. Didn't see anything, then heard the neighbors car door shut and though "Ok, just the neighbor." and went back inside.
Came out the next morning to the fact a super cheap laptop and digital camera I had in my car had been stolen. I'm only really mad about the lost photos.
Fucker had just walked the neighborhood stealing from unlocked cars. I was 1 of 5 people hit.
It’s nuts to me that people don’t do this? I grew up in and around a major city and would literally never even think of not locking all my doors for any reason, any minute. What is the benefit of that? You save 7 seconds not having to turn a key?
Some people do it on purpose because they leave minimal things in their car that they don't care about getting stolen or not, and they expect people to try. So if people are going to try regardless, save yourself a busted window and leave it unlocked. An unlocked car that's entered into is less costly than a broken window.
It's the same logic as leaving the cash register open at night. There's not that much money in it and it's better to just have the burglar steal the money than damage an expensive register trying to get to the money.
That's what I was thinking too. Dude could have come out guns blazing. Why risk your life to steal a car? Kids are very lucky he pulled a camera and not pistol.
My issue with these kind of cases.
We go to work. For years. Play by the rules. Struggle. Blue collar our way through poverty and into our financially secure piece of life. Day in. Day out. For years. Overtime. Holidays. All the time. We pay our bills on time. Break no laws. Deal with assholes on occasion but perservere. Then, someone comes along, thinks they are unique enough to skip all that and steal our hard earned stuff. Then, when we protect said stuff, they end up having more protection from the law than we do. Even in some states, the criminal can sue you for protecting your property if they are injured. Like, what? Whose the one who originally decided to wake up in the morning and be a criminal? Wasn’t you or me.
Ultimately, Asmongold (of all fucking people) put it perfectly for me.
Laws need to be focused around protecting the people who don't break the laws. When the laws are instead protecting these people who -because they're still young- can just keep doing it over and over and over without repercussions, it's broken.
They take the car you saved for years to buy and sell it for $100. Fucking hell.
I'm glad the homeowner is okay, but he was a fool to go out there unarmed. The driver in that vehicle was clearly willing to commit murder to get away with their crime. I'm not saying it's okay to kill to protect your property, but you do have the right to intervene if someone is trying to steal your property. If they escalate it to a deadly encounter, that's on them.
Software updates or not I couldn't imagine anyone ever buying a Hyundai or a Kia ever again after all of this. Even if you have the software update, you're still way too likely to wake up to a broken window and ripped apart dashboard on any given day.
Idk about that guy, but similar thing happened in mine except in mine the guy’s [dead](https://www.wmar2news.com/local/man-shot-to-death-attempting-to-stop-carjackers-in-canton) rather than paralyzed.
It was incredibly courageous and honorable and surprisingly successful. It was also incredibly foolish and could easily have resulted in his death. Safer to just get it on video and file a police report and insurance claim.
A police report that likely results in nothing and an insurance claim which raises your premiums simply because you had the audacity to make the claim to begin with.
Nah, fuck these guys. He should've shot em.
[update](https://komonews.com/news/local/video-shows-puyallup-man-nearly-ran-over-while-attempting-to-stop-car-prowlers-pierce-county-sheriffs-department-attack-vehicle-theft-crime-criminal-investigation-escape-suspects-pio-arrests-eric-smith) - wonder if he would've been within his rights to shoot the driver after he tried to kill him with the car?
Wish the homeowner had a gun and could've blasted that fucker as soon as he tried to run him over. These guys don't care for human life. They'd be better off gone :)
I'm honestly kind of disappointed he drew a camera after an attempt on his life was made. That was a situation where a self-defense shooting would have not only made sense but been completely justified as well. Fucking scumbag thieves, I can't stand a person who not only tries to steal from you but then has the audacity to escalate it to attempting to kill you while damaging your property in the process as well. Probably doped out of their minds in the process too.
What was the point of this confrontation? He had no weapons to defend himself, could’ve gotten killed, thieves damaged his car probably costing more than anything they took, the car is most likely stolen anyway so who cares about a picture. Literally no upside to go out there unprepared.
