Warning

 

Close
Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Cancel Confirm
AR15.COM
6/23/2016 10:33:51 AM EDT
My wife is taking her CWP exam tonight and brought up a question last night that I didn't have a good answer for her. After reading the lovely SC Use Of Deadly Force laws I still don't. Anyone have a good answer for her question?

Question: At what point is she allowed to pull her firearm and/or use it if someone is attempting to rob or snatch her purse away? Does the Castle Doctrine extend to her purse as property just like someone trying to break into your vehicle. My understanding is you are authorize deadly force to stop a vehicle break in regardless if you are in the vehicle or outside.

Thanks
6/23/2016 2:23:43 PM EDT
[#1]
I have to assume that the gun is not in the purse.

A lot happens in split seconds.

Is he armed?
Is he threatening her or just taking the purse?
Does presenting the gun make the bad guy drop the purse and run, or keep pulling?
Is she being video'd?

Any one answer doesn't work every time, but it always starts and concludes before the popo arrive

This is easily a "jury of 12/carried by 6" type issue?

Several others are more well versed in the law and may offer a better answer - Ponti always seems knowledgeable and of course schnee is a lawyer, plus our mods are quite good sources as well.
6/23/2016 5:24:05 PM EDT
[#2]
She is allowed to use it whenever she pleases. But if she uses deadly force when not facing imminent death or great bodily injury, don't be surprised if you have your lives ruined by an antigun zealot DA.

Add this to the confusion: If she purse carries, and some mugger is taking her purse, he will be armed if he gets it. Let 'em work, let 'em live?

But I aint no slick, fancy suit wearin, fast talkin lawyer feller, like whats up in the city.  *Paging Schneecat to the white courtesy phone.*
6/23/2016 8:16:02 PM EDT
[#3]
Quoted:
My wife is taking her CWP exam tonight and brought up a question last night that I didn't have a good answer for her. After reading the lovely SC Use Of Deadly Force laws I still don't. Anyone have a good answer for her question?

Question: At what point is she allowed to pull her firearm and/or use it if someone is attempting to rob or snatch her purse away? Does the Castle Doctrine extend to her purse as property just like someone trying to break into your vehicle. My understanding is you are authorize deadly force to stop a vehicle break in regardless if you are in the vehicle or outside.

Thanks
View Quote


No, only allowed to use deadly force when she can claim threat of force against her or another person (very much a fact based question of circumstances). Can't use deadly force to protect just property in SC. Now, someone trying to take her purse from her directly? - Open fire.
6/23/2016 8:17:34 PM EDT
[#4]
Quote History
Quoted:
She is allowed to use it whenever she pleases. But if she uses deadly force when not facing imminent death or great bodily injury, don't be surprised if you have your lives ruined by an antigun zealot DA.

Add this to the confusion: If she purse carries, and some mugger is taking her purse, he will be armed if he gets it. Let 'em work, let 'em live?

But I aint no slick, fancy suit wearin, fast talkin lawyer feller, like whats up in the city.  *Paging Schneecat to the white courtesy phone.*
View Quote


Sorry, I guess I'm too slow to beat the request tonight, lol.
6/24/2016 12:56:37 AM EDT
[#5]
Quote History
Quoted:


No, only allowed to use deadly force when she can claim threat of force against her or another person (very much a fact based question of circumstances). Can't use deadly force to protect just property in SC. Now, someone trying to take her purse from her directly? - Open fire.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Quote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
My wife is taking her CWP exam tonight and brought up a question last night that I didn't have a good answer for her. After reading the lovely SC Use Of Deadly Force laws I still don't. Anyone have a good answer for her question?

Question: At what point is she allowed to pull her firearm and/or use it if someone is attempting to rob or snatch her purse away? Does the Castle Doctrine extend to her purse as property just like someone trying to break into your vehicle. My understanding is you are authorize deadly force to stop a vehicle break in regardless if you are in the vehicle or outside.

Thanks


No, only allowed to use deadly force when she can claim threat of force against her or another person (very much a fact based question of circumstances). Can't use deadly force to protect just property in SC. Now, someone trying to take her purse from her directly? - Open fire.


Not being difficult, but I cant see the difference in the example you posted above. To me, both seem like "protecting property" at that point unless the bad guy is physically harming her.

ETA: say a guy walks up from behind, grabs her purse and tries to run away with it. At that point he's just "robbing her of her property" without the intent of harming her. Whereas if he starts beating on her right off the bat to get the bag away from her, different story.
6/24/2016 7:21:38 AM EDT
[#6]
Anybody remember the recent case in Camden where the homeowner shot the guy stealing from his truck?

