User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 7/4/2015 12:57:16 PM EDT
[#1]
So, I think I may have figured out my answer. Because I questioned it, I had a feeling like using a gun outside of your home was a no-go for FOID holders.
http://www.handgunlaw.us/documents/agopinions/USDisCtforIllinoisOnOutSideHomeCarry.pdf While not a lawyer, from what I can gather, carrying or having possession on any public street, alley, or public land is a class 4 felony without a ccw license. I really need to get off the couch and take that 16 hour course. :) |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/4/2015 5:51:18 PM EDT
[#2]
Might as well. I just took the class, prices are down now. I took it because there was a lot of confusion about a lot of thing. It seemed that I would have more "Rights" with the CC card, even when I wasn't carrying. Just to be on the safe side, why not, it cost 100 dollars at Illinois Public Safety in Crestwood.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/5/2015 9:57:51 AM EDT
[#3]
Yes you could be charged because it is a violation of law. However the common
law defense of necessity would probably apply in a legitimate self defense situation. How this plays out is going to depend on the specific facts and the politics of the SA. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/5/2015 11:17:19 AM EDT
[#4]
Deadly force cannot be used in Illinois to protect property. Can't shoot someone stealing your car or breaking in your detached garage. Castle doctrine could apply for a garage that is integral to the house (common entry door separating same).
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/5/2015 1:00:12 PM EDT
[#5]
UUW statute
Definitely get your carry license. The process is involving but not difficult, the hardest part is waiting for it to arrive. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/5/2015 1:55:01 PM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Might as well. I just took the class, prices are down now. I took it because there was a lot of confusion about a lot of thing. It seemed that I would have more "Rights" with the CC card, even when I wasn't carrying. Just to be on the safe side, why not, it cost 100 dollars at Illinois Public Safety in Crestwood. Wow, 100 bucks. What were your thoughts of the course? I'm actually on a mission to find a place to get trained. I was thinking it would be $350 for classes and rangetime. For 100 bucks, I might even sign the wife up...and, crestwood isn't a drive for me either, which is a huge plus. It looks like they use article ii. They have a class in July 11th and 12th, and range time on the 11th and then August 5th. If you sign up for the July 11/12th dates, do you have to wait until August 5th to qual, or do you go during the 16 hour class? |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/5/2015 2:22:16 PM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
UUW statute Definitely get your carry license. The process is involving but not difficult, the hardest part is waiting for it to arrive. Quote HistoryQuoted:
UUW statute Definitely get your carry license. The process is involving but not difficult, the hardest part is waiting for it to arrive. Good link, but may I offer as an alternative the 720 ILCS 5/7 - the Justifiable Use of Force Statute ARTICLE 7. JUSTIFIABLE USE OF FORCE; EXONERATION
(720 ILCS 5/7-1) (from Ch. 38, par. 7-1) Sec. 7-1. Use of force in defense of person. (a) A person is justified in the use of force against another when and to the extent that he reasonably believes that such conduct is necessary to defend himself or another against such other's imminent use of unlawful force. However, he is justified in the use of force which is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm only if he reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or another, or the commission of a forcible felony. (b) In no case shall any act involving the use of force justified under this Section give rise to any claim or liability brought by or on behalf of any person acting within the definition of "aggressor" set forth in Section 7-4 of this Article, or the estate, spouse, or other family member of such a person, against the person or estate of the person using such justified force, unless the use of force involves willful or wanton misconduct. (Source: P.A. 93-832, eff. 7-28-04.) (720 ILCS 5/7-2) (from Ch. 38, par. 7-2) Sec. 7-2. Use of force in defense of dwelling. (a) A person is justified in the use of force against another when and to the extent that he reasonably believes that such conduct is necessary to prevent or terminate such other's unlawful entry into or attack upon a dwelling. However, he is justified in the use of force which is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm only if: (1) The entry is made or attempted in a violent, riotous, or tumultuous manner, and he reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent an assault upon, or offer of personal violence to, him or another then in the dwelling, or (2) He reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent the commission of a felony in the dwelling. (b) In no case shall any act involving the use of force justified under this Section give rise to any claim or liability brought by or on behalf of any person acting within the definition of "aggressor" set forth in Section 7-4 of this Article, or the estate, spouse, or other family member of such a person, against the person or estate of the person using such justified force, unless the use of force involves willful or wanton misconduct. (Source: P.A. 93-832, eff. 7-28-04.) (720 ILCS 5/7-3) (from Ch. 38, par. 7-3) Sec. 7-3. Use of force in defense of other property. (a) A person is justified in the use of force against another when and to the extent that he reasonably believes that such conduct is necessary to prevent or