"Why didn't you pull that gun?"

[BobK]

In Ohio, one can use force to protect one's property - one cannot use deadly force to protect one's property.

True.

One common variation is when someone chooses to use force to protect their property. When the gibsmedat orc decides to attack the person so heinously withholding the property in question, that shift from property theft to a personal attack can also shift the justification from force to deadly force.

[TSiWRX]

I sometimes wonder if supposedly grown people make such statements just because they didn't think them through, or they really think the law works like that?

^ Probably a little of both.

[Werz]

Thanks, everyone. Make, model, and license # were recorded by employees. I went on with my day.

But you acknowledge that you saw it, so you're still a witness.

[Cruiser]

In Ohio, one can use force to protect one's property - one cannot use deadly force to protect one's property.

True.

One common variation is when someone chooses to use force to protect their property. When the gibsmedat orc decides to attack the person so heinously withholding the property in question, that shift from property theft to a personal attack can also shift the justification from force to deadly force.

But then the problem arises. Who escalated the violence? Did the property owner by using force!

[carmen fovozzo]

TR.can i aim for the foot ?

[Bama.45]

You did the right thing. I would have done the same thing. Stayed out of it and been a good witness.

[catfish86]

Believe it or not, the EMPLOYEES have some limited protection in stopping a shoplifter. As a bystander you do not. Shoplifters have died in chokeholds attempting to restrain without successful legal consequences against the employees. I can't recall the exact legal requirements for use of force on shoplifters but I know that force is allowed. Now, should the store employee be in the act of restraint when a knife is pulled by the rascal, that is justified defense of another.

[Tweed Ring]

TR.can i aim for the foot ?

I believe the use of a firearm against an opponent is deadly force. However, my use of a baton against an opponent, depending on the technique used, and the body part to which it is applied, may be less than deadly force.

[Stryker74]

Believe it or not, the EMPLOYEES have some limited protection in stopping a shoplifter. As a bystander you do not. Shoplifters have died in chokeholds attempting to restrain without successful legal consequences against the employees. I can't recall the exact legal requirements for use of force on shoplifters but I know that force is allowed. Now, should the store employee be in the act of restraint when a knife is pulled by the rascal, that is justified defense of another.

That might be a stretch. In defense of others, you have to be sure that the person you are defending was not at fault for instigating the situation. Otherwise, you place yourself into the precarious position of defending the potential "attacker". If the grand jury declares that the employee was a fault for an attack - you are on the hook for use of deadly force as well.

Property is never worth more than my life or freedom. Ever.

I might be angry that some person stole from me, as I work hard for my possessions. But it is just stuff, and can be replaced. My life and my freedom cannot be replaced so easily.

[MyWifeSaidYes]

Believe it or not, the EMPLOYEES have some limited protection in stopping a shoplifter. As a bystander you do not. Shoplifters have died in chokeholds attempting to restrain without successful legal consequences against the employees. I can't recall the exact legal requirements for use of force on shoplifters but I know that force is allowed. Now, should the store employee be in the act of restraint when a knife is pulled by the rascal, that is justified defense of another.

They have limited 'authority' under R.C. 2935.041, but there are no protections beyond that authority.

2935.041(E) The officer, agent, or employee of the library, museum, or archival institution, the merchant or employee or agent of a merchant, or the owner, lessee, employee, or agent of the facility acting under division (A), (B), or (D) of this section shall not search the person detained, search or seize any property belonging to the person detained without the person's consent, or use undue restraint upon the person detained.

[Javelin Man]

Believe it or not, the EMPLOYEES have some limited protection in stopping a shoplifter. As a bystander you do not. Shoplifters have died in chokeholds attempting to restrain without successful legal consequences against the employees. I can't recall the exact legal requirements for use of force on shoplifters but I know that force is allowed. Now, should the store employee be in the act of restraint when a knife is pulled by the rascal, that is justified defense of another.