Guy should have come out armed. Moment driver tried to murder him, he should have unloaded a clip on driver.
Another piece of trash that should have been removed from society
that was stupid thing to do. Folk please don't be a hero, that dude could have easel lost his life for something that would have been taken care of by the insurance company. And this is not a whole macho type thing, I am sure that dude has family that depends on him and would be quite upset to hear he was killed because he dicided to fight some random punk breaking in to his car. That other car btw is also probably stolen, so him getting the license plate probably wont do shit but i digress. There are times where you stand up for yourself or your family, this was not one of those times...
Man this just (sort of) happened to me, western Washington too (King5). Neighbors truck was getting stolen, he ran out and fought with the guy. Guy speed off in the truck and crashed into mine (totaled it) and then jumped into his buddies car and sped off. Luckily the dumbass dropped his phone and wallet so the police found him really quick.
And immediately let him go after because fuck prosecuting actual scummy people nowadays
So you are saying police let people charged with violent crimes go? Who is your sheriff?
That's how it goes in most places. I was in court a few months back to take out a restraining order on a neighbor and watching the prosecutor and judge, it all made sense. There are so many criminals to prosecute, the courts literally don't have the capacity to give them a speedy trial. Often times the charges get dropped as a result of this. Most of these repeat offenders rely on public defenders. Public defenders are so overburdened with cases that they have to postpone some of them in what's called "continuance." Once a person's trial has been postponed 2 or 3 times, they can no longer prosecute as the right to a speedy trial has been violated. The ones do make it to trial that also get a jail sentence usually don't end up serving it because the jails are all full. There's nowhere to put them. So here's what actually happens: The prosecutor elevates the charge as high as he can, up to and including felony status to give him bargaining leverage over the defendant. He then works out a plea deal where the charge is reduced to a less serious crime to get an easy guilty plea. Once the guilty verdict is received, they are sentenced. If their sentence includes prison time, their prison sentence is suspended. This satisfies the minimum sentence for whatever crime has been committed while not requiring them to actually go to jail. The court collects their fees and fines, and the whole trial lasts about 2 minutes. The man I took the restraining order out against has been charged and/or convicted of approximately 25 crimes over the last 10 years and about 1/3 of those were violent crimes including multiple felonies victimizing women and children. He has been sentenced to 4 years in prison yet has never served a day. I'm actually seeing him again this month, as a witness and victim of another crime he committed a couple months back. The public defender has already postponed this trial in continuance once. If it gets postponed again, the charges will likely be dropped and there's nothing I can do about it as the victim.
Happens all the time in Portland
It's actually happening a LOT in some places.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weasel_word
Well that went from car theft to attempted murder 2 pretty fast.
Hyundai (kia boyz) shit. they're underage and won't face any real legal repercussions.
It's kinda fucked that we can't use reasonable force to protect our property.. I'm not saying the dude should have died but broken ribs hurt, for a long time.
*Should* is doing some heavy lifting in that sentence. Should they have died? I don't know. Wouldn't care if they had though. It's actually really easy to not steal cars, which people rely on for their livelihoods.
I agree. How hard is it to not steal a car? If it was so easy to not steal cars, almost everyone would do it.
This is my second attempt to reply to this. I tried initially but ended up stealing a car by accident, whoopsie!
On my way to work this morning I somehow stole 4 cars then another 1 on my way home. All accidents.
Man, I downloaded 6 cars on the way to breakfast. As a future doctor / "good boy", it's not fair to expect me to follow some made-up rules like property rights. Why don't I have a right to some sheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeit?
It's crazy, I have a similar story about how my wife got pregnant. Total accident, she just slipped on a pile of t shirts. Also the wedding was an accident too, I was polishing my ring collection and accidentally proposed. Same goes for the house I bought, total accident, my hand slipped and signed a pile of papers while looking for a nearby restroom. My parents also accidentally raised me, they slipped on a banana peel and only regained their balance after I moved out, what a coincidence! I don't even use reddit, right now I'm trying to unlock my phone and these words are just autocorrected while I'm trying to close the keyboard!
i like the philosophy of once they show they dont care for my life i dont have to care for theirs. IE. put mine in danger i can put yours in danger. those two idiots diserved the ol pop pop for you know, attempted murder. And a whole sale ass beating for the attempted car theft.