terminate such other's trespass on or other tortious or criminal interference with either real property (other than a dwelling) or personal property, lawfully in his possession or in the possession of another who is a member of his immediate family or household or of a person whose property he has a legal duty to protect. However, he is justified in the use of force which is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm only if he reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent the commission of a forcible felony. (b) In no case shall any act involving the use of force justified under this Section give rise to any claim or liability brought by or on behalf of any person acting within the definition of "aggressor" set forth in Section 7-4 of this Article, or the estate, spouse, or other family member of such a person, against the person or estate of the person using such justified force, unless the use of force involves willful or wanton misconduct. (Source: P.A. 93-832, eff. 7-28-04.) |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/5/2015 5:26:50 PM EDT
[#8]
Deadly force cannot be used in Illinois to protect property. Actually, according to posting above, it can be used for protection of property....However, you should weigh out your cost in the form of emotional, legal, societal costs. Is it better to shoot someone or just be a good witness. The insurance deductible may be quite a bargain compared to legal fees required to get you exonerated. if I have a handgun properly broken down and stored in a vehicle Your handgun needn't be broken down...you can have it unloaded and enclosed in a case with the ammo in the case with it with a FOID card. However the common
law defense of necessity would probably apply in a legitimate self defense situation. How this plays out is going to depend on the specific facts and the politics of the SA. Pretty much spot on...If you used a gun in a legally justified shooting, you will not be convicted of firearms violations. So, say you justifiably shot someone with an "assault weapon" in a county that has a ban on such weapons, you would not be convicted on the weapons charge. However, if it isn't justified, that charge will be added to the other charges. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/5/2015 9:16:05 PM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Wow, 100 bucks. What were your thoughts of the course? I'm actually on a mission to find a place to get trained. I was thinking it would be $350 for classes and rangetime. For 100 bucks, I might even sign the wife up...and, crestwood isn't a drive for me either, which is a huge plus. It looks like they use article ii. They have a class in July 11th and 12th, and range time on the 11th and then August 5th. If you sign up for the July 11/12th dates, do you have to wait until August 5th to qual, or do you go during the 16 hour class? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Might as well. I just took the class, prices are down now. I took it because there was a lot of confusion about a lot of thing. It seemed that I would have more "Rights" with the CC card, even when I wasn't carrying. Just to be on the safe side, why not, it cost 100 dollars at Illinois Public Safety in Crestwood. Wow, 100 bucks. What were your thoughts of the course? I'm actually on a mission to find a place to get trained. I was thinking it would be $350 for classes and rangetime. For 100 bucks, I might even sign the wife up...and, crestwood isn't a drive for me either, which is a huge plus. It looks like they use article ii. They have a class in July 11th and 12th, and range time on the 11th and then August 5th. If you sign up for the July 11/12th dates, do you have to wait until August 5th to qual, or do you go during the 16 hour class? The class was pretty general. The instructor tries to keep you interested, which helps, considering how long it is. The range time is separate, you will not qualify during class time. They have light guns so your can train with a gun in hand. I assume you would have to wait until the 5th, but I don't see why. I believe you have to finish each sequence of the course, the order my not be important. Call and ask. Can't beat the price. Finger prints are extra, of course. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/8/2015 4:02:04 PM EDT
[#10]
Again a gentle reminder:
Your trainer will be called to the stand if you have to use your CCW. Who do you want in that chair defending your life? |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/8/2015 4:15:33 PM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Again a gentle reminder: Your trainer will be called to the stand if you have to use your CCW. Who do you want in that chair defending your life? Do you have examples of this? I have heard it said many times but, i have no knowledge of it actually happening. I don't remember any instructors being called in Zimmerman case which would have been a red letter case. Just looking for examples... Thanks |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/8/2015 5:27:11 PM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Again a gentle reminder: Your trainer will be called to the stand if you have to use your CCW. Who do you want in that chair defending your life? Possibly, an instructor could be called by the defense in a criminal trial, if at all. There is a greater likelihood a plaintiff's attorney would subpoena an instructor during a civil proceeding. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/9/2015 11:10:40 AM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Deadly force cannot be used in Illinois to protect property. Can't shoot someone stealing your car or breaking in your detached garage. Castle doctrine could apply for a garage that is integral to the house (common entry door separating same). Wow... That is 100% incorrect...
