What is the basis for this conclusion? ISTM exactly the opposite is very clear.
Well done!
Is a frying pan a gun now? Is there a danger to whoever is standing behind the person you are swinging at or the person down the block? It may surprise you to find out that guns are treated differently under the law than frying pans.
So the law says (about regular non-lethal force):
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.
There is no way that hitting someone, who is in the process of trying to leave your property via the front gate, is preventing or terminating am unlawful entry into or attack upon a dwelling. Pretty cut and dried IMO
This is response to this comment (bolding mine)
It’s like the drawing of the body with green, yellow and red areas that’s used in ASP training
So you are saying that shooting the green bits is not considered lethal force?
As Loach said;
Shooting “the green bits”, even if it was actually realistic for someone to be that accurate firing at a moving target in a chaotic situation, still can have your bullet miss, or pass through a “green bit”, to strike an eight year old sleeping in their own bedroom down the block.
So using one deadly weapon (a gun) on the “green bits” would still be considered force which is likely to cause death or great bodily harm. So that’s not really an argument that using a different deadly weapon (a frying pan) would not be. The opposite in fact, it’s a reason why it could be.
Only because in real life, where we unfortunately don’t have VATS like in the Fallout games, there’s really no way to ensure you’re “shooting at the green bits”.
It is if you enagage with the actual argument beyond an incredibly superficial level. A frying pan and a gun have different properties, which mean it is realistic to swing a pan at the “green bits” specifically but it is not realistic to shoot only at the “green bits”.
You are really hung up on that “deadly weapon” term aren’t you?
An ASP is a straight baton so it’s more analogous to a frying pan than a gun. Hitting someone in the arm with it is not considered deadly force. Shooting someone is. No matter where you shoot someone you could kill them or cause serious bodily injury. Shooting at someone is also putting anyone behind, in the next room or down the block in danger. Yes there are very good reasons why a gun is treated differently than a frying pan or a pencil.
I do not know the law in Illinois. We have been provided one statute. I suspect several would come into play. Then you would have to know precedent and AG guidelines.
In my state the type of weapon wouldn’t make much difference. If an assault was committed with a weapon it would bump it up to Aggrevated Assault. If an assault occurred with a weapon and deadly force was found to be used then it would bump it up to Attempted Murder. The type of weapon wouldn’t matter. Of course if the force was found to be justified none of that matters.
But that’s irrelevant to the argument. It’s not about the advisability of using a gun or a frying pan on someone’s hand, it’s about the legality of doing so. If you take the perfect Hollywood shot, that incapacitates the bad guys hand, without severing any arteries or hitting any bystanders, that’s still using lethal force (aka force which is likely to cause death or great bodily harm). If the legal bar for using lethal force has not been met, you will face charges, even if you have done less damage to someones hand than a well swing frying pan would do.
So that is not an argument than smacking someone’s hand with a frying pan wouldn’t be using lethal force.
Read that over a few times and see if you can make sense of it.
Ah ok I thought you were talking about firearms training
This thread is a good demonstration of how complicated self-defense really is. The home owner was suddenly placed in a very stressful situation where he was afraid and perhaps angry at the same time. He grabbed a weapon, in this context the pan was a weapon, and chased the intruder off his property which was a reasonable reaction given the situation.
Given a lot of the comments here, I think it also helps to explain the proliferation of stand-your-ground laws thoughout many states. People got tired of the perception that defending yourself meant you had to worry about the state coming after you. Not that perception is necessarily the truth of course.
The old adage holds true, I’d rather be judged by 12 than carried by 6.
Let the jury debate whether a cast iron smack on someone still in your yard after breaking and entering is justified or not.
I find this different from firing 12 shots in the perps back as he goes out the gate. The frying pan is NOT overwhelming force versus if you’ve got the drop on the running away perp. And, as always, there are grey areas.
Well, unlike shooting at the burglar, the guy wielding the frying pan is not putting his neighbors at risk.
Unless he throws it really, really hard.
He is trying to leave, while the homeowner is chasing him with the pan. We don’t know what he would do if the homeowner stopped. Burglar might keep running, but also could stop and regroup.
In self defense classes I’ve taken, one thing that has been mentioned is, don’t decide to fight, hit (or kick or whatever) the person once and then stop to see what effect that had. Once you’re fighting, you keep fighting until the person is clearly not a threat anymore.
My state uses both “deadly weapon” and “dangerous weapon.” A deadly weapon is something which is designed for and presently capable of killing or causing serious bodily injury. A dangerous weapon is something which, in the manner it is used, attempted to be used or threatened to be used, is capable of causing death or serious bodily injury.
So, generally, it is most serious if you assault a person with a weapon qua weapon, less serious if it is essentially an improvised weapon, and less serious still if there is no weapon, or nothing that increases the risk of death or serious injury.
So you think the homeowner has to stop at the threshold?
Crocodiles with fur, I calls 'em.
Um. Then there’s actual alligators. Might actually qualify as a deadly weapon in my state, depending on one’s views of the meaning of “designed.” I’d argue evolution is a kind of design, but it’s probably not the intended meaning…
Seems so to you, after watching the video all the way through. I mean, at first the intruder runs out of the home, then circles back toward either the house or the backyard. Not having foreknowledge of what the intruder is there for, or how determined he might be, imagine the frying pan guy stopping as soon as the intruder runs out of the house. Is it really so hard to see that that would not necessarily terminate the intruder’s intended action?
Agree.
You need to be very careful on how/if you choose to defend yourself against a threat. Check your state laws. Check w/ a lawyer. If you have a CCW, be extra cautious.
My SOP is to separate myself from the threat. If that means running away, it means running away. I want minimal bodily harm to me, him, and anyone else.
If the threat will not go away, then I incrementally escalate things. But my ultimate goal is to separate myself form the threat while maintaining my own self interests (life, freedom, etc.).
So this is a sidetrack to the OP which was about the legality of what happened, not the advisability of it
But IMO the absolutely safest thing to do would have been once, he is out of the house, lock the doors, get away from the doors and windows and call 911. Whatever the chance he might come back and reek vengeance, you are In much safer situation behind a locked door than standing in the middle of your lawn with a frying pan.
I mean i am not saying I would have had the presence of mind to do that, in the same circumstances, but it’s definitely the safest thing to do
He doesn’t “have to” but clearly as shown by that law he loses the protections and the ability to claim self defence under that law when he is no longer in the dwelling.
In the description the homeowner gives online he says the burglar tried to climb over a fence to escape then ran to the gate when that failed.