Pennsylvania Firearm Owners Association
Page 7 of 10 FirstFirst ... 345678910 LastLast
Results 61 to 70 of 91
  1. #61
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Somewhere, Pennsylvania
    Posts
    653
    Rep Power
    4265971

    Default Re: Woman pulls gun at KoP Mall food court

    Quote Originally Posted by Gman106 View Post
    18 Pa. C.S.A § 505:

    § 505. Use of force in self-protection.

    (a) Use of force justifiable for protection of the person.--The use of force upon or toward another person is justifiable when the actor believes that such force is immediately necessary for the purpose of protecting himself against the use of unlawful force by such other person on the present occasion.

    (b) Limitations on justifying necessity for use of force.--

    (1) The use of force is not justifiable under this section:

    (i) to resist an arrest which the actor knows is being made by a peace officer, although the arrest is unlawful; or

    (ii) to resist force used by the occupier or possessor of property or by another person on his behalf, where the actor knows that the person using the force is doing so under a claim of right to protect the property, except that this limitation shall not apply if:

    (A) the actor is a public officer acting in the performance of his duties or a person lawfully assisting him therein or a person making or assisting in a lawful arrest;

    (B) the actor has been unlawfully dispossessed of the property and is making a reentry or recaption justified by section 507 of this title (relating to use of force for the protection of property); or

    (C) the actor believes that such force is necessary to protect himself against death or serious bodily injury.

    (2) The use of deadly force is not justifiable under this section unless the actor believes that such force is necessary to protect himself against death, serious bodily injury, kidnapping or sexual intercourse compelled by force or threat; nor is it justifiable if:

    (i) the actor, with the intent of causing death or serious bodily injury, provoked the use of force against himself in the same encounter; or

    (ii) the actor knows that he can avoid the necessity of using such force with complete safety by retreating, except the actor is not obliged to retreat from his dwelling or place of work, unless he was the initial aggressor or is assailed in his place of work by another person whose place of work the actor knows it to be.

    (2.1) Except as otherwise provided in paragraph (2.2), an actor is presumed to have a reasonable belief that deadly force is immediately necessary to protect himself against death, serious bodily injury, kidnapping or sexual intercourse compelled by force or threat if both of the following conditions exist:

    (i) The person against whom the force is used is in the process of unlawfully and forcefully entering, or has unlawfully and forcefully entered and is present within, a dwelling, residence or occupied vehicle; or the person against whom the force is used is or is attempting to unlawfully and forcefully remove another against that other's will from the dwelling, residence or occupied vehicle.

    (ii) The actor knows or has reason to believe that the unlawful and forceful entry or act is occurring or has occurred.

    (2.2) The presumption set forth in paragraph (2.1) does not apply if:

    (i) the person against whom the force is used has the right to be in or is a lawful resident of the dwelling, residence or vehicle, such as an owner or lessee;

    (ii) the person sought to be removed is a child or grandchild or is otherwise in the lawful custody or under the lawful guardianship of the person against whom the protective force is used;

    (iii) the actor is engaged in a criminal activity or is using the dwelling, residence or occupied vehicle to further a criminal activity; or

    (iv) the person against whom the force is used is a peace officer acting in the performance of his official duties and the actor using force knew or reasonably should have known that the person was a peace officer.

    (2.3) An actor who is not engaged in a criminal activity, who is not in illegal possession of a firearm and who is attacked in any place where the actor would have a duty to retreat under paragraph (2)(ii) has no duty to retreat and has the right to stand his ground and use force, including deadly force, if:

    (i) the actor has a right to be in the place where he was attacked;

    (ii) the actor believes it is immediately necessary to do so to protect himself against death, serious bodily injury, kidnapping or sexual intercourse by force or threat; and

    (iii) the person against whom the force is used displays or otherwise uses:

    (A) a firearm or replica of a firearm as defined in 42 Pa.C.S. § 9712 (relating to sentences for offenses committed with firearms); or

    (B) any other weapon readily or apparently capable of lethal use.

    (2.4) The exception to the duty to retreat set forth under paragraph (2.3) does not apply if the person against whom the force is used is a peace officer acting in the performance of his official duties and the actor using force knew or reasonably should have known that the person was a peace officer.

