WHAT CAN YOU DO IF RIOTERS ATTACK YOUR CAR?

how's it going buddy in this video I'm gonna be addressing one of the most prevalent questions I've been getting recently and that has to do with what can you do if rioters or looters have you surrounded when you're in your vehicle what are you allowed to do under California law so real quick before we jump into this video I want to thank one of the channel sponsors us CCA us CCA provides carry insurance or legal protection for law-abiding citizens like me and you so if you're interested I'll go ahead and put a link down in the comment section and also a link in the details so a lot of you have been asking me this question especially after I put out a recent video talking about what can you do if rioters or looters come to your door what are the California laws related to that and a lot of you asked well what about if you're in your vehicle what can you do and ultimately what you are permitted to do under California law is going to be based on the general law surrounding self-defense here in the state I know a lot of you were wondering if there was some sort of special statutory laws or rules here in the state of California surrounding having to use self-defense when you're inside your vehicle but here in the state of California there's not really a special distinguishment between having to use your firearm or use self-defense while you're in your vehicle it is just going to be the general umbrella of self-defense here in the state so let's look at generally the laws about self-defense here in the state of California and then I will try to apply them to the specific scenario of having to use self-defense or use your farm when you are in your vehicle surrounded by two individuals or individuals or trying to get to you while you're in your vehicle so here in the state of California we do have an affirmative defense which is a self-defense or a justifiable homicide defense which relates to if you had to ultimately injure someone or you actually caused the death of another individual but it was in the course of self-defense or defending yourself then that is an affirmative defense and you can use it to essentially create an umbrella defense around what you had to do but there are elements to proving the affirmative defense of self-defense and there are three main elements to a self-defense claim here in the state of California so let's look at those the three main elements are that you or someone else was in imminent danger of great bodily injury or death that you reasonably believed of that the immediate use of that deadly force was necessary to protect yourself from that immediate risk of great bodily injury or death and that you use the force not more than necessary to deal with that immediate danger or of great bodily death or injuries so the force that you use is proportionate to the threat that you were faced or the threat that someone else was faced with so let's look at all three of these elements based on the specific scenario of using self-defense when you're inside your vehicle so the first element is imminent danger and the critical factor to this is imminent was the threat to you of great bodily injury or death imminent was it happening now it cannot be something that you think might happen or you think may happen in the future or something that may occur it has to be happening to you in the moment it has to be imminent it has to be happening right now so the question for this element becomes is that scenario of when your car surrounded by a mob of people trying to get in is that an imminent fear of great bodily injury or death and so in my belief I would think yes and I'm sure a lot of you would think that yes also but ultimately that's left up to the individual in the scenario and the jury is going to have to determine if that individual in that scenario believed that if they had the reasonable belief of imminent danger of great bodily injury or death but I think if a jury were to look at that it would be hard to argue that an individual who's pretty much being dragged out of their car by a mob did not have a reasonable belief of imminent danger or great bodily injury or death something like that I think it would be really hard to argue that but you never know what juries and so the next element is that you had a reasonable belief that the deadly force that you used was necessary in that scenarios so when we look at the scenario of maybe your car surrounded by a mob of people they're beating on your car they're damaging it then they break the windows and are pulling you out the question is in that moment with an individual like me or you have a reasonable belief that using deadly force is necessary in that situation to prevent the great bodily injury or death and I'm sure like a lot of you I believe that yes I mean if I'm being pulled out of a car by a mob they just damaged my car broke my windows pulling me and maybe my through my family members out I personally would believe that using deadly force would be necessary to prevent that you know great bodily injury or death the jury has to determine what an objectively reasonable person believed in this scenario that using deadly force was appropriate and the juries are supposed to take into account relevant evidence in circumstances to come to this determination so what they would have to look at is what was the mob doing you know what were you doing were they throwing Molotov cocktails did they have a crowbar that they were beating your car with did they break the windows did someone have a knife when they pulled you out how many people were pulling you out there's a lot of evidence and circumstances and you know just general what is going on that has to be considered by the jury so now let's look at the last element and that is did you use reasonably necessary force to address that you know threat that you are faced with and ultimately this is pretty much proportional force did you use force that was proportional to the threat that you're faced with and so what a jury would have to look in this scenario is when a mob is pretty much damaged in your car breaking your windows trying to pull you out would you using deadly force or using your firearm would that be proportional to the threat that you're being faced with ie being that mob damaging your car breaking your window and trying to pull you out would that use a force that you use be proportional to that threat and so generally when a jury looks at this if they determine that there was a threat of great bodily injury or death to the individual the individual ie me or you using deadly force to meet that great bodily injury or fear of death would be proportional essentially you could meet you know fear of death or fear of great bodily injury with deadly force but when it comes to this element generally you are only permitted to use the level of force to meet that threat level now one of the other things I want to address in this video has to do with a lot of the questions I was getting on the prior video had to do with castle