They have limited 'authority' under R.C. 2935.041, but there are no protections beyond that authority.

2935.041(E) The officer, agent, or employee of the library, museum, or archival institution, the merchant or employee or agent of a merchant, or the owner, lessee, employee, or agent of the facility acting under division (A), (B), or (D) of this section shall not search the person detained, search or seize any property belonging to the person detained without the person's consent, or use undue restraint upon the person detained.

And if they do search or detain the person without the person's consent, what is the consequence to the employee or whomever is doing the detaining or searching?

[Werz]

2935.041(E) The officer, agent, or employee of the library, museum, or archival institution, the merchant or employee or agent of a merchant, or the owner, lessee, employee, or agent of the facility acting under division (A), (B), or (D) of this section shall not search the person detained, search or seize any property belonging to the person detained without the person's consent, or use undue restraint upon the person detained.

And if they do search or detain the person without the person's consent, what is the consequence to the employee or whomever is doing the detaining or searching?

You're not asking the right question. Respondeat superior.

[Bama.45]

Believe it or not, the EMPLOYEES have some limited protection in stopping a shoplifter. As a bystander you do not. Shoplifters have died in chokeholds attempting to restrain without successful legal consequences against the employees. I can't recall the exact legal requirements for use of force on shoplifters but I know that force is allowed. Now, should the store employee be in the act of restraint when a knife is pulled by the rascal, that is justified defense of another.

They have limited 'authority' under R.C. 2935.041, but there are no protections beyond that authority.

2935.041(E) The officer, agent, or employee of the library, museum, or archival institution, the merchant or employee or agent of a merchant, or the owner, lessee, employee, or agent of the facility acting under division (A), (B), or (D) of this section shall not search the person detained, search or seize any property belonging to the person detained without the person's consent, or use undue restraint upon the person detained.

What is undue restraint though?..And I saw cops searching a person a few weeks back, with the person still in the store..I thought that was illegal..I thought the person had to actually try to leave the store..Is that wrong?

[JediSkipdogg]

Believe it or not, the EMPLOYEES have some limited protection in stopping a shoplifter. As a bystander you do not. Shoplifters have died in chokeholds attempting to restrain without successful legal consequences against the employees. I can't recall the exact legal requirements for use of force on shoplifters but I know that force is allowed. Now, should the store employee be in the act of restraint when a knife is pulled by the rascal, that is justified defense of another.

They have limited 'authority' under R.C. 2935.041, but there are no protections beyond that authority.

2935.041(E) The officer, agent, or employee of the library, museum, or archival institution, the merchant or employee or agent of a merchant, or the owner, lessee, employee, or agent of the facility acting under division (A), (B), or (D) of this section shall not search the person detained, search or seize any property belonging to the person detained without the person's consent, or use undue restraint upon the person detained.

What is undue restraint though?..And I saw cops searching a person a few weeks back, with the person still in the store..I thought that was illegal..I thought the person had to actually try to leave the store..Is that wrong?

General rule of thumb is you need to make an attempt to leave the store before security will jump in. I think in most cases, security will follow until you walk past the counter and are at the exit to walk out. Another method is removing the packages and leaving the original package behind. If you open a He-Man action figure out of the plastic, stick the action figure in your pocket, and leave the package behind, that can be construed as theft. Now, if you open the action figure, hand it to your kid, and take the original package with you, that's not theft. It's not a clear cut and dry for everything.

I'm not sure I'm following you on the search though. Police don't have to search the person in the parking lot. They can search in the store if they are under arrest and an element of theft has been met.

We also deal with employee theft all the time and search inside the store.

[Bama.45]

That answered my question..The guy hadn't left the store and was in the process of paying for stuff when the cops came up and searched him..Didn't find anything and let him go..It just didn't make sense to me and I felt that was an illegal search...I would imagine employee search procedures would be different..What is undue restraint though?..That has me curious..What's the definition?