Crime Vigilantism

ScurrFace

ScurrFace

Member

§ 23-581. Arrests without warrant by law enforcement officers.

(a) (1) A law enforcement officer may arrest, without a warrant having previously been issued therefor -
(A) a person who he has probable cause to believe has committed or is committing a felony;
(B) a person who he has probable cause to believe has committed or is committing an offense in his presence;
(C) a person who he has probable cause to believe has committed or is about to commit any offense listed in paragraph (2) and, unless immediately arrested, may not be apprehended, may cause injury to others, or may tamper with, dispose of, or destroy evidence; and
(D) a person whom he has probable cause to believe has committed any offense which is listed in paragraph (3) of this section, if the officer has reasonable grounds to believe that, unless the person is immediately arrested, reliable evidence of alcohol or drug use may become unavailable or the person may cause personal injury or property damage.
(2) The offenses referred to in subparagraph (C) of paragraph (1) are the following:
(A) The following offenses specified in the Act entitled "An Act to establish a code of law for the District of Columbia", approved March 3, 1901, and listed in the following table:


Offense: Specified in -
Assault .......................... section 806 (D.C. Code, sec. 22-404).
Unlawful entry ................... section 824 (D.C. Code, sec. 22-3302).
Malicious burning, destruction or
injury of another's property section 848 (D.C. Code, sec. 22-303).
(B) The following offense specified in the Omnibus Public Safety Amendment Act of 2006, effective April 24, 2007 (D.C. Law 16-306; 53 DCR 8610):

Offense: Specified in -
Voyeurism ........................ section 105 (D.C. Code, sec. 22-3531).
(C) The following offenses specified in the District of Columbia Theft and White Collar Crimes Act of 1982, and listed in the following table:


Offense: Specified in -
Theft of property valued less than
$250 section 111 [D.C. Code, § 22-3211]
Receiving stolen property ........ section 132 [D.C. Code, § 22-3232]
Shoplifting ...................... section 113 [D.C. Code, § 22-3213]
(D) Attempts to commit the following offenses specified in the Act and listed in the following table:


Offense: Specified in -
Theft of property valued in excess
of $250 section 111 [D.C. Code, § 22-3211]
Unauthorized use of vehicles ..... section 115 [D.C. Code, § 22-3215]
(E) The following offenses specified in the Illegal Dumping Enforcement Act of 1994 [Chapter 9 of Title 8], and listed in the following table:


Offense: Specified in -
Unauthorized Disposal of Solid
Waste Section 3. [D.C. Code, § 8-902]
(F) The following offenses specified in section 113.7 of Title 12A of the District of Columbia Municipal Regulations (12A DCMR § 113.7).


Offense: Specified in
Illegal construction ............. section 113.7 (12A DCMR § 113.7)
(3) The offenses which are referred to in paragraph (1)(D) of this section are the following offenses specified in the District of Columbia Traffic