    (2.5) Unless one of the exceptions under paragraph (2.2) applies, a person who unlawfully and by force enters or attempts to enter an actor's dwelling, residence or occupied vehicle or removes or attempts to remove another against that other's will from the actor's dwelling, residence or occupied vehicle is presumed to be doing so with the intent to commit:

    (i) an act resulting in death or serious bodily injury; or

    (ii) kidnapping or sexual intercourse by force or threat.

    (2.6) A public officer justified in using force in the performance of his duties or a person justified in using force in his assistance or a person justified in using force in making an arrest or preventing an escape is not obliged to desist from efforts to perform such duty, effect such arrest or prevent such escape because of resistance or threatened resistance by or on behalf of the person against whom such action is directed.

    (3) Except as otherwise required by this subsection, a person employing protective force may estimate the necessity thereof under the circumstances as he believes them to be when the force is used, without retreating, surrendering possession, doing any other act which he has no legal duty to do or abstaining from any lawful action.

    (c) Use of confinement as protective force.--The justification afforded by this section extends to the use of confinement as protective force only if the actor takes all reasonable measures to terminate the confinement as soon as he knows that he safely can, unless the person confined has been arrested on a charge of crime.

    (d) Definition.--As used in this section, the term "criminal activity" means conduct which is a misdemeanor or felony, is not justifiable under this chapter and is related to the confrontation between an actor and the person against whom force is used.

    (June 28, 2011, P.L.48, No.10, eff. 60 days)



    2011 Amendment. Act 10 amended subsec. (b) and added subsec. (d). See the preamble to Act 10 in the appendix to this title for special provisions relating to legislative findings.

    Cross References. Section 505 is referred to in section 506 of this title; section 6304 of Title 23 (Domestic Relations); section 8340.2 of Title 42 (Judiciary and Judicial Procedure).
    As you highlighted, the retreat requirement is the rule before using deadly force against unarmed perpetrators in public. The use of non-deadly force in self defense does not require retreat. She didn't fire her gun. Is a defensive display of a firearm a use of deadly force or is it a use of non-deadly force? The former requires retreat against unarmed perpetrators in public while the latter does not.
    Last edited by Mosinshooter762; August 27th, 2022 at 10:54 PM.

  2. #62
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Somewhere, Pennsylvania
    Posts
    653
    Rep Power
    4265971

    Default Re: Woman pulls gun at KoP Mall food court

    Quote Originally Posted by DK23 View Post
    From the article:



    Could be argued that she did retreat.

    From the law:



    What is considered 'complete safety'? She's in a food court with one entrance/exit (yes it is a large area, but still only 1 direction) and she had already walked away once. Where else could she go to be completely safe from 3 people in a mall?
    I also think this is a good point considering the disparity of force and assuming for the sake of argument that a defensive display of a firearm is a use of deadly force. Though, I don't think she used deadly force. Rather, arguably it was a use of non-deadly force (which doesn't require retreat). As far as the retreat requirement, if a District Attorney decides to prosecute a case based on that then the whole deadly force vs non-deadly force issue and the whole deadly force requirement of 'knows you can retreat with complete safety' against unarmed attackers in public issue would likely be for the jury to decide.

    Based on some comments, I just wanted to remind everyone that there is still a retreat requirement in Pennsylvania before using deadly force against unarmed attackers in public (at least when you know you can retreat with complete safety). I didn't intend to indicate that this particular case wasn't a good defensive display case.

  3. #63
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Boondocks, Pennsylvania
    (Montgomery County)
    Posts
    1,076
    Rep Power
    21474848

    Default Re: Woman pulls gun at KoP Mall food court

    Quote Originally Posted by Mosinshooter762 View Post
    I also think this assuming for the sake of argument that a defensive display is a use of deadly force. Though, I don't think she used deadly force. Rather I think it arguably was a use of non-deadly force (which doesn't require retreat). As far as the retreat requirement, if a District Attorney decides to prosecute a case based on that then the 'knows you can retreat with complete safety' would ultimately be up to a jury to decide.

    Based on some comments, I just wanted to remind everyone that there is still a retreat requirement in Pennsylvania before using deadly force against unarmed attackers in public (at least when you know you can retreat with complete safety). I didn't intend to indicate that this particular case wasn't a good defensive display case.
    No worries, I just posted that to further the discussion.