See why you should take a class from an approved instructor and not get advice from anonymous internet message boards? Shameless plug, I have a class coming up on July 25-26 in Peru, IL. It is just a bit more than $100, but it includes range time, electronic app completion, FL and/or AZ app, and probably lunch. I also have spouse discounts if your wife can come with you. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/9/2015 1:49:17 PM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Deadly force cannot be used in Illinois to protect property. Can't shoot someone stealing your car or breaking in your detached garage. Castle doctrine could apply for a garage that is integral to the house (common entry door separating same). is stealing a car felony?? |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/9/2015 1:56:37 PM EDT
[#15]
bobapunk, does it have to be your own wife, or can I bring someone elses
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/9/2015 3:11:38 PM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted: bobapunk, does it have to be your own wife, or can I bring someone elses |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/9/2015 10:46:49 PM EDT
[#17]
Stealing a car is a felony. May be hard to prove it was a forcible felony. Carjacking is a forcible felony where great bodily harm is present.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/9/2015 11:03:50 PM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Stealing a car is a felony. May be hard to prove it was a forcible felony. Carjacking is a forcible felony where great bodily harm is present. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Stealing a car is a felony. May be hard to prove it was a forcible felony. Carjacking is a forcible felony where great bodily harm is present. Edited for clarity: The law says a burglary is a forcible felony. If the person is in your car, it's a burglary. (720 ILCS 5/2-8) (from Ch. 38, par. 2-8) Sec. 2-8. "Forcible felony". "Forcible felony" means treason, first degree murder, second degree murder, predatory criminal sexual assault of a child, aggravated criminal sexual assault, criminal sexual assault, robbery, burglary, residential burglary, aggravated arson, arson, aggravated kidnaping, kidnaping, aggravated battery resulting in great bodily harm or permanent disability or disfigurement and any other felony which involves the use or threat of physical force or violence against any individual. (720 ILCS 5/19-1) (from Ch. 38, par. 19-1) Sec. 19-1. Burglary. (a) A person commits burglary when without authority he or she knowingly enters or without authority remains within a building, housetrailer, watercraft, aircraft, motor vehicle, railroad car, or any part thereof, with intent to commit therein a felony or theft. This offense shall not include the offenses set out in Section 4-102 of the Illinois Vehicle Code. (720 ILCS 5/16-1) (from Ch. 38, par. 16-1) Sec. 16-1. Theft. (a) A person commits theft when he or she knowingly: (1) Obtains or exerts unauthorized control over property of the owner; or... Section 4-102 of the Illinois Vehicle Code, since it was referenced by the Burglary law.
(625 ILCS 5/4-102) (from Ch. 95 1/2, par. 4-102) Sec. 4-102. Offenses relating to motor vehicles and other vehicles - Misdemeanors. (a) It is a violation of this Chapter for: (1) A person, without authority to do so, to damage a vehicle or to damage or remove any part of a vehicle; (2) A person, without authority to do so, to tamper with a vehicle or go in it, on it, or work or attempt to work any of its parts, or set or attempt to set it in motion; (3) A person to fail to report a vehicle as unclaimed in accordance with the provisions of Section 4-107. (b) Sentence. A person convicted of a violation of this Section shall be guilty of a Class A misdemeanor. A person convicted of a violation of this Section a second or subsequent time, shall be guilty of a Class 4 felony. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/10/2015 12:01:22 PM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Stealing a car is a felony. May be hard to prove it was a forcible felony. Carjacking is a forcible felony where great bodily harm is present. You still must be able to articulate that you or another were in reasonable apprehension of great bodily harm or death when you made the decision to apply deadly force. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/10/2015 4:53:05 PM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted: You still must be able to articulate that you or another were in reasonable apprehension of great bodily harm or death when you made the decision to apply deadly force. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Stealing a car is a felony. May be hard to prove it was a forcible felony. Carjacking is a forcible felony where great bodily harm is present. You still must be able to articulate that you or another were in reasonable apprehension of great bodily harm or death when you made the decision to apply deadly force. Not according to the ILLINOIS LAW RE: JUSTIFIABLE USE OF FORCE.... he is justified in the use of force which is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm only if he reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent the commission of a forcible felony |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/10/2015 6:25:36 PM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Not according to the ILLINOIS LAW RE: JUSTIFIABLE USE OF FORCE.... he is justified in the use of force which is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm only if he reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent the commission of a forcible felony Robbery and Burglary are both "forcible felonies" in Illinois. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Stealing a car is a felony. May be hard to prove it was a forcible felony. Carjacking is a forcible felony where great bodily harm is present. You still must be able to articulate that you or another were in reasonable apprehension of great bodily harm or death when you made the decision to apply deadly force. Not according to the ILLINOIS LAW RE: JUSTIFIABLE USE OF FORCE.... he is justified in the use of force which is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm only if he reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent the commission of a forcible felony Robbery and Burglary are both "forcible felonies" in Illinois. Agreed...but, always quoted with the qualifier: Is the legal expense and headaches of shooting someone over property in your own best interest. You will have to make that decision but, it is nice to have the law on your side....You will still most likely have to hire a lawyer to make sure your rights are upheld. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/11/2015 5:10:28 PM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Not according to the ILLINOIS LAW RE: JUSTIFIABLE USE OF FORCE.... he is justified in the use of force which is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm only if he reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent the commission of a forcible felony Robbery and Burglary are both "forcible felonies" in Illinois. It's not that simple Nick. It's not all black and white. The reasonable person doctrine applies and the JOA concept also applies. Are you or another in Jeopardy and does the assailant have the Opportunity and Ability to inflict great bodily harm or death? Example 1: You witness a one on one Robbery in which the use of force is threatened against another if they do not surrender property to the robber. No physical force is used and no weapon is displayed. Do you use deadly force or not? If you apply deadly force without being able to articulate that you or another are in reasonable apprehension of great bodily harm or death, you will find yourself unwillingly involved in the legal process with the very real possibility of a conviction for a criminal offense. Example 2: If someone forces their way into your residence and removes property without your authority, it would be considered a burglary. If you happen upon them, they flee your home with property and you engage them with deadly force, you will most likely be an unwilling participant in the legal process. Police cannot even engage someone who is fleeing the scene of a burglary with deadly force without additional justification. Google Garner vs. Tennessee, read the original case and some of the numerous cases in which that precedent applied over the years. The dynamics of each instance in which deadly force MAY be applied and applicable case law need to be discussed in great detail. Regurgitating text from state statute is not sufficient. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/11/2015 8:41:33 PM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Agreed...but, always quoted with the qualifier: Is the legal expense and headaches of shooting someone over property in your own best interest. You will have to make that decision but, it is nice to have the law on your side....You will still most likely have to hire a lawyer to make sure your rights are upheld. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Stealing a car is a felony. May be hard to prove it was a forcible felony. Carjacking is a forcible felony where great bodily harm is present. You still must be able to articulate that you or another were in reasonable apprehension of great bodily harm or death when you made the decision to apply deadly force. Not according to the ILLINOIS LAW RE: JUSTIFIABLE USE OF FORCE.... he is justified in the use of force which is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm only if he reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent the commission of a forcible felony Robbery and Burglary are both "forcible felonies" in Illinois. Agreed...but, always quoted with the qualifier: Is the legal expense and headaches of shooting someone over property in your own best interest. You will have to make that decision but, it is nice to have the law on your side....You will still most likely have to hire a lawyer to make sure your rights are upheld. Mike, I never said that deadly force was recommended, or a good idea; just that the law says that it is legal...
