Timeline for Under what circumstances is it OK for a layperson to shoot a fleeing burglar?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
Post Revisions
12 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 25, 2025 at 7:31 | comment | added | forest | or a crime of a sexual nature involving a child under the age of 12 – So if someone flashes someone and they happen to be within sight of a child, you can just... shoot them in Alabama? After all, flashing in view of a child, even if they are not the intended recipient, is a crime of sexual nature and involves a child. | |
| Dec 9, 2019 at 14:28 | comment | added | WBT | @Mazura "Running away" is found in the description, and a synonym of "fleeing" in this setting. And you complain about an example of someone getting shot as "pedantic" in the very same comment?? | |
| Dec 7, 2019 at 23:40 | comment | added | Mazura | What set of conditions would allow someone else to justifiably shoot a fleeing burglar? None, unless the "fleeing bugler" could begin to have any of those bullet points ascribed to them, and thus no longer considered 'fleeing'. The justifiable use of deadly force is pedantically described; "fleeing" is not to be found in the description. | |
| May 2, 2016 at 13:22 | comment | added | WBT | @feetwet This question is about the law in practice, which may or may not have anything to do with the law on the books. "The NYPost neither offers nor constitutes a coherent argument that the shooting was legally justified." That's why I ask this question here. If the NYPost article had a coherent argument, I wouldn't ask this question. And yes, I am trying to exclude any answers about what might give members of the law enforcement profession practical rights to shoot fleeing people from the scope of this question. | |
| May 2, 2016 at 3:31 | comment | added | feetwet♦ | Also, while I'm nitpicking: What is the significance of asking about the laws for "a layperson?" Do you really mean to suggest that the rules on use of lethal force are different for clergy, or some other profession? I assume you mean "people that are not officers of the law." Although the laws allowing police to use lethal force against a fleeing criminal have become pretty close to those of unsworn citizens. | |
| May 2, 2016 at 3:21 | comment | added | feetwet♦ | Not really: Evidently the state and media are getting on the bandwagon of celebrating what the child did. That the child is not being prosecuted does not mean he is "unprosecutable." (Though @cpast notes that due to his age he is not criminally.) The NYPost neither offers nor constitutes a coherent argument that the shooting was legally justified. Hence it appears you are begging the question, "Was this shooting legally justified?" | |
| May 2, 2016 at 2:06 | history | edited | WBT | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 218 characters in body
|
| May 2, 2016 at 1:59 | comment | added | WBT | @feetwet edited, does that help? | |
| May 2, 2016 at 1:51 | history | edited | WBT | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 1323 characters in body
|
| May 1, 2016 at 21:27 | answer | added | Dale M♦ | timeline score: 12 | |
| May 1, 2016 at 20:50 | comment | added | feetwet♦ | Why do you say that "the shooter in that story [is] an unprosecutable hero?" And you beg the question of whether the shooting was legally justified. | |
| May 1, 2016 at 19:57 | history | asked | WBT | CC BY-SA 3.0 |