Is there ever a legal right to self-defense against out-of-control police?

[bcohen]

This is a theoretical and legal question--not a political discussion.

Recently, there have been several incidents of police ramming or opening fire on vehicles of people who are not suspects in a crime, or storming homes of people who are not criminals, such as due to faulty intelligence indicating that drugs/contraband are stored on the premises. For example, in California, there have been several incidents recently of police using deadly force on people who ARE NOT CRIMINALS. In the past couple days, there were multiple incidents of police in L.A. and surrounding areas firing on vehicles because they thought the person inside might be a certain fugitive they are looking for, but in fact the occupants were normal civilians.

My question is a legal question: Is there ever a legal right to self-defense against police officers who are using deadly force against you (assuming you are not a criminal) or would that always be considered capital murder/attempted murder. In other words, if the police were to storm your house, guns drawn, or ram your car, or open fire on your car, can you legally shoot back (again assuming you are not a criminal/have not threatened them to provoke this)? Does this change if the police officer(s) are wearing a uniform versus being plainclothes?

[goon]

This would likely come down to what you could convince a jury of..... and to some degree what state you are in....

A few things here....

In theory they are supposed to identify themselves as police (of course this is tricky as anyone can yell police as they are attacking you), but at the end of the day they know people have weapons and they don't want to get shot at, unless they see you as an active threat they are not going to just mob you.

So initially, you would more than likely be locked up and charged with a crime of some kind (unless there is obvious glaring evidence that you were justified, ie proof up front that they didn't identify themselves and you had reason to fear for your life.)

But what this really comes down to is, after the event, if you could convince a jury of your peers of the following.
1. You were not aware that it was a police officer OR had substantial reason to believe that it was someone impersonating a police officer OR had substantial reason to believe that this officer was rogue
2. You felt that your life, or someone else's life, was in immediate and continued jeopardy. And that shooting the person was the best way at your disposal to eliminate the threat.

At the end of the day, contrary to the movies, a single officer (or even 2) is not going to storm your house, he is going to knock and announce himself. If your house is being "stormed" it is going to be fairly obvious that it is the police and/or that you are just flat out screwed...

If anybody were to fire on your car there are VERY few cases where the best move (for your personal safety) would be to fire back. Essentially the only way you can legally justify shooting another person (and this may vary somewhat by state) is that shooting that person was the best/only way to eliminate the threat (to yourself or someone else). In most vehicle situations in the time that it would take you to draw and fire (very difficult to do while driving) you could use the vehicle to escape the situation and eliminate the threat.

The key here is that if you are going to put yourself in a situation where you are armed you should also make sure that you are trained on how to identify and handle different situations. And do NOT use the movies as a guide in proper response to various threats. Go through CCW training even if you do not plan on carrying concealed, you learn alot.

[tobee43]

any GREAT criminal defense atty can find legal ways out of most any situation (OJ for example, and please NO comments i'm certain if he's guilty or not, i'm just talking about his defense).

here's where i'm coming from. to preserve some privacy i will say this i am married to someone that was undercover state police both in white and black collar crimes...(black collar is really bad bad stuffs..just a name i gave it after worrying half my life while his was out there on the line)...there are over zealous cops everywhere. even in the most dangerous situations and he's been in quite a few i think in his entire career he pulled his gun maybe 5 times at most. however, i also want to point out training here. his was the first class of state police which required a college degree (not that than means a hill of beans other than you can complete a task as instructed IMHO), i know they not only required heavy duty intelligence testing but a vigorous psychosocial testing. many potential state police in his class were weeded out as a result. however, his career was difficult at times because many of his counter parts where what is called "old school". in other words he didn't eat a donut until he retired .

even today many local or county police just do not have the training and education that really is needed to be great law enforcement. i'm not saying all situations are miss handled, but some are. is there a legal defense to shoot back??? could be, could be a REAL valid reason, it's just you have to be able to prove it. remember Rodney King.....the video said it all. most times now, many police situations like this are filmed...just for that reason.

now b....just curious as to why you want to know?

[AngelinaCatHub]

This is only my opinion: You always have a right to defend your life. Judged by 12 rather than carried by six. However, if you have any doubt unless that person is imminently in your face about to shoot, I would not attempt anything but raising your hands up. For the most, they are trained better at gunman-ship and have a better gun than the average person. Here in FL you have heard of our "stand your ground" law. This is giving a citizen a tough time right now after killing Travon Martin. The determination could become political rather than fact. I would not wish to be in that position or shot by a cop who thinks he's in imminently danger of being killed. 'Hub

[sbatman]

We have a closed and locked gate, with a 5 or 6 foot fence surrounding our property. Our cars are within the gates. If someone were to climb over and ring our doorbell, they are clearly trespassing. We have rejas on the windows (had them in Miami, FL and now in Arizona and a security system and the SHOTGUN. We feel very safe, even with the windows open. If anyone breached our multiple security measures, they would probably get what they deserve. Just about every house in our neighborhood has the same "security" measures. The gates are only unlocked the the cars going in and out of our compound or it we are waiting for UPS or FEDEX. With both of those, we know when they are coming because you can check it online. Even then, if we decided to relax on the front porch, we wouldn't have to unlock the gate.

A few years ago, our infamous Sheriff Joe Arpaio wanted to blow up a house that was full of munitions. This was in a small community, 20 miles north of Phoenix, somewhat independent (meaning not really in support of law enforcement which was never there when we actually needed them) where everyone had at least an acre of land. Almost everyone had a locked gate and many with horses and livestock. He decided that he wanted to evacuate all of us, including our pets and livestock. The overwhelming response was "Over our dead bodies!". Since the county sheriffs would have had to trespass through locked gates just to get to front doors of homes that were almost uniformly armed, that plan was dropped and the outlaw munitions were handled another way. He just wanted to play "big boy" and blow things up. Given the fact that deaths on both sides of the battle would have likely occurred, plans for mandatory evacuation were dropped and the ATF handled it.

What was funny was that the guy with all the "fireworks" would set of china-rattling (even a mile away)explosions intermittently prior to this brouhaha, no one in the area complained. As far as many of the residents were concerned, he was just practicing to protect his property. A little unhinged, perhaps, but he was left alone until our Wild-West sheriff wanted to go in and play at blowing things up, who cares about the locals.

[tobee43]

we always have guns, funny thing we are use to having them on the kitchen table. we have learned to respect them, although i was one that use to protest guns, but what can you do when the person you have committed to for the rest of your life carries one or two all the time? you learn to shoot! make it a night out for target practice and dinner! i sport a 22mag personally and love the little thing. i also would have no problem shooting if i needed to. we had to teach our children at an extremely young age about the dangers and respect, as they have always been part of our lives. i must admit tho, we were shocked to see how easy it was to get a carry permit in florida. not so where we had come from, if one was not an ex cop or state police, getting one was very difficult.

i also LOVE the fact guns are also a GREAT investment! if you take proper care of them they just continue to go up in value.

[GoingDown]

We have a closed and locked gate, with a 5 or 6 foot fence surrounding our property. Our cars are within the gates. If someone were to climb over and ring our doorbell, they are clearly trespassing. We have rejas on the windows (had them in Miami, FL and now in Arizona and a security system and the SHOTGUN. We feel very safe, even with the windows open. If anyone breached our multiple security measures, they would probably get what they deserve. Just about every house in our neighborhood has the same "security" measures. The gates are only unlocked the the cars going in and out of our compound or it we are waiting for UPS or FEDEX. With both of those, we know when they are coming because you can check it online. Even then, if we decided to relax on the front porch, we wouldn't have to unlock the gate.

A few years ago, our infamous Sheriff Joe Arpaio wanted to blow up a house that was full of munitions. This was in a small community, 20 miles north of Phoenix, somewhat independent (meaning not really in support of law enforcement which was never there when we actually needed them) where everyone had at least an acre of land. Almost everyone had a locked gate and many with horses and livestock. He decided that he wanted to evacuate all of us, including our pets and livestock. The overwhelming response was "Over our dead bodies!". Since the county sheriffs would have had to trespass through locked gates just to get to front doors of homes that were almost uniformly armed, that plan was dropped and the outlaw munitions were handled another way. He just wanted to play "big boy" and blow things up. Given the fact that deaths on both sides of the battle would have likely occurred, plans for mandatory evacuation were dropped and the ATF handled it.

What was funny was that the guy with all the "fireworks" would set of china-rattling (even a mile away)explosions intermittently prior to this brouhaha, no one in the area complained. As far as many of the residents were concerned, he was just practicing to protect his property. A little unhinged, perhaps, but he was left alone until our Wild-West sheriff wanted to go in and play at blowing things up, who cares about the locals.

AH HA! I remember seeing that on the news!

Interesting reading about it from this perspective.

I am always surprised when he keeps getting re-elected.

[ksgirl38]

In my experience the police will lie and do what they want. My best advice would be to make sure you know how to use the camera on your cell phone and get any evidence you can. Should something happen as you suggested I think you'd have a right to sue in a civil court, but good luck convincing anyone. I think in the case of Rodney King it was the media and all the videos that helped him.

[frogger]

The ACLU has some apps for smartphones.