Woman With a Gun Apprehended a Murderer

Post your links to the latest news.

Moderators: admin, Inquisitor, ForumModerator, WebsiteContent

Post Reply
Stiff
Loquacious
Posts: 3623
Joined: Thu Apr 16, 2015 1:43 am
Contact:

Woman With a Gun Apprehended a Murderer

Post by Stiff »

Too bad she couldn’t step in earlier, but at least the suspect didn’t escape.

https://www.wndu.com/2020/09/17/woman-h ... michigan-2

Update: here’s a more detailed story

https://www.lenconnect.com/news/2020091 ... n-with-gun
Last edited by Stiff on Thu Sep 17, 2020 10:05 pm, edited 1 time in total.
When the ignorant are united and the informed are divided, the result is an idiocracy.

User avatar
BKinzey
Verified Member
Verified Member
Posts: 2184
Joined: Wed Jan 08, 2014 12:34 pm
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Contact:

Re: Woman With a Gun Apprehended a Murderer

Post by BKinzey »

Somebody gets stabbed to death in a grocery store and this is all the info they have to report?

Any less info and one might think there could be some sort of agenda against reporting on it.

EDITORS NOTE:
One short story is certainly not enough to question motives here but I would be pissed if a reporter wrote up a story on a citizen stopping traffic for a duck crossing the road with so little information.

User avatar
Bisbee
Carpal Tunnel
Posts: 7911
Joined: Fri Mar 23, 2012 6:38 pm
Location: On The Border with no need of The Wall.
Contact:

Re: Woman With a Gun Apprehended a Murderer

Post by Bisbee »

You know, for a CCW holder this is very problematic. I don’t see how holding the suspect at gunpoint can be legally allowed. I’m glad that it went well and the suspect didn’t get a away. But he did in fact throw away the knife in another isle and was trying to run when the CCW holder stopped him at gunpoint. Without police powers, she is just threatening him with deadly force unless he complies. If the suspect ignored her orders, merely turned around and slowly walked away, was she going to shoot him in the back? That would certainly be an indefensible shooting.

I know, I know, armchair quarterbacking.
"It is better to be violent, if there is violence in our hearts, than to put on the cloak of non-violence to cover impotence. There is hope for a violent man to become non-violent. There is no such hope for the impotent." -Gandhi

Stiff
Loquacious
Posts: 3623
Joined: Thu Apr 16, 2015 1:43 am
Contact:

Re: Woman With a Gun Apprehended a Murderer

Post by Stiff »

Michigan allows citizen’s arrest for any felony committed in the presence of the person. However, if the murderer dropped his knife and ran, she wouldn’t be justified to shoot. It’s good that he doesn’t know the law, or he doesn’t want to risk getting shot by a woman who doesn’t know the law.

In any case, no DA who wishes to be reelected would prosecute a woman for pointing a gun at a man who just committed a murder in public. I can’t imagine any jury that would convict her either.
When the ignorant are united and the informed are divided, the result is an idiocracy.

User avatar
lurker
Verified Member
Verified Member
Posts: 16233
Joined: Sun Feb 09, 2014 11:00 pm
Location: spencer, nc.
Contact:

Re: Woman With a Gun Apprehended a Murderer

Post by lurker »

i had the same question as bisbee so appreciate your answer, stiff.

Stiff
Loquacious
Posts: 3623
Joined: Thu Apr 16, 2015 1:43 am
Contact:

Re: Woman With a Gun Apprehended a Murderer

Post by Stiff »

lurker wrote:
Fri Sep 18, 2020 7:28 am
i had the same question as bisbee so appreciate your answer, stiff.
You’re welcome. I think most states allow citizen’s arrest for witnessed felonies, some states even allow it for misdemeanor theft at the place of business. The manner of the arrest is rarely specified, so using a gun is iffy. Unless I witness a guy being literally stabbed to death, I wouldn’t risk arresting anyone.

As always, know the law for your state.
When the ignorant are united and the informed are divided, the result is an idiocracy.

User avatar
lurker
Verified Member
Verified Member
Posts: 16233
Joined: Sun Feb 09, 2014 11:00 pm
Location: spencer, nc.
Contact:

Re: Woman With a Gun Apprehended a Murderer

Post by lurker »

makes sense to stop a crime in progress, particularly murder, but afterward a camera might be more effective.

User avatar
featureless
Verified Member
Verified Member
Posts: 6954
Joined: Tue May 23, 2017 6:11 pm
Location: California
Contact:

Re: Woman With a Gun Apprehended a Murderer

Post by featureless »

Stiff wrote:
Fri Sep 18, 2020 8:19 am
lurker wrote:
Fri Sep 18, 2020 7:28 am
i had the same question as bisbee so appreciate your answer, stiff.
You’re welcome. I think most states allow citizen’s arrest for witnessed felonies, some states even allow it for misdemeanor theft at the place of business. The manner of the arrest is rarely specified, so using a gun is iffy. Unless I witness a guy being literally stabbed to death, I wouldn’t risk arresting anyone.