To the best of my recollection, the robber was not threatening the owner, but still got deaded.

The homeowner did not get charged, but the event DID happen on his premises which is a primary difference in what you suggested. There is a gray line between the Castle Doctrine and fight or flight in public. Perceived threat level plays a role, and your actions may or may not be justifiable on hindsight. But, what will a jury think of your split second decision - ie: what would a reasonable person be expected to do if faced with that situation.

If I were on the jury, you would likely walk, but you can't bet on freedom lovers to be the ones to choose the verdict behind the closed court house doors.

Tough case.
6/24/2016 10:33:01 AM EDT
[#7]
Quote History
Quoted:
My wife is taking her CWP exam tonight and brought up a question last night that I didn't have a good answer for her. After reading the lovely SC Use Of Deadly Force laws I still don't. Anyone have a good answer for her question?

Question: At what point is she allowed to pull her firearm and/or use it if someone is attempting to rob or snatch her purse away? Does the Castle Doctrine extend to her purse as property just like someone trying to break into your vehicle. My understanding is you are authorize deadly force to stop a vehicle break in regardless if you are in the vehicle or outside.

Thanks
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Quote History
Quoted:
My wife is taking her CWP exam tonight and brought up a question last night that I didn't have a good answer for her. After reading the lovely SC Use Of Deadly Force laws I still don't. Anyone have a good answer for her question?

Question: At what point is she allowed to pull her firearm and/or use it if someone is attempting to rob or snatch her purse away? Does the Castle Doctrine extend to her purse as property just like someone trying to break into your vehicle. My understanding is you are authorize deadly force to stop a vehicle break in regardless if you are in the vehicle or outside.

Thanks




Now, someone trying to take her purse from her directly? - Open fire.


That is what she really is wondering about. Someone trying to take the purse off her body. And she 50/50 maybe be carrying in the purse depending on situation especially. Is it because the bag is attached to her at the time and could be perceived and she is being assaulted through it?

I remember that case about the guys shooting him for trying to rob it truck.

http://www.wistv.com/story/14046485/when-is-the-use-of-deadly-force-justified

I wondered about that since you can't use deadly force to protect property. I suppose if the guy turned around and what ever he had in his hands using to break into the truck I would consider the threat pointed my direction at that point.
6/24/2016 12:32:25 PM EDT
[#8]
He's not showing a weapon and is not beating on you - give him the purse - you may probably walk but your life will be hell from the lawsuit bought by his family, other harassment.
6/24/2016 12:59:02 PM EDT
[#9]


ARTICLE 6










Protection of Persons and Property Act






SECTION 16-11-420. Intent and findings of General Assembly







(E) The General Assembly finds that no person or victim of crime should be required to surrender his personal safety to a criminal, nor should a person or victim be required to needlessly retreat in the face of intrusion or attack.







SECTION 16-11-440. Presumption of reasonable fear of imminent peril when using deadly force against another unlawfully entering residence, occupied vehicle or place of business.
(C) A person who is not engaged in an unlawful activity and who is attacked in another place where he has a right to be, including, but not limited to, his place of business, has no duty to retreat and has the right to stand his ground and meet force with force, including deadly force, if he reasonably believes it is necessary to prevent death or great bodily injury to himself or another person or to prevent the commission of a violent crime as defined in Section 16-1-60.
This is my non-lawyer, non-legal advice, opinion on the matter.
Someone taking your wife's purse directly FROM HER means she IS being assaulted. She feared for her "personal safety"(16-11-420 (E)), right? I certainly would in that scenario, in the "face of attack"(16-11-420 (E)).
If someone was even approaching her in a threatening or suspicious manner, say a parking lot at night, and she asks them to stop and they do not I would say a person "reasonably believes"(16-11-440 (C)) they would have "fear of imminent peril"(16-11-440) and she has the right to "prevent death or great bodily injury to himself... or to prevent the commission of a violent crime as defined in Section 16-1-60"(16-11-440 (C)).