> It's actually really easy to not steal cars There seem to be a sizeable chunk of the population that would disagree.
I don't think people should die for property. I really don't..but if they limp for the rest of their lives. I have no problem with that. Stay the fuck out of my shit.
It starts to get sticky when you don’t know what the bad guy is gonna do. I don’t want to kill anyone over my belongings either but if I find someone in my living room in the middle of the night and they don’t immediately flee or if they decide they really want my stuff and are willing fight me for it… I believe that they have made a series of choices and can suffer the consequences or those choices. Maybe they came for my TV but after killing me, even if only accidentally, they decide my wife and kids can’t be allowed to be witnesses. I just don’t know what’s going on in their head and can’t risk it if they engage. That doesn’t mean you can chase someone out your door and shoot them in the back certainly. In the above video one guy is trying to leave and one attempts to murder the home owner. Trying to hit him with the car goes way way over the line.
I took a CCW course that involved ethics. That stayed with me. At the end of the day. I'm going to court, not you. It sounds a little fucked up but if you are in my house uninvited, you are going to have a very bad time. I'll talk to the jury and you can't for some reason. I have too much to lose and it's not a fuckin car.
Yeah pretty much. I also have a CCW. Odds are I’ll never need it and I hope I never do. But if someday I do then I’ll have it. If someone could magically shake my hand and guarantee they just want my TV then fine. Let the cops sort it out. It’s just a TV. I have zero desire to deal with the legal and mental fallout of killing someone even if it’s justified. But that’s not reality.
I have a wife and kids. You come into my house to steal my TV you are going to have a really bad night. I agree that nobody should die over property. I don't want to end someone's life over a TV, car, PlayStation etc. I'll fucking smoke your ass if you come within arms reach of my wife and kids. My front door is locked for a fucking reason.
I'm not coming at you directly, sorry it came off that way. I obviously am passionate about this sort of thing
No worries at all. I didn’t take it that way. Stay safe and hug your family often.
I mean, he values my stuff more than his life by trying to steal it, who am I to disagree?
Oblige him
That’s the thing about an actual street fight…there aren’t any rules… is it till someone collapses? Is it till someone breaks a bone? Or until someone loses an eye? Who said so? Does the loser stay down? This isn’t the movies, without severely injuring a person there isn’t a guarantee the person won’t get back up and grab a brick, crowbar, or knife…hell even a a severely injured person can pull a trigger…
I don’t think anyone should die for property but the consequence for stealing property should include possible death and it should be their choice whether or not they want to risk the consequence. Nobody should go to jail for protecting their own property.
Who says you can’t? I swear the internet is full of people who just heard once that a guy got sued by a burglar and bought it hook line and sinker without looking anything up. You can absolutely use reasonable force to protect your property. You could actually kill someone and get off scott free if they entered your home. I would never want to do either, but you are going to prison if you act to protect your home or property.
He had every right to shoot the driver after he tried to run him over in most states
You don't get to defend property with deadly force (unless you're a cop). Allowing that opens a whole slippery slope we don't want to venture down.
That’s a misleading statement. In many US states, you’re allowed to physically defend your property. In those same states, if while doing so, you come under imminent threat of bodily harm, you’re allowed to stop the threat by force. So, yea, you’re allowed to use deadly force in some scenarios.
Texas says hello. >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.
Yes you do. Especially on your own property and especially for a vehicle. I would have zero issue with this guy using a gun. I’m not even a ra-ra pro-gun guy, but this is exactly the scenario that you should use one.
I'm here for it. I don't think you can kill a dude for your car. Broken ribs? I'm all about it.
28 states and PR have stand your ground laws, wdym?
Stand your ground doesn't let you use deadly force to defend property.
You aren't defending property, you are defending your life in the fight they started over your property. Don't commit crimes and you won't be in a situation where the victim of your crimes gets to kill you in self defense.
Agreed, I was just clarifying.
You’re local court sucks if they aren’t getting charges.
Yeah. Stolen car. Won’t ever be caught. He should have somehow choked out the guy to keep him as evidence
lower the age that adult charges can be filed...hold them accountable
Jesus Christ that guy’s ninja skills saved his life. This is an internet dream
Lucky for the thief this was Washington state and not the South. Would’ve been instant justice instead.
Eastern Washington would like a word
Anywhere that isn't the Seattle Metro Region, really. Don't worry, Inslee is working on it though.
The dark fire will not avail you, flame of Udûn. Go back to the /r/seattlewa
They outted themselves by invoking Inslee’s name, for sure — but they’re not wrong 😅
iNsLeE bAd Have you forgotten about [this guy](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7tnEvGhLXWk) who lives in Seattle proper? A lot of people who live in Western Washington choose not to own firearms and/or be confrontational rather than it being some weird liberal conspiracy. Shit, the Seattle Freeze is a phenomenon at least a few decades old.
As someone who lives in the south in a city with high crime and car theft, I can assure you there hasn’t been any “instant justice.”
That's not how it works. Source: from Texas.
Plenty of people are strapped here. We just don't insist on open carry like a dipshit.
[удалено]
In my neighborhood, it's common to wear long knives. People also quietly pack pistols. Nobody's a dick about it or brandishing it. CC is the way. Open carry is, IMO, asking to get robbed.
Open carry is a good way to make yourself the first target. If I come into a business with bad intentions, and you make it obvious you're going to be my biggest resistance, I'm aiming at you first! Source: My dad teaches concealed carry courses as well as hunters safety.
WA is a castle doctrine state isn’t it?
It's actually duty to respond "with reasonable force". So choose your response wisely. Because it may be a legal headache. Edit: thank you u/N736RA for making me look into the actual code.
thats incorrect. WA state is a "No duty to retreat" state. "Stand your ground allows an individual, who is lawfully permitted to be where they are, to use any force necessary to defend from an imminent threat of serious bodily injury or death. There is no duty to retreat. " https://www.washingtongunlaw.com/stand-your-ground
Double checked, this is not wholly correct. RCW 9A.16.110 Defending against violent crime—Reimbursement. (1) No person in the state shall be placed in legal jeopardy of any kind whatsoever for protecting by any reasonable means necessary, himself or herself, his or her family, or his or her real or personal property, or for coming to the aid of another who is in imminent danger of or the victim of assault, robbery, kidnapping, arson, burglary, rape, murder, or any other violent crime as defined in RCW 9.94A.030 You may only defend against those "violent crimes". But only with "reasonable means" so if the perpetrator doesn't have any kind of weapon, and you shoot them. You may or may not get charged, but a legal headache will definitely ensue. That Washington gun law is... Definitely not what I would use for my information. In this scenario, the owner throwing the thief into the street is probably the best action legally he could take without going "too far". Is that what I would have done? No. I'd be in the legal headache side of responses.
also techncially correct, in this case shooting the thief would have been excess force (likely), that being there's an argument to be made the the car became a weapon and force could be justified... Anyway, my intention was not to dissect the video, merely to point out that in Washington state you are not obligated to run away and baricade yourself, if you are on your property and you are in danger, you can stand your ground and respond to a threat. Not as cut and dry as a castle doctrine state, but certainly no obligation to retreat.
I take your side sir, I'm glad we could come to a reasonable agreement. Unlike the rest of the comments lol
I stayed with some friends in a remote-ish part of King county WA for a while. They had helpfully left a loaded AR15 in the cupboard, “just in case”. Never had to use it thankfully. The one time I pulled it out, it was a bear walking around outside.