As always, know the law for your state.
Yep, even california allows use of force during a citizen's arrest, although it's not a good idea for reasons others mention. As lurker says, the camera and being a good witness is the safer approach.

User avatar
Mikeinmich
Verified Member
Verified Member
Posts: 519
Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 7:07 pm
Location: Michigan
Contact:

Re: Woman With a Gun Apprehended a Murderer

Post by Mikeinmich »

Actually, although it sounds really odd-Michigan’s citizen arrest powers includes the right to use deadly force against a fleeing felon. Even though police officers can’t shoot someone running away if they don’t pose a continuing danger (ha), a private citizen can. There’s a Michigan Supreme Court case on it - People v Couch 436 Mich 414 (1990). Of course there is no defense for just believing that the person committed a felony-they actually have to have done so. But murder works.

User avatar
Mikeinmich
Verified Member
Verified Member
Posts: 519
Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 7:07 pm
Location: Michigan
Contact:

Re: Woman With a Gun Apprehended a Murderer

Post by Mikeinmich »

Oh, and just for the fun part about defending property with deadly force- malicious destruction of property over $1000 is a felony (as is the attempt to do so). As is trying to threaten to run over someone with your car (assault with a deadly weapon). It’s probably a good thing that most Michiganders are ignorant of the law or this place would probably turn into a shooting gallery.

User avatar
highdesert
Carpal Tunnel
Posts: 18092
Joined: Thu Nov 25, 2010 4:54 pm
Location: Biggest state on the Left Coast
Contact:

Re: Woman With a Gun Apprehended a Murderer

Post by highdesert »

I too doubt that any DA would even threaten the woman with prosecution. A 29 year old man stabs to death an 85 year old man, it's ready made for tabloids and social media - the woman is the hero. DAs are generally elected and respond to public opinion.
"Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but not their own facts." - Daniel Patrick Moynihan

User avatar
featureless
Verified Member
Verified Member
Posts: 6954
Joined: Tue May 23, 2017 6:11 pm
Location: California
Contact:

Re: Woman With a Gun Apprehended a Murderer

Post by featureless »

A lot of those laws date back to times when law abiding citizens were deemed an important part of keeping society running (citizens arrest). Somewhere along the line, we collectively decided that citizens should helplessly wait for LEO to keep law and order with their body armor, SWAT and assault vehicles. Plus, it's easier now to take a photo and place a 911 call than it was even 20 years ago.

In some ways, we've asked for modern day LEO by abdicating our own obligations to each other and society. There is also a large urban/rural divide on these views where urban residents believe LEO is just around the corner while rural residents largely understand the law is in their hands until/if the sheriff arrives. This also contributes to the wildly disparate views on guns between the two groups. I see a research paper there for someone with time. :)

User avatar
highdesert
Carpal Tunnel
Posts: 18092
Joined: Thu Nov 25, 2010 4:54 pm
Location: Biggest state on the Left Coast
Contact:

Re: Woman With a Gun Apprehended a Murderer

Post by highdesert »

featureless wrote:
Fri Sep 18, 2020 9:41 am
A lot of those laws date back to times when law abiding citizens were deemed an important part of keeping society running (citizens arrest). Somewhere along the line, we collectively decided that citizens should helplessly wait for LEO to keep law and order with their body armor, SWAT and assault vehicles. Plus, it's easier now to take a photo and place a 911 call than it was even 20 years ago.

In some ways, we've asked for modern day LEO by abdicating our own obligations to each other and society. There is also a large urban/rural divide on these views where urban residents believe LEO is just around the corner while rural residents largely understand the law is in their hands until/if the sheriff arrives. This also contributes to the wildly disparate views on guns between the two groups. I see a research paper there for someone with time. :)
Yup, sounds like Mother England - keep calm and carry on until the constables arrive. We have two generations who think everything is available quickly through their smartphones which is reinforced by TV and movies. I don't expect them to turn into Bear Grylls, but recognize that if the cell towers don't work, life will be very different and can they survive.
"Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but not their own facts." - Daniel Patrick Moynihan

Stiff
Loquacious
Posts: 3623
Joined: Thu Apr 16, 2015 1:43 am
Contact:

Re: Woman With a Gun Apprehended a Murderer

Post by Stiff »

Mikeinmich wrote:
Fri Sep 18, 2020 9:10 am
Actually, although it sounds really odd-Michigan’s citizen arrest powers includes the right to use deadly force against a fleeing felon. Even though police officers can’t shoot someone running away if they don’t pose a continuing danger (ha), a private citizen can. There’s a Michigan Supreme Court case on it - People v Couch 436 Mich 414 (1990). Of course there is no defense for just believing that the person committed a felony-they actually have to have done so. But murder works.
That is bizarre...
When the ignorant are united and the informed are divided, the result is an idiocracy.