SECTION 16-1-60. Violent crimes defined.
For purposes of definition under South Carolina law, a violent crime includes the offenses of: murder (Section 16-3-10); attempted murder (Section 16-3-29); assault and battery by mob, first degree, resulting in death (Section 16-3-210(B)), criminal sexual conduct in the first and second degree (Sections 16-3-652 and 16-3-653); criminal sexual conduct with minors, first, second, and third degree (Section 16-3-655); assault with intent to commit criminal sexual conduct, first and second degree (Section 16-3-656); assault and battery with intent to kill (Section 16-3-620); assault and battery of a high and aggravated nature (Section 16-3-600(B)); kidnapping (Section 16-3-910); trafficking in persons (Section 16-3-2020); voluntary manslaughter (Section 16-3-50); armed robbery (Section 16-11-330(A)); attempted armed robbery (Section 16-11-330(B)); carjacking (Section 16-3-1075); drug trafficking as defined in Section 44-53-370(e) or trafficking cocaine base as defined in Section 44-53-375(C); manufacturing or trafficking methamphetamine as defined in Section 44-53-375; arson in the first degree (Section 16-11-110(A)); arson in the second degree (Section 16-11-110(B)); burglary in the first degree (Section 16-11-311); burglary in the second degree (Section 16-11-312(B)); engaging a child for a sexual performance (Section 16-3-810); homicide by child abuse (Section 16-3-85(A)(1)); aiding and abetting homicide by child abuse (Section 16-3-85(A)(2)); inflicting great bodily injury upon a child (Section 16-3-95(A)); allowing great bodily injury to be inflicted upon a child (Section 16-3-95(B)); domestic violence of a high and aggravated nature (Section 16-25-65); domestic violence in the first degree (Section 16-25-20(B)); abuse or neglect of a vulnerable adult resulting in death (Section 43-35-85(F)); abuse or neglect of a vulnerable adult resulting in great bodily injury (Section 43-35-85(E)); taking of a hostage by an inmate (Section 24-13-450); detonating a destructive device upon the capitol grounds resulting in death with malice (Section 10-11-325(B)(1)); spousal sexual battery (Section 16-3-615); producing, directing, or promoting sexual performance by a child (Section 16-3-820); sexual exploitation of a minor first degree (Section 16-15-395); sexual exploitation of a minor second degree (Section 16-15-405); promoting prostitution of a minor (Section 16-15-415); participating in prostitution of a minor (Section 16-15-425); aggravated voyeurism (Section 16-17-470(C)); detonating a destructive device resulting in death with malice (Section 16-23-720(A)(1)); detonating a destructive device resulting in death without malice (Section 16-23-720(A)(2)); boating under the influence resulting in death (Section 50-21-113(A)(2)); vessel operator's failure to render assistance resulting in death (Section 50-21-130(A)(3)); damaging an airport facility or removing equipment resulting in death (Section 55-1-30(3)); failure to stop when signaled by a law enforcement vehicle resulting in death (Section 56-5-750(C)(2)); interference with traffic-control devices, railroad signs, or signals resulting in death (Section 56-5-1030(B)(3)); hit and run resulting in death (Section 56-5-1210(A)(3)); felony driving under the influence or felony driving with an unlawful alcohol concentration resulting in death (Section 56-5-2945(A)(2)); putting destructive or injurious materials on a highway resulting in death (Section 57-7-20(D)); obstruction of a railroad resulting in death (Section 58-17-4090); accessory before the fact to commit any of the above offenses (Section 16-1-40); and attempt to commit any of the above offenses (Section 16-1-80). Only those offenses specifically enumerated in this section are considered violent offenses.









"Open fire"




 
6/24/2016 3:40:39 PM EDT
[#10]
^^^^^^^^ violent crime^^^^^^^
6/24/2016 4:03:21 PM EDT
[#11]
I really want to give a complete answer to all of the above questions, but unfortunately there are too many factual possibilities and the courts, police and prosecutors deal with every case differently. One of my best friends is probably the top attorney in the State for castle doctrine issues and very often he isn't sure what the correct answer will be.
6/25/2016 12:51:29 AM EDT
[#12]
Quote History
Quoted:
I really want to give a complete answer to all of the above questions, but unfortunately there are too many factual possibilities and the courts, police and prosecutors deal with every case differently. One of my best friends is probably the top attorney in the State for castle doctrine issues and very often he isn't sure what the correct answer will be.
View Quote


Unfortunately, this sums it up best. No two cases are likely to turn out the same, we just hope to never be in the situation and have to find out.
6/25/2016 12:53:50 AM EDT
[#13]
Quote History
Quoted:
He's not showing a weapon and is not beating on you - give him the purse - you may probably walk but your life will be hell from the lawsuit bought by his family, other harassment.
View Quote


I guess this is where I was thinking things could get sticky. If dude doesn't have a weapon and isn't harming the woman, just give him the purse and chalk it up to a loss(would be a little harder to do if said woman had a firearm in the bag, because then bad guy has a free weapon). If things turn violent, the situation drastically changes and she would be more than justified to use force.
6/25/2016 12:54:34 AM EDT
[#14]
dbl tap