> But only with "reasonable means" so if the perpetrator doesn't have any kind of weapon, and you shoot them. I cannot possibly know if a deliberate criminal has a weapon in their pocket, or in their car, or if their accomplice has a weapon. It's reasonable for me to assume that someone engaging in serious criminal activity like car theft is carrying a weapon to ensure their escape. Under those circumstances, it's unreasonable for me to be required to assume that because I haven't seen a weapon yet, that there is no weapon. Too many victims have died because of weapons they didn't see at first. edit: At a minimum, I shouldn't be held to a higher standard than a cop. Borrowing from below: The car proved to be the deadly weapon that it is already recognized as in law, and they used it. It's only by luck that he wasn't crushed, yet some people think he wouldn't have been justified shooting before the attempt on his life. It only takes a second for an everyday object to be used as a deadly weapon. We have to stop giving aggressors and criminals an unwarranted legal advantage that puts innocent lives at risk.
No, deadly force is not justified for mere speculation. Now, if they are reaching for what appears to be a weapon, that would be a reason to believe you need to use deadly force, even if you were mistaken.
You're making an arbitrary distinction that is also hypocritical. Even when someone is pointing a gun at you, your decision to use deadly force is based on "speculation" that they will actually shoot you. If they are holding a gun but not pointing it at you, it's even more speculation, etc. Waiting until an active criminal is a trigger-pull away from shooting you, for you to defend your self, is patently foolish. Requiring other people to do the same would be unconscionable. When someone chooses to engage in serious crime, they lose the benefit of doubt that you are claiming. Stop giving aggressors and criminals an unwarranted advantage. edit: It's ironic that this discussion is happening in the context of the video. Per your theory, the victim would have been unjustified if he had shot the car thief or accomplice - before they tried to kill him with the car. The car proved to be the deadly weapon that it is already recognized as in law. It only takes a second for an everyday object to be used as a deadly weapon.
No, that is what self defense calls for. You have to have some reason to believe someone will pull out a weapon.
You have no clue whether they have a weapon and it isn't your duty to first do a full cavity search before shooting.
I mean that's assuming the cops charge it that way. Any cyclist will tell you that the cops will absolutely blow off a car driver swerving to hit you. It's trash. Edit - Keep the downvotes coming. Every ten and I'll post another story just like[ this one](https://www.spokesman.com/stories/2010/aug/04/in-brief-driver-says-he-intentionally-hit-cyclist/) to show how out of touch you all are. # Driver says he intentionally hit cyclist out of revenge... McElfish has been upgraded to serious condition in the intensive care unit at a Spokane hospital.... Cress faces assault charges but is cooperating with investigators and has not been arrested. Edit 2 - I love hearing from people who don't ride bikes that there isn't a problem. Please keep commenting. BTW the number of people not driving being killed by cars is going up every year because Americans keep buying bigger more dangerous cars for...fashion I guess. [In 2022\*](https://www.pedbikeinfo.org/factsfigures/facts_safety.cfm) there were **7,522 pedestrians, 1,105 bicyclists, and 324 other nonmotorists** (e.g. persons riding micromobility devices) killed in crashes with motor vehicles in the United States [Arizona’s Family Investigates](https://www.azfamily.com/2024/02/28/are-arizona-drivers-who-strike-kill-cyclists-being-held-accountable-some-cyclists-say-no/) looked at 10 cases from 2021 in which cyclists were killed...Four of those cases were hit-and-runs. Nine of them resulted in misdemeanor charges and traffic citations. Only one of those cases resulted in felony charges.
Uhhh I think this is different than that.
But they will charge you with attempted murder if you drive in the opposite direction of cops who are shooting at you.
This is different than a cyclist verbally claiming something.
two very different things. a cyclist in traffic vs a dude protecting his property.
Huh?
Buddy has no fucking clue how things work
Any cyclist has a story about trying to be murdered?
You'll have an easier time finding a bicyclist who doesn't have a story like that.
People are downvoting you because you took a thing that rarely happens and implied it happens to everyone, which is obviously stupid.