User avatar
wings
Verified Member
Verified Member
Posts: 1666
Joined: Mon Jun 01, 2020 11:24 am
Contact:

Re: Woman With a Gun Apprehended a Murderer

Post by wings »

My suspicion is that, having just witnessed a murder by an armed suspect, the CCW holder had a legitimate claim to the use of deadly force in self defense and/or defense of others. Merely threatening the use of deadly force in order to bring the suspect in alive should count for something.

I'm simply grateful that she didn't have to pull the trigger. She may still be seeing a therapist about this. Someone still died.

User avatar
BKinzey
Verified Member
Verified Member
Posts: 2184
Joined: Wed Jan 08, 2014 12:34 pm
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Contact:

Re: Woman With a Gun Apprehended a Murderer

Post by BKinzey »

Using this event as a basis for what one can legally do, there is a clear conclusion.

Having observed the guy using deadly force gives you the legal right to detain him til the police get there. You can use reasonable force to do so.

So, you draw your CCW and point it at the guy and tell him to stop and lay down on the floor. At some point he tosses away the knife he was using and in this incidence he complied and laid down. There should be no question that this is a legal action.

But what if he doesn't lay down but instead slowly turns and begins to walk away? Maybe he has even raised his hands like someone who is signaling they are surrendering or giving up. You are still giving him commands to stop and lay down. Maybe you are also vocalizing you will shoot if he doesn't (and it would be a good idea), but in this case your brandishing a firearm would be enough to show your intentions if he doesn't comply.

So, he continues to walk away from you. You have clearly expressed your intentions, you have the legal right to detain him, he is clearly not complying and trying to leave. What can you legally do?

Shoot him.

Yes he threw away the knife and put his hands up, but you have no way of knowing if he is carrying another weapon. You also know he could also use his bare hands to seriously injure or kill others and you have no way to know if he is through attacking people.

There is one major consideration in this scenario. That you have a clear field of fire. If you hit bystanders you could be charged. Being responsible for every shot you fire is a thing. More so because you aren't a cop.

Stiff
Loquacious
Posts: 3623
Joined: Thu Apr 16, 2015 1:43 am
Contact:

Re: Woman With a Gun Apprehended a Murderer

Post by Stiff »

It might be legal to shoot a fleeing felon in Michigan, but it’s not required. I wouldn’t be shooting him if he tries to run away, there’s always a chance that I’m making a mistake, and death is permanent. I’d shoot only if he attacks again.

All stores have cameras these days. Even if I don’t hold him at gunpoint, the long arm of the law will eventually get him.
When the ignorant are united and the informed are divided, the result is an idiocracy.

User avatar
BKinzey
Verified Member
Verified Member
Posts: 2184
Joined: Wed Jan 08, 2014 12:34 pm
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Contact:

Re: Woman With a Gun Apprehended a Murderer

Post by BKinzey »

Whether one actually has the will and ability to use deadly force won't be fully known until the trigger is pulled and I think, is a different discussion but yes, there isn't a legal requirement and moral would be debatable.

With this instance all the boxes have been checked should you decide to intervene. You are an eyewitness to what is reasonably a murder in progress. A young man repeatedly stabbing an old man.

If you have made the decision to intervene and are carrying a firearm then it would be downright foolish not to brandish and have the firearm at at least low ready. You are using the threat of deadly force to retain them until the police take over. Death is permanent but most people survive being gunshot and using deadly force does not equal killing.

If you don't shoot and allow the person to walk away, what's the plan? Get on the phone with 911 and follow them around? Otherwise how will you know the attacks have stopped? It certainly would be crappy to let the guy go and have him attack someone else, there is also the chance it will be much harder to intervene this time.

I can't think of an example where to shoot would be a greater mistake than letting him go.

Finally if you can draw your weapon and threaten the use of deadly force, but can't go through with it, you should seriously re-think whether you should intervene at all.

Stiff
Loquacious
Posts: 3623
Joined: Thu Apr 16, 2015 1:43 am
Contact:

Re: Woman With a Gun Apprehended a Murderer

Post by Stiff »

I carry for a very specific purpose: to preserve life and prevent great injury to myself and my loved ones. If the risk is acceptable, I’ll consider saving other people’s lives.

I’m not the police, so I have no legal obligation to protect others. My moral obligation must always be balanced with the legal and physical risk.

In my state shooting a fleeing felon is a sure way to go to jail and lose my right to ever own firearms. That is how I condition my mental reaction, so I’d rather not have an exception if I’m in Michigan.
When the ignorant are united and the informed are divided, the result is an idiocracy.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 2 guests