The law says it is legal to drive 70 MPH on interstates, that does not mean that it is always the prudent thing to do. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/11/2015 8:59:50 PM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted: It's not that simple Nick. It's not all black and white. The reasonable person doctrine applies and the JOA concept also applies. Are you or another in Jeopardy and does the assailant have the Opportunity and Ability to inflict great bodily harm or death? Example 1: You witness a one on one Robbery in which the use of force is threatened against another if they do not surrender property to the robber. No physical force is used and no weapon is displayed. Do you use deadly force or not? If you apply deadly force without being able to articulate that you or another are in reasonable apprehension of great bodily harm or death, you will find yourself unwillingly involved in the legal process with the very real possibility of a conviction for a criminal offense. Example 2: If someone forces their way into your residence and removes property without your authority, it would be considered a burglary. If you happen upon them, they flee your home with property and you engage them with deadly force, you will most likely be an unwilling participant in the legal process. Police cannot even engage someone who is fleeing the scene of a burglary with deadly force without additional justification. Google Garner vs. Tennessee, read the original case and some of the numerous cases in which that precedent applied over the years. The dynamics of each instance in which deadly force MAY be applied and applicable case law need to be discussed in great detail. Regurgitating text from state statute is not sufficient. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Not according to the ILLINOIS LAW RE: JUSTIFIABLE USE OF FORCE.... he is justified in the use of force which is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm only if he reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent the commission of a forcible felony Robbery and Burglary are both "forcible felonies" in Illinois. It's not that simple Nick. It's not all black and white. The reasonable person doctrine applies and the JOA concept also applies. Are you or another in Jeopardy and does the assailant have the Opportunity and Ability to inflict great bodily harm or death? Example 1: You witness a one on one Robbery in which the use of force is threatened against another if they do not surrender property to the robber. No physical force is used and no weapon is displayed. Do you use deadly force or not? If you apply deadly force without being able to articulate that you or another are in reasonable apprehension of great bodily harm or death, you will find yourself unwillingly involved in the legal process with the very real possibility of a conviction for a criminal offense. Example 2: If someone forces their way into your residence and removes property without your authority, it would be considered a burglary. If you happen upon them, they flee your home with property and you engage them with deadly force, you will most likely be an unwilling participant in the legal process. Police cannot even engage someone who is fleeing the scene of a burglary with deadly force without additional justification. Google Garner vs. Tennessee, read the original case and some of the numerous cases in which that precedent applied over the years. The dynamics of each instance in which deadly force MAY be applied and applicable case law need to be discussed in great detail. Regurgitating text from state statute is not sufficient. This law does appear to be "that simple"... Yes, the reasonable person doctrine applies. I believe I quoted that: "reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent the commission of a forcible felony" Example #1: If you can articulate why you "reasonably believed that such force was necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm another, or robbery, or another felony which involves the use or threat of physical force or violence against any individual" then I don't see how you are going to convicted of a criminal offense. There are multiple legal justifications for use of deadly force in your example... as long as you "reasonably believe". Example #2, if you pursue someone after they commit a forcible felony, and then use deadly force, that would not be justified by the law. The law clearly states "PREVENT the commission of a forcible felony". Where did I ever say that chasing down a fleeing criminal was legally justified? You are right, each and every scenario is unique with specific details that may effect the legal justifications of using force. Please go back and read what I have posted here. All I was doing was countering the incorrect statement that, "Deadly force cannot be used in Illinois to protect property"...
We have enough bad laws to deal with; we don't need to invent more problems where they don't exist. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/12/2015 8:28:33 AM EDT
[#25]
And to further beat a dead horse
In agreement with Bobapunk: I’m not an advocate of shooting someone stealing your TV…Or even stealing your car unless your kids are in it…But, the question seems to be around what the law actually states. If you are in your house and someone throws a concrete block through your patio door to get access to your house…By law, you can use lethal force to stop that forcible felony. There is no mention of fear for your life in this provision of the law. So, your lawyer…and yes, you will have to get a lawyer will keep you out of jail once it is proved it was a forcible felony…The fear for your life (which could also possibly be used) argument isn’t required. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/12/2015 3:17:35 PM EDT
[#26]
The text of the ILCS is not all inclusive. To have a better understanding of how each section of the criminal code applies requires a working understanding of legislative intent and case law, which is continually changing.
