Non lethal ammo rubber bullets and bean bags

[GeauxLSU]

https://bixonlaw.com/defending-your-property-in-georgia-when-is-deadly-force-is-justified/

 

[John Monroe]

Some idiot stealing a TV isn't exactly a threat to your life and it can be replaced, but using less lethal force is very well justified.

Do you have any authority for that, or are you just making up what seems right to you? I hate to be too critical, but Big Mike was correct. Either deadly force is authorized or it isn't. And, as you point out, the so-called "less lethal" ammos are still lethal. Shooting them is using deadly force. To say that it's okay (legal) to use less lethal ammo on an unarmed burglar and more lethal ammo on an armed burglar is just not true. If you're having to split hairs over what part of the body you're aiming at, you're in big trouble.

But if someone breaks in to steal a TV and you see a gun in their waist, that's justifiable for live ammo.

Under 16-3-23(3), if the deadly force is necessary to prevent the burglary, then deadly force is authorized. But whether the burglar is armed while carrying the TV is not really part of the statute.

 

[GeauxLSU]

Deadly force is legally justified in the prevention of a forcible felony.
What you feel is "morally" justified is relevant only to you.

 

[John Monroe]

Deadly force is legally justified in the prevention of a forcible felony.

That's true (16-3-21(a)).

But burglary is not a forcible felony. 16-1-3(6).

 

[GeauxLSU]

That's true (16-3-21(a)).

But burglary is not a forcible felony. 16-1-3(6).

I was attempting to address the references to looting. But yes, if I am sitting in my store, guarding it, and I ask you to not break in and you go away, then deadly force is not warranted. You pick up the brick, and.....

 

[Ken Ford]

Do you have any authority for that, or are you just making up what seems right to you? I hate to be too critical, but Big Mike was correct. Either deadly force is authorized or it isn't. And, as you point out, the so-called "less lethal" ammos are still lethal. Shooting them is using deadly force. To say that it's okay (legal) to use less lethal ammo on an unarmed burglar and more lethal ammo on an armed burglar is just not true. If you're having to split hairs over what part of the body you're aiming at, you're in big trouble.


Under 16-3-23(3), if the deadly force is necessary to prevent the burglary, then deadly force is authorized. But whether the burglar is armed while carrying the TV is not really part of the statute.

Anyway, make notes of necessary and reasonable.
Jury will decide if your actions were “necessary and reasonable”
The manner of entry and what his direct actions are make a huge difference.
A subject smashing in you window or door in a violent manner, and you use force to stop the threat, is usually a positive defense against a charge.
Someone sneaking out with your TV with out any obvious threat probably wouldn’t be considered reasonable or necessary.



Y’all realize there is misdemeanor burglary in Ga?



2010 Georgia Code
TITLE 16 - CRIMES AND OFFENSES
CHAPTER 3 - DEFENSES TO CRIMINAL PROSECUTIONS
ARTICLE 2 - JUSTIFICATION AND EXCUSE
§ 16-3-23 - Use of force in defense of habitation
O.C.G.A. 16-3-23 (2010)
16-3-23. Use of force in defense of habitation


A person is justified in threatening or using force against another when and to the extent that he or she reasonably believes that such threat or force is necessary to prevent or terminate such other's unlawful entry into or attack upon a habitation; however, such person is justified in the use of force which is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm only if:

(1) The entry is made or attempted in a violent and tumultuous manner and he or she reasonably believes that the entry is attempted or made for the purpose of assaulting or offering personal violence to any person dwelling or being therein and that such force is necessary to prevent the assault or offer of personal violence;

(2) That force is used against another person who is not a member of the family or household and who unlawfully and forcibly enters or has unlawfully and forcibly entered the residence and the person using such force knew or had reason to believe that an unlawful and forcible entry occurred; or

(3) The person using such force reasonably believes that the entry is made or attempted for the purpose of committing a felony therein and that such force is necessary to prevent the commission of the felony.

 

[Ken Ford]

That's true (16-3-21(a)).

But burglary is not a forcible felony. 16-1-3(6).

It can be, if done in a violent or tumultuous manner, and the building is occupied.

 

[John Monroe]

It can be, if done in a violent or tumultuous manner, and the building is occupied.

It sounds more like are you describing a circumstance when deadly force is authorized in defense of habitation, 16-3-23(1) (When the "entry is made or attempted in a violent and tumultuous manner...."), and you are correct that deadly force is authorized then, but that does not make burglary a forcible felony. It's possible for a forcible felony to be committed in conjunction with a burglary (e.g., assault, rape, murder, etc.), but burglary is not defined to be a forcible felony.

 

[Wolf six]

Is it legal to pop someone with non lethal ammo in defense of your property from looters in the state of Ga. ?

this is a legit question, not looking for personal opinions.

Dead men dont file civil lawsuits

 

[falken]

Dead men dont file civil lawsuits

No but their estate and next of kin can.