  4. #64
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    DELCO, Pennsylvania
    (Delaware County)
    Posts
    2,253
    Rep Power
    21474851

    Default Re: Woman pulls gun at KoP Mall food court

    Quote Originally Posted by Mosinshooter762 View Post
    I also think this is a good point considering the disparity of force and assuming for the sake of argument that a defensive display of a firearm is a use of deadly force. Though, I don't think she used deadly force. Rather, arguably it was a use of non-deadly force (which doesn't require retreat). As far as the retreat requirement, if a District Attorney decides to prosecute a case based on that then the whole deadly force vs non-deadly force issue and the whole deadly force requirement of 'knows you can retreat with complete safety' against unarmed attackers in public issue would likely be for the jury to decide.

    Based on some comments, I just wanted to remind everyone that there is still a retreat requirement in Pennsylvania before using deadly force against unarmed attackers in public (at least when you know you can retreat with complete safety). I didn't intend to indicate that this particular case wasn't a good defensive display case.
    I think "complete safety" also gives some legal wiggle room to a gun owner in a public safety threat situation.
    "Everyone is entitled to my opinion." - Gman106
    "Everyone has a plan till they get punched in the face." - Mike Tyson
    "Get the hell out of my way." - John Galt

  5. #65
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    york, Pennsylvania
    (York County)
    Posts
    728
    Rep Power
    21474848

    Default Re: Woman pulls gun at KoP Mall food court

    FOX OC spray
    For those those times when you can't just shoot them...............................

  6. #66
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Glenmoore, Pennsylvania
    (Chester County)
    Age
    65
    Posts
    3,556
    Rep Power
    21474854

    Default Re: Woman pulls gun at KoP Mall food court

    Quote Originally Posted by JenniferG View Post
    Before it was Ruth Criss that place was a Denny's.
    Used stop there for Grand Slams when I sold Snap-On (corporate sales, not a dealer). KoP was in my territory.

  7. #67
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Somewhere, Pennsylvania
    Posts
    2,911
    Rep Power
    21474856

    Default Re: Woman pulls gun at KoP Mall food court

    Quote Originally Posted by DK23 View Post
    I'm not bougie like that. I have eaten at Sullivan's quite a few times, but that's usually when I'm not paying. And I only eat seafood when I can see water from the table.
    That's funny, I was just thinking the other day that I've never eaten at Sullivan's when someone else wasn't paying the bill. Been there for parties, job interviews, and vendor presentations. Never once have I paid.

  8. #68
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Douglassville, Pennsylvania
    (Berks County)
    Posts
    11,764
    Rep Power
    21474859

    Default Re: Woman pulls gun at KoP Mall food court

    Quote Originally Posted by JAKIII View Post
    Used stop there for Grand Slams when I sold Snap-On (corporate sales, not a dealer). KoP was in my territory.
    I ate many a $1.98 Grand Slams in my day. Many there and many at their Devon location. I don't care what anybody says, that was good eating and their pancakes didn't fall apart when I ate them, like they do at many other restaurants.
    Gender confusion is a mental illness

  9. #69
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Somewhere, Pennsylvania
    Posts
    2,911
    Rep Power
    21474856

    Default Re: Woman pulls gun at KoP Mall food court

    Quote Originally Posted by Gman106 View Post
    When I used to work in Collegeville, we would have occasional luncheons art various eateries. I recall an Italian place at Kop Mall called Maggiano's (sp?) which had pretty good Italian food served family style.
    Maggiano's is still there. Still serving good food.

    Quote Originally Posted by Walleye Hunter View Post
    I delivered a lot of materials in there when Maggiano's was being built. I'll bet that an appetizer costs what a full meal should in there.
    Their prices are no better or worse than any other restaurant in KoP. The key to Maggiano's is to go with a group and order family style.

  10. #70
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Somewhere, Pennsylvania
    Posts
    2,911
    Rep Power
    21474856

    Default Re: Woman pulls gun at KoP Mall food court

    Quote Originally Posted by Walleye Hunter View Post
    I figured you for a Ruth's Criss or Morton's kind of guy.
    Meh, I'd rather go to the Seven Stars Inn for a steak.

Page 7 of 10 FirstFirst ... 345678910 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 82
    Last Post: September 26th, 2021, 09:52 PM
  2. RC encounter at local mall food court
    By Koli01 in forum General
    Replies: 37
    Last Post: July 16th, 2008, 01:09 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •