Can you hold someone at gunpoint in your home state?

[vt_shooter]

Is there any circumstance where you, as a non-LEO, in your home state, can legally hold someone at gunpoint until police arrive? I'm thinking in my home state such a circumstance does not exist. To hold someone at gunpoint means threatening him with death, and in my state, you can't do that unless your own life is in imminent danger, and if you're holding someone at gun point, your own life is not in imminent danger. Example: If I came home to find a burglar, unless I can physically restrain him, I have to let him go because I cannot legally hold him at gunpoint. So is there a circumstance where you can hold someone, legally, at gun point in your state?

 

[FlyFish]

I can't refer you to the applicable statute (and IA definitely NAL), but it does appear to be legal here in New Hampshire, under certain circumstances of course. I googled "NH holding at gunpoint" and found numerous news stories of non-LEO legal firearms owners doing just that, and in some cases the local police chief was quoted as saying the individual with the gun was acting appropriately within his/her rights.

 

[dockmurgw]

Hold them from advancing towards you or someone else...probably maybe. Hold them from fleeing...probably not, unless they are fleeing from something so heinous that its overlooked. But that's just a guess.

 

[SAFireman]

Probably not a good idea in any state....

 

[Breakaway500]

If I have pulled a firearm and am pointing it at someone in my house the next sound is going to be loud.

 

[Hair Trigger]

I think the key point in any state, or any circumstance, is what LE will immediately think and do when they arrive on-scene and see one person on the ground with another holding a gun on them. It would be no different, I think, if they arrive on the scene of a shooting; their first priority will be to make sure they don't get shot, and you can sure betcha if someone is holding a gun, he'll likely be on the ground soon, too, one way or the other.

Their second action will be to try and identify the parties involved and determine for the moment who the bad guy and good guy are, but you'll both be treated the same way until it becomes clear, both from circumstantial evidence and witnesses.

Then, if it is determined a justified response to be holding someone at gunpoint, somebody gets arrested and somebody else has to go in and make a statement. The DA makes the decision whether it is justified and not press charges.

 

[NYlakesider]

I think the key point in any state, or any circumstance, is what LE will immediately think and do when they arrive on-scene and see one person on the ground with another holding a gun on them. It would be no different, I think, if they arrive on the scene of a shooting; their first priority will be to make sure they don't get shot, and you can sure betcha if someone is holding a gun, he'll likely be on the ground soon, too, one way or the other.

Their second action will be to try and identify the parties involved and determine for the moment who the bad guy and good guy are, but you'll both be treated the same way until it becomes clear, both from circumstantial evidence and witnesses.

Then, if it is determined a justified response to be holding someone at gunpoint, somebody gets arrested and somebody else has to go in and make a statement. The DA makes the decision whether it is justified and not press charges.

Dead men tell no tails!

 

[Absalom]

To hold someone at gunpoint means threatening him with death, and in my state, you can't do that unless your own life is in imminent danger, and if you're holding someone at gun point, your own life is not in imminent danger .Example: If I came home to find a burglar, unless I can physically restrain him, I have to let him go because I cannot legally hold him at gunpoint.

But the reasoning becomes circular if the only reason your life is not in imminent danger is because you have a gun pointed at the guy.

I think in the real world, as long as there are no casualties, nobody will prosecute a homeowner for keeping a gun pointed at an intruder and telling him not to move. I‘ve also easily found references to multiple stories of homeowners holding burglars for the police, and no indications of trouble for the homeowner.

Oregon law allows for the use of physical force during citizens arrests to the degree necessary to prevent the perpetrator from leaving, but limits specifically the use of deadly force to classic self defense criteria. You can jump on the guy if he tries to run, but you cannot shoot him.

So holding someone at gunpoint is basically a bluff.

You‘re making the guy think you‘re threatening him with getting shot, but you can‘t, and won‘t unless he attacks you instead of running. The question then is, does he know that, and is he willing to assume you‘re educated in the law?

 

[2wheels]

Holding someone at gun point for stealing a yard ornament will probably get you busted for assault with deadly weapon. Holding someone at gun point that is are posing a imminent threat to your life - you're probably fine. Answer is: it depends. See paragraph (4) below. This is from Washington State.

RCW 9A.16.020
Use of force—When lawful.
The use, attempt, or offer to use force upon or toward the person of another is not unlawful in the following cases:
(1) Whenever necessarily used by a public officer in the performance of a legal duty, or a person assisting the officer and acting under the officer's direction;
(2) Whenever necessarily used by a person arresting one who has committed a felony and delivering him or her to a public officer competent to receive him or her into custody;
(3) Whenever used by a party about to be injured, or by another lawfully aiding him or her, in preventing or attempting to prevent an offense against his or her person, or a malicious trespass, or other malicious interference with real or personal property lawfully in his or her possession, in case the force is not more than is necessary;
(4) Whenever reasonably used by a person to detain someone who enters or remains unlawfully in a building or on real property lawfully in the possession of such person, so long as such detention is reasonable in duration and manner to investigate the reason for the detained person's presence on the premises, and so long as the premises in question did not reasonably appear to be intended to be open to members of the public;
(5) Whenever used by a carrier of passengers or the carrier's authorized agent or servant, or other person assisting them at their request in expelling from a carriage, railway car, vessel, or other vehicle, a passenger who refuses to obey a lawful and reasonable regulation prescribed for the conduct of passengers, if such vehicle has first been stopped and the force used is not more than is necessary to expel the offender with reasonable regard to the offender's personal safety;
(6) Whenever used by any person to prevent a mentally ill, mentally incompetent, or mentally disabled person from committing an act dangerous to any person, or in enforcing necessary restraint for the protection or restoration to health of the person, during such period only as is necessary to obtain legal authority for the restraint or custody of the person.

 

[biku324]

If you are pointing a firearm at someone and telling they can't leave until police arrive or you'll shoot the (whether you articulate that or whether such was clear from your actions), you've 'arrested' that person. If your state has laws on citizen's arrest, you'd better know them and be really, unquestionably right - in nearly all states false imprisonment is a felony as well as a tort.

I wouldn't even consider such a thing.

Here's common law in New Mexico on citizen's arrest:

In New Mexico, “[a]ny person . . . may arrest another upon good-faith, reasonable grounds that a felony had been or was being committed, or a breach of the peace was being committed in the person’s presence.”State v. Arroyos, 2005-NMCA-086, ¶ 5, 137 N.M. 769 (citing State v. Johnson, 1996-NMSC-075, ¶ 18, 122N.M. 696), overruled on other grounds by State v. Slayton, 2009-NMSC-054, 147 N.M. 340. A breach of the peace is considered “a disturbance of public order by an act of violence, or by any act likelyto produce violence, or which, by causing consternation and alarm, disturbs the peace and quiet of the community.” State v. Florstedt, 1966-NMSC-208, ¶ 7, 77 N.M. 47

Hernandez v. Fitzgerald et al, No. 1:2014cv00964 - Document 203 (D.N.M. 2019)

 

[bigwheelzip]

My SC CC class was taught by a Deputy Sheriff, and Citizens Arrest was covered.
While "Legal" in a variety of cases, his opinion was the law was poorly crafted for modern application, potentially creating a minefield of liability.
His recommendation was just don't chance it.


Sent from my motorola one 5G using Tapatalk

 

[LoboGunLeather]

At Chapter 2 Colorado Revised Statutes specifically authorizes any citizen to make an arrest for a criminal act committed in that person's presence using such force as may be reasonably necessary to subdue the perpetrator and deliver to the sheriff of the county.

Please note that I am only speaking of Colorado law; other jurisdictions may vary considerably.

Legally authorized, probably so. Advisable, maybe not. Certain to bring close scrutiny at the courthouse. Probably best avoided if at all possible. A jury may, or may not, decide that such actions were reasonable and prudent under the circumstances, but that will only take place at the conclusion of your trial (another event that is better to avoid whenever possible).

Another exercise in trying to determine just how many lawyers can dance on the head of a pin. Prosecutors are public employees, usually with decent salaries and benefits, so they are willing to dance all day. Your lawyers will be billing by the hour, so the longer the dance the better for them.

 

[LVSteve]

My simplistic view is that it may be legal in some states and in certain circumstances. Depending on the attitude of LE and the DA in your area, even though it may appear legal where you live, you may find yourself pleading down a kidnapping charge.

 

[Skeet 028]

I did it once in Maryland of all places...4 guys in a car at O dark 30... when the police got there he got the people out of the car. Told me to ditch the shotgun...but the cop was a down the road neighbor. When he searched the car there were 3 guns on the floor one a sawed off 870 IIRC. I had to make a statement and the crooks(all had extensive records) tried to say they were lost. Didn't fly. That being said at the time I was a FFL holder with the business on the farm. So there was a bit more leniency towards me I guess. Heck lots of cops bought stuff from me. Only one did serious time ...the others said the driver made 'em come with him. He had the sawed off. I would not recommend doing it now though....

 

[jjfitch]

I the two western states I'm familiar with it follows post #9.

The key take aways are in defense of oneself or another and or a "felony"!

Stealing or attempting to steal a yard ornament does not qualify.

Smiles,

 

[steelslaver]

Montana code

46-6-502. (1) A private person may arrest another when there is probable cause to believe that the person is committing or has committed an offense and the existing circumstances require the person's immediate arrest. ... The private person may use reasonable force to detain the arrested person.

(2) A private person making an arrest shall immediately notify the nearest available law enforcement agency or peace officer and give custody of the person arrested to the officer or agency.

I would only do that if I caught someone red handed on my property in one of my buildings or vehicles. I also know I would not have any problems from the county attorney or sheriff

Around here going in someones building uninvited would be a poor idea. If I drive into a ranch yard and don't see anyone going directly to the door of the house or shop and knocking or calling out is the limit. I would be real careful about dogs too

 

[Smoke]

Is there any circumstance where you, as a non-LEO, in your home state, can legally hold someone at gunpoint until police arrive?

Why would you?

 

[MRB1]

The only time I would hold someone at gunpoint was if I caught them on or in my property in a criminal act. Here in Texas our Castle Doctrine is a godsend. I also have to be mindful of the fact that unused backhoes only take up space.

 

[vt_shooter]

Why would you?

I'm sure you could think a hypothetical of when you'd like that option if the law allowed it. But the question wasn't about wanting to, it was about the legalities. And to get a little dialog going that benefits perhaps a few of us. Good comments, I appreciate them.

 

[Imissedagain]

No yard ornaments on our lawn but when someone takes a ripe pineapple, from the garden without asking and runs, we use one of these.
Just call me Gringo Gaucho.

Back in the early '70s I was detained when walking into my favorite rare tone wood supply store, Avenue A and 11th Street, in the East Village of NYC.
Nine German Shepherds and the big one was gently mouthing my forearm. Rough part of town in those days.

Not sure of the legality to the OP's question but I'm proficient with a 12 foot cast net.

I would detain a crook with a gun if necessary.