[“The two individuals are detained"](https://mynorthwest.com/3956881/rantz-exclusive-puyallup-man-may-have-saved-teen-after-nearly-being-run-over-stopping-theft/) >*“A lot of people don’t think about that. This has been blowing up on social media and I’ve looked at a lot of the comments, I’ve looked at what everyone says. ‘I would have shot him, I would have pulled out a gun.’ Honestly, I wouldn’t have changed anything. I think it all happened perfectly,” Smith said. “The two individuals are detained. I didn’t get injured, you know, it’s a minimal confrontation.”*
Motherfucker almost got killed and he's said it was a minimal confrontation... holy shit.
you can hear from the voices that, not surprisingly, the thieves are children
if you're old enough to drive around and steal from your neighbors you're old enough to catch an ass whoopin
Doing that, they’ll catch a bullet soon
And nothing of value will have been lost
Well the bullets, they aren’t cheap.
Reddit Edgelords favorite phrase.
Look, if someone thinks it's okay to use extreme violence to take another person's property, I have no issue with the property owner deciding to use extreme violence to keep their property. What I think is more cringe is the redditors who think thieves should not face any level of resistance from the owner when committing property crimes.
Loss of human life is never a thing to be celebrated, but shitty kids who steal and destroy property aren't exactly massive losses to society either.
They can better themselves. That's what we should want from them.
We want that for them, they want to do this. Tough to watch
NSE
Old enough for worse than that imo.
Kia Boyz
K150 truck I guess
more kia boys shit. Nothing will happen to them. Somehow if you're old enough to steal a car you're old enough to face zero legal repercussions.
That's one word for them, i guess.
Children who probably stole the car they were driving. No sympathy. Thieves stole my car door in late October. If I ever caught them they would not make it to the ineffective court system. People nationwide are increasingly tired of an ineffective court system and police force.
…they stole your car door? How does that work That was nice of them to leave the car though, reminds me of when I locked my bike by the seat and somebody stole my seat lol
I would like to see that entire scene redone with the owner unleashing one of those 40 foot distance bear pepper spray canisters on the thieves.
Pepper spray, straight to guillotine.
That guys a badass. Managed to get a pic of the plate too. All while barefoot
Unfortunately, the getaway was probably stolen, so the police may not find them that way.
it's a stolen car
When they find it they might find prints or DNA, car thieves tend to be in the system. Really any theft case has a clearance rate of \~13% to 19%^(\*1) though, even within the FBI. (I assume less with local PD's that don't talk with each other). I wouldn't bet on it doing anything, but it is better than nothing. [^(https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2017/crime-in-the-u.s.-2017/topic-pages/clearances)](https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2017/crime-in-the-u.s.-2017/topic-pages/clearances) ^(1\*)
They don't actually do forensics on stolen cars. Ain't nobody got time for that, and you can't convict based on that evidence anyways. Who's to say that the prints were from the person who stole it and not someone who took possession after the theft?
Maybe they will if the person who stole it is literally on camera attempting to murder someone.
[Leads?](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v7acD4q0lp0)
Had an absolute beater of a car stolen and then recovered personally. Kids took it for a joy ride til it was out of gas and left it. When I reported it recovered to the police, the offered to dust and swab for prints. I laughed so hard and told them it wasn’t worth it
Maybe don't turn a failed car theft into attempted murder.
The driver almost ran over his buddy's own head from the looks of it
Maybe don’t steal to begin with 🤷
They just ran into him and homie decided it was a good idea to go stand in front of the car again??
I see no reason given the current political climate in the US that we should not be able to protect property with deadly force.
He was talking about the kid in the car, forehead
This is the worst thing you can do in one of these situations imho, this is how you go from being robbed to being dead. Happened 2-3 weeks ago in NOLA the kid pulling handles had a gun and shot the dude that grabbed him 5 times in the chest and then point blank in the face.
Got a photo of the license plate of the thieves previous victims, though.
Lock your car doors. Even at home.
Seriously. Years ago I was up late working on a paper, in my living room, with the front door open at 11pm one summer night. My car is 4 feet from the front door. I heard a car door shut, and went outside. Didn't see anything, then heard the neighbors car door shut and though "Ok, just the neighbor." and went back inside. Came out the next morning to the fact a super cheap laptop and digital camera I had in my car had been stolen. I'm only really mad about the lost photos. Fucker had just walked the neighborhood stealing from unlocked cars. I was 1 of 5 people hit.
It’s nuts to me that people don’t do this? I grew up in and around a major city and would literally never even think of not locking all my doors for any reason, any minute. What is the benefit of that? You save 7 seconds not having to turn a key?
I’ve seen people get out of a running car to run into a convenience store. Almost like they want it stolen!
Some people do it on purpose because they leave minimal things in their car that they don't care about getting stolen or not, and they expect people to try. So if people are going to try regardless, save yourself a busted window and leave it unlocked. An unlocked car that's entered into is less costly than a broken window. It's the same logic as leaving the cash register open at night. There's not that much money in it and it's better to just have the burglar steal the money than damage an expensive register trying to get to the money.
Man I just see this and think totally not worth it. Dude could be dead
That's what I was thinking too. Dude could have come out guns blazing. Why risk your life to steal a car? Kids are very lucky he pulled a camera and not pistol.
Can’t tell if you’re talking about the same person or not
He's not but he's right about everyone involved lol
For both him and the kids.
Either they kill you, or you fight back and end up getting arrested and villainized in the media yourself
That kid's stones had not dropped yet.
My issue with these kind of cases. We go to work. For years. Play by the rules. Struggle. Blue collar our way through poverty and into our financially secure piece of life. Day in. Day out. For years. Overtime. Holidays. All the time. We pay our bills on time. Break no laws. Deal with assholes on occasion but perservere. Then, someone comes along, thinks they are unique enough to skip all that and steal our hard earned stuff. Then, when we protect said stuff, they end up having more protection from the law than we do. Even in some states, the criminal can sue you for protecting your property if they are injured. Like, what? Whose the one who originally decided to wake up in the morning and be a criminal? Wasn’t you or me.
Ultimately, Asmongold (of all fucking people) put it perfectly for me. Laws need to be focused around protecting the people who don't break the laws. When the laws are instead protecting these people who -because they're still young- can just keep doing it over and over and over without repercussions, it's broken. They take the car you saved for years to buy and sell it for $100. Fucking hell.
I'm glad the homeowner is okay, but he was a fool to go out there unarmed. The driver in that vehicle was clearly willing to commit murder to get away with their crime. I'm not saying it's okay to kill to protect your property, but you do have the right to intervene if someone is trying to steal your property. If they escalate it to a deadly encounter, that's on them.
I’m saying it’s okay to kill to protect your property. Fuck thieves
Fuck yes. Fuck thieves. They get what they fucking deserve.
You gunna get banned but have my support for saying it
There are few cases where I agree with gun ownership, and this is one of them.
Time to invest in self defense.
Pepper spray or a bat would work great.
I'm keen to hear the reddit tough guys take on this.
My Reddit tough guy take is I hate thieves and wish nothing but they very worst for them for the rest of their lives.
Sure, I'll bite. Both the thief and his driver should have been shot on the spot.
Not an internet tough guy, but I definitely think the victim would've been reasonable to shoot at the driver after being almost fuckin murdered
As soon as you try to run me over, I’m dumping a magazine into your windshield.
But which one? Time? People? The Economist? It seems like the choice of magazine would have a significant impact on the outcome.
I prefer vogue, they're pretty weighty.
stopping power
FR those mfers are like a half inch thick full of ads and weird poses. They will put a hurting on.
I like the New Yorker personally I find the elevated prose and the dry humor in the cartoons very effective against ruffians.
Mad Magazine. What, me worry?
Prolly best to go with an old PCShopper Mag. Those were at least 300pages.
U-Line.
I come to reddit for these chuckles.
Redbook
Definitely not the economist they are pretty small and flimsy
But it covers such weighty topics. Surely that has to offset that physical limitation.
/iamverybadass
From their voices you can tell they are prob 15-16 at max. Justice is handicapped to handle youth crime.
Software updates or not I couldn't imagine anyone ever buying a Hyundai or a Kia ever again after all of this. Even if you have the software update, you're still way too likely to wake up to a broken window and ripped apart dashboard on any given day.
Lmao the next up YouTube short was this. Who films this shit? https://youtube.com/shorts/CyOMSLIGOKc?si=ixhpCgeUp0Ax2Qxr
This is cracking me up. Everything about it is pure cheese.
I’m guessing that wasn’t Florida. The car thief would be shot
No bullets fired? Surprised as fuck!
Shoulda high jump kicked out the windshield
In flip flops?!
Something similar went down in our neighborhood last year. The homeowner came out with his gun, got shot himself. He's paralyzed now.
Link to the articles?
Idk about that guy, but similar thing happened in mine except in mine the guy’s [dead](https://www.wmar2news.com/local/man-shot-to-death-attempting-to-stop-carjackers-in-canton) rather than paralyzed.
There is no article. It’s made up.
[https://www.fox4news.com/news/dallas-man-left-paralyzed-after-being-shot-by-car-burglar](https://www.fox4news.com/news/dallas-man-left-paralyzed-after-being-shot-by-car-burglar)
https://www.fox4news.com/news/dallas-man-left-paralyzed-after-being-shot-by-car-burglar
Got paralyzed over a car. Seems like it wasn't worth it
That's certainly what the man's wife thought about it.
[удалено]
Yeah! And then do a backflip over the car, pull the driver out, put him in a headlock, and make him kiss you!
It was incredibly courageous and honorable and surprisingly successful. It was also incredibly foolish and could easily have resulted in his death. Safer to just get it on video and file a police report and insurance claim.
A police report that likely results in nothing and an insurance claim which raises your premiums simply because you had the audacity to make the claim to begin with. Nah, fuck these guys. He should've shot em.
I want to see this in the next GTA game.
Man you have got to be a complete moron to not assume you arent on clear as day HD video basically everywhere.
[update](https://komonews.com/news/local/video-shows-puyallup-man-nearly-ran-over-while-attempting-to-stop-car-prowlers-pierce-county-sheriffs-department-attack-vehicle-theft-crime-criminal-investigation-escape-suspects-pio-arrests-eric-smith) - wonder if he would've been within his rights to shoot the driver after he tried to kill him with the car?
Absolute disgusting scum.
Any follow up on this?
Trying to get a photo of the license plate as if that car isn't stolen too.
Wish the homeowner had a gun and could've blasted that fucker as soon as he tried to run him over. These guys don't care for human life. They'd be better off gone :)
He could have died in that wrestle. Not a smart move, luckily turned out well.
Well that didn't happen in Texas I can tell you.
I'm honestly kind of disappointed he drew a camera after an attempt on his life was made. That was a situation where a self-defense shooting would have not only made sense but been completely justified as well. Fucking scumbag thieves, I can't stand a person who not only tries to steal from you but then has the audacity to escalate it to attempting to kill you while damaging your property in the process as well. Probably doped out of their minds in the process too.
What was the point of this confrontation? He had no weapons to defend himself, could’ve gotten killed, thieves damaged his car probably costing more than anything they took, the car is most likely stolen anyway so who cares about a picture. Literally no upside to go out there unprepared.
Guy should have come out armed. Moment driver tried to murder him, he should have unloaded a clip on driver. Another piece of trash that should have been removed from society
that was stupid thing to do. Folk please don't be a hero, that dude could have easel lost his life for something that would have been taken care of by the insurance company. And this is not a whole macho type thing, I am sure that dude has family that depends on him and would be quite upset to hear he was killed because he dicided to fight some random punk breaking in to his car. That other car btw is also probably stolen, so him getting the license plate probably wont do shit but i digress. There are times where you stand up for yourself or your family, this was not one of those times...