Frank Hassle, a dude trying to be the next Sam Hyde, starts trolling Boogie. Boogie gets trolled, and Frank decides to go to Boogie's house after Boogie challenges him to. Boogie gets a gun from his roommate and pulls it on Frank. Boogie then fires a warning shot, which is massively illegal in the US, and the cops are called.
Boogie then fires a warning shot, which is massively illegal in the US, and the cops are called.
Can we get a source for that bolded part? Arkansas law explicitly authorizes the use of deadly force when a person in their own home reasonably believes that they are about to be violently assaulted. (Arkansas Code § 5-2-607)
Frank Hassle, a dude trying to be the next Sam Hyde, starts trolling Boogie. Boogie gets trolled, and Frank decides to go to Boogie's house after Boogie challenges him to. Boogie gets a gun from his roommate and pulls it on Frank. Boogie then fires a warning shot, which is massively illegal in the US, and the cops are called.
Yeah that's the dilemma, its the idea of "you can only shoot them if you feel your like is in danger" but if you don't just shoot them directly, then it could be figured that you did NOT believe your life was 'enough' in danger to actually use the gun.
Frank Hassle, a dude trying to be the next Sam Hyde, starts trolling Boogie. Boogie gets trolled, and Frank decides to go to Boogie's house after Boogie challenges him to. Boogie gets a gun from his roommate and pulls it on Frank. Boogie then fires a warning shot, which is massively illegal in the US, and the cops are called.
There is no law saying warning shots are illegal, your emphasis is rather bizarre to be honest. Police (albeit rarely) use them as does the Coast Guard and military, usually maritime. Just falls under laws for a gunshot for civilians.
Can we get a source for that bolded part? Arkansas law explicitly authorizes the use of deadly force when a person in their own home reasonably believes that they are about to be violently assaulted. (Arkansas Code § 5-2-607)
Traze said:
There is no law saying warning shots are illegal, your emphasis is rather bizarre to be honest. Police (albeit rarely) use them as does the Coast Guard and military, usually maritime. Just falls under laws for a gunshot for civilians.
Warning shots aren't illegal. Reckless use of a firearm and disorderly conduct is. Possibly a felony for deadly force and attempted murder.
The problem is that if you were in a situation where you could warn the target, but didn't need to kill them, you weren't in a fatal situation to justify self defense. If it was a fatal situation, you would have needed to kill them, and could not have warned them or run away.
It fails to satisfy the condition of fulfilling one's legal duty to retreat from combat to be considered self defense. Prosecutors could construe ricochet or an accidental hit as reckless in such a case. Double if it was in public. If the intruder wasn't actually armed, it could be considered attempted murder. I imagine the bigger reason for this is to prevent civilians from drawing a firearm at any typical incursion, and it makes it harder for actual murderers to justify provoking and killing a person as "self defense".
It varies by state, but the concept of mercy is really tricky in the eyes of the law. If you can't prove the situation was deadly, the other side absolutely will say it wasn't.
Ah, ok. Just a couple of fools playing stupid games it appears.
Also, some states have it where you have to see a deadly weapon or have to be hit first in order to be justified in using deadly force. Whether or not this was legal is highly dependent on where Boogie lives.
Can we get a source for that bolded part? Arkansas law explicitly authorizes the use of deadly force when a person in their own home reasonably believes that they are about to be violently assaulted. (Arkansas Code § 5-2-607)
The problem is that if you're going to pull a gun, that you believe you're in enough danger to warrant it. If you take a ccw class, or something like that depending on the state, and the topic of self-defense comes up, you're explicitly told that brandishing and warning shots are bad. If you have to draw your weapon, the expectation is that you need to use it.
Boogie firing a warning shot makes his inevitable court case that much more difficult. If Frank had shown up with a gun or had tried to attack him, and Boogie shot him, he'd be fine.
TLDR; If he hadn't left his house and instead called the cops, he wouldn't be in trouble.
TLDR; If he hadn't left his house and instead called the cops, he wouldn't be in trouble.
I don't know this guy, but if what it has been said is true, he borrowed a gun from another person. That could imply he doesn't own a gun, he doesn't have permission to own one, he doesn't have training to handle firearms and hence he is into more dirt than only "self defense".
There is no law saying warning shots are illegal, your emphasis is rather bizarre to be honest. Police (albeit rarely) use them as does the Coast Guard and military, usually maritime. Just falls under laws for a gunshot for civilians.
Unless things have changed, Warning Shots are illegal, especially from law enforcement thanks to case law. Officers are only allowed to shoot if they feel their life is in danger.
"I was so afraid of him my first shot went wild! I then pretended that it was a warning shot because I thought he'd kill me otherwise!" BAM, reasonable doubt.
"I was so afraid of him my first shot went wild! I then pretended that it was a warning shot because I thought he'd kill me otherwise!" BAM, reasonable doubt.
This is also true, but it's not so easy to lie. There are ways to tell.
Even if the person was sincerely being reckless, they could still get charged for reckless firearm at the very worst, taking a week to a few months in jail for repeat offenses. If an investigation gets opened and detectives find it wasn't sincere self defense, you absolutely will get smashed in court.
Some states give no less than a year for a full conviction.
Unless things have changed, Warning Shots are illegal, especially from law enforcement thanks to case law. Officers are only allowed to shoot if they feel their life is in danger.
Warning shots are exceedingly illegal. Its a Hollywood myth that only exists in the movies. Much like "why don't they just shoot him in the leg", its one of those feel-good bullshit tropes that doesn't work in real life. A situation either warrants the use of deadly force, or it does not. There is no gray zone where you just shoot a guy "a little". Or aim close but deliberately miss.
Unless things have changed, Warning Shots are illegal, especially from law enforcement thanks to case law. Officers are only allowed to shoot if they feel their life is in danger.
Except they aren't for law enforcement. Some departments have policies against but there has never been a law making them illegal for law enforcement to use. There's something in Texas for homeowners but it's far from clear. Where are you getting your information?
...warning shots are illegal? Jesus, the US is even more bizarre than I thought. I mean, I am aware the danger of richochet and wandering bullet. But if you can pick scaring someone away with show of force, that should Always be preferable over bodily harm.
Ofc, reckless discharge charges should still be fine. It is much better than having someone's death on yer consciousness.
Nevertheless, yer legal system sounds kind of backwards in number of ways. But ofc I am saying this as an outsider looking in, so I don't have all the perspective or know the full history of those laws.
Just think about it for a second. Do you really want anyone owning a gun drawing every time they are having common differences with anyone? Including the law or even on public places like in front of a cash register because their fries are cold or the cashier speaks Spanish? It's not surprise warning shots are illegal and intended to kill in life threatening events. It would be a total chaos, firearm owners showing off their weapons only to win arguments against strangers whenever possible.
EDIT: And that is only the best case when the other party is unnarmed. Now if the other is, it turns quickly in a life threatening event and a free pass to kill anyone around them. The wild west was a thing back then for a reason.
...warning shots are illegal? Jesus, the US is even more bizarre than I thought. I mean, I am aware the danger of richochet and wandering bullet. But if you can pick scaring someone away with show of force, that should Always be preferable over bodily harm.
Ofc, reckless discharge charges should still be fine. It is much better than having someone's death on yer consciousness.
Nevertheless, yer legal system sounds kind of backwards in number of ways. But ofc I am saying this as an outsider looking in, so I don't have all the perspective or know the full history of those laws.
The bullet has to hit something. Even if you fire it into the ground there is a none zero chance that it could hit something hard enough to ricochet off of. If you are firing and gun then you are commiting to that bullet hiting something either a person or a target.
...warning shots are illegal? Jesus, the US is even more bizarre than I thought. I mean, I am aware the danger of richochet and wandering bullet. But if you can pick scaring someone away with show of force, that should Always be preferable over bodily harm.
Ofc, reckless discharge charges should still be fine. It is much better than having someone's death on yer consciousness.
Nevertheless, yer legal system sounds kind of backwards in number of ways. But ofc I am saying this as an outsider looking in, so I don't have all the perspective or know the full history of those laws.
This is one of the reasons why people who live in the US who do not own a gun also do not want to: strict legal responsibility. Reckless use of a firearm, reckless handling of a firearm, unlawful possession of a firearm, unlawful carrying of a firearm, and unlawful discharge of a firearm are all serious offenses in the US and can potentially result in a felony conviction if taken up with a court.
In addition that, as already stated, if a gun is used incorrectly a person's self-defense claim can be completely run through. You could end up charged with assault or maybe even attempted murder, and you can get 5 years in prison for that easy. All for trying to use a gun.
...warning shots are illegal? Jesus, the US is even more bizarre than I thought. I mean, I am aware the danger of richochet and wandering bullet. But if you can pick scaring someone away with show of force, that should Always be preferable over bodily harm.
Ofc, reckless discharge charges should still be fine. It is much better than having someone's death on yer consciousness.
Nevertheless, yer legal system sounds kind of backwards in number of ways. But ofc I am saying this as an outsider looking in, so I don't have all the perspective or know the full history of those laws.
That is because of a difference in view. The legal theory here is that guns are a weapon of last-resort, only to be used when someone feels they are in immediate danger. A warning shot, according to that theory, is a show of force and indicates someone is not in immediate danger.
Traze said:
Except they aren't for law enforcement. Some departments have policies against but there has never been a law making them illegal for law enforcement to use. There's something in Texas for homeowners but it's far from clear. Where are you getting your information?
The supreme court ruled on this ages ago, since they ruled a firearm can only be used if an officer is in immediate danger. A warning shot, by definition, goes against this. Whether or not a department actually enforces this or conducts proper training is a secondary issue.
That is because of a difference in view. The legal theory here is that guns are a weapon of last-resort, only to be used when someone feels they are in immediate danger. A warning shot, according to that theory, is a show of force and indicates someone is not in immediate danger.
The supreme court ruled on this ages ago, since they ruled a firearm can only be used if an officer is in immediate danger. A warning shot, by definition, goes against this. Whether or not a department actually enforces this or conducts proper training is a secondary issue.
It's important to remember that most laws in the US on homicide have effectively been thrown out the window in recent months due to COVID.
Not wearing a mask has the same level of danger as randomly firing a handgun at a range close enough to cause hearing damage. Enforcing firearms laws, but not other reckless endangerment, attempted murder, first degree murder, and second degree murder laws is wildly arbitrary at best and more likely just outright abusive.