doctrine a lot of people were asking well does castle doctrine that we have in the city of California would that extend to your vehicle if you're not familiar with castle doctrine I can go over comprehensively in this video and you can click the link up here of all the other videos that I have that talked about self defense castle doctrine and generally protecting your home from rioters and looters but the quick answer is no in the city California castle doctrine does not extend to your vehicle there are some states in the US like Pennsylvania I've lived in Pennsylvania before and they do extend castle doctrine to things like vehicles and other properties but here in the state of California this statutory language that discusses castle doctrine only applies it to your residence now I'm sure I'll get a lot of questions on this video also talking about what about your RV your mobile home stuff like that what the castle doctrine apply to your RV if someone was trying to break into it or if right if you're driving here RV and you're surrounded by rioters and looters and they're trying to get to you while you're narvi that's a little bit more of a gray area you probably could argue that your RV or mobile home that you're driving is your residence or your domicile for that period of time that you're in your RV especially if you're traveling or something like that that's a little bit easier of an argument but what we're covering generally in this video has to do with just your general vehicles your car trucks something like that when you're just in your general commute you're out in the public and then something like this would happen with an RV or mobile home you might have a better argument for the castle doctrine but it's not just a clear-cut now one of the last things I want to talk about which applies to California self defense generally and could apply to this specific scenario of someone coming after you while you're in your vehicle or a mob surround me you while you're in your vehicle has to do with California stand your ground laws in California's requirement that you do not have a duty to retreat now I've put out videos in the past where I talk about self defense generally and a lot of people say well California doesn't have a stand-your-ground law I googled it and then I had the first thing that came up said that we have a castle doctrine but we don't have a stand-your-ground law the California stand your ground law is not like other states where other states for example like Florida have a statutory requirement or actually have statutory language that codifies the Stand Your Ground law in the state of California we don't have statutory language what we have is general case law and a general common law understanding that you do not have a duty to retreat and that a jury cannot take into account your reluctance or inability or essentially failure to retreat as a basis to convict you or to overcome your self-defense argument and you can actually find this in California criminal jury instruction section 505 and actually has this language in there where it talks about that a jury can not take into consideration your duty to retreat or your reluctance to retreat or your failure to retreat essentially what it says is a person is not required to retreat he or she is entitled to stand his or her ground and defend himself or herself and have reasonably necessary to pursue an assailant until the danger of death or great bodily injury has passed this applies even if safety could have been achieved by retreating so this essentially is talking about that duty to retreat or stand your ground it's language that we talked about or I've mentioned here in state of California a jury cannot take into account the fact that maybe you could have avoided that fear of great bodily to injury or death if you would have retreated or found safety somewhere else they can't take that into consideration pretty much you can stand your ground and also there is language talking about actually pursuing an assailant so how would this applied to this specific scenario where maybe rioters looters have your vehicle surrounded and they're trying to get to you essentially how I could see this playing out is maybe a prosecutor to say well you were in your vehicle you could have got away but in the state of California that might play into the jury but they're not supposed to take that into consideration the language here in the state pretty much says that they cannot consider that so as you can see when it comes to California self-defense laws and how it might apply to this specific scenario of you being in your vehicle and surrounded by a mob and it gets really muddy it gets really you know gray area a lot of stuff it's very factually specific and so I don't want you just to assume that because a mob is around you and they're breaking in they're trying to get you out that self-defense will just automatically apply like I've mentioned multiple times it's up to the jury to determine whether that former defense will actually protect you but that's pretty much a judgment call you will have to make for yourself because it's would you rather be judged by the jury or like a lot of people say or would you rather be carried in a box because a mob pulled you out and killed you so hopefully you guys found this video helpful and if you did go ahead and like comment and share also don't forget to hit that notification bell because that helps me a lot and also will help you guys be notified if I put out any more videos thank you all for watching don't forget to Like and subscribe and never forget a nation the drawl it's a great distinction between its scholars and it's warriors well if its laws or in my cowards and its wars fought by fools

Channel: Armed Scholar

Views: 178,551

Rating: 4.8530612 out of 5

Keywords: vehicle, protestors, riots, vehicle self defense, looting, rioting, self defense laws, castle doctrine california, castle doctrine, stand your ground law, stand your ground, stand your ground law explained, george floyd, george floyd protest, business looters, protests looting, george floyd protests, protecting home from intruders, black lives matter, protestors attack vehicles, protestors attacked for blocking traffic, protestors attack car

Id: V3PMrt_8DyU

Length: 11min 45sec (705 seconds)

Published: Sat Jul 04 2020

Reddit Comments

[u/420BlazeArk]

This post is turning into a dumpster fire, keep it civil and stop posting about how you’d totally just run over protestors.

[u/lern2swim]

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/summer-taylor-24-year-old-woman-struck-by-car-in-seattle-has-died/ar-BB16lTg9?li=BBnbcA1

[u/CKal7]

This is all assuming you have a ccw permit and have your gun inside the car in the first place right? Fkin Los Angeles :(

[u/ChallyII]

"that sure looks like a big crowd of people blocking the road. I should turn around"

[u/ArmedScholar]

Tldw: going to be based on the standard elements of self defense in California.

[u/flicka-da-wrist]

Not driving into protesters would be a good start