Instructors need to be careful, including what information they provide on the internet. It is all subject to discovery during civil litigation. Personally, when someone asks me a question about use of force, I would never just repeat what one particular section or a few sections of the criminal code states. There is a lot of background that applies to each statute that requires years to learn and understand. This is why I can't finish the criminal code portion of the FCCL course in 4 hours if students are asking good questions. Without questions it takes five hours and with good question it takes a bit longer. I have never had a single student complain about running an hour or two over and have had people who were trained elsewhere come to me and ask questions. I am not the most knowledgeable when it pertains to the criminal code, but I have a considerable amount of experience investigating shootings, attending autopsies and testifying in homicide trials. That being said, there are more knowledgeable instructors than myself and I learn something new from them often. Anytime you get three FCCL instructors involved in a discussion, you won't get more than two to agree on any given point. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/12/2015 3:30:19 PM EDT
[#27]
Quoted:
I've got a question that I hope to never be able to practice. I am NOT a CCW holder but I do have a FOID. When am I allowed to use a handgun? For example, if I have a handgun properly broken down and stored in a vehicle and see some trouble coming up, re-assemble the handgun, load it, and shoot somebody, could I be charged? If there was an upcoming apocalypse and had a handgun in my vehicle, would I be able to walk around with it holstered and not worry about the law? On private property and inside a home, I think it's pretty much a no-brainer of what to do. But if I am traveling and discharge my weapon because I feel like my life is in danger, could I be charged with something? Again, with a CCW, there's not that much to determine. But as somebody with a FOID, can I just break it down and use it if needed anywhere within the state? To get the thread back on track: 1) You would have to provide much greater detail about the incident before someone should comment on whether you may or may not be charged. If you applied deadly force with any weapon, not just a firearm, expect to be held by the police during the investigation. 2) I could not find any exemptions in the ILCS for open carry in a public place during civil unrest. If another instructor has located a provision for exemption in the Illinois Criminal Code, it would be great if they posted the specific section to further the discussion. Unless someone can cite a provision for exemption, it would be safe to say you would be subject to arrest. From a practical standpoint, you would have to ask yourself "would law enforcement view me as part of the problem" while they are trying to get things back under control. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/12/2015 3:31:32 PM EDT
[#28]
Anytime you get three FCCL instructors involved in a discussion, you won't get more than two to agree on any given point. On this, we definitely agree. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/1/2015 6:28:27 PM EDT
[#29]
Wow, thank you all for the responses and information. I never realized it would had differing points of view, but it's all good information to think about.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/1/2015 6:44:53 PM EDT
[#30]
Food for thought,
First rule of self defense is don't put yourself in a situation where you need to use self defense. This requires awareness and avoidance. Second rule of self defense is deescalation, even if you are right apologize. Try to calm the situation down. If you are armed you have already won the fight, there is no need to prove it. Third rule of self defense is flee if possible. There is nothing to prove here by fighting, it is a lose lose situation. Fourth rule of self defense is to use less lethal means if you can not flee. Pepper spray, kick to the groin, maybe a knife (though knives are very lethal). A firearm is the 5th rule of self defense and is a means of last resort, that's the point of all the rules. Keep in mind that all these rules may go right out the window when put in a life and death situation. You may skip 2, 3 or 4, and go right to 5 and be justified in doing so. Every situation is flexible, but the point again is that lethal force is a means of last resort. Even if you are legally justified I can't think of any good that will come with taking a life, even if justified. Last resort. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/3/2015 4:52:29 AM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Not according to the ILLINOIS LAW RE: JUSTIFIABLE USE OF FORCE.... he is justified in the use of force which is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm only if he reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent the commission of a forcible felony Robbery and Burglary are both "forcible felonies" in Illinois. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Stealing a car is a felony. May be hard to prove it was a forcible felony. Carjacking is a forcible felony where great bodily harm is present. You still must be able to articulate that you or another were in reasonable apprehension of great bodily harm or death when you made the decision to apply deadly force. Not according to the ILLINOIS LAW RE: JUSTIFIABLE USE OF FORCE.... he is justified in the use of force which is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm only if he reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent the commission of a forcible felony Robbery and Burglary are both "forcible felonies" in Illinois. Are you serious? Re-read the part beginning with 'only if..' |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/6/2015 11:13:03 PM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
And to further beat a dead horse
In agreement with Bobapunk: I’m not an advocate of shooting someone stealing your TV…Or even stealing your car unless your kids are in it…But, the question seems to be around what the law actually states. If you are in your house and someone throws a concrete block through your patio door to get access to your house…By law, you can use lethal force to stop that forcible felony. There is no mention of fear for your life in this provision of the law. So, your lawyer…and yes, you will have to get a lawyer will keep you out of jail once it is proved it was a forcible felony…The fear for your life (which could also possibly be used) argument isn’t required. Damage to property would not be justification for the application of deadly force. The fact that someone was attempting to enter your residence in a riotous and tumultuous manner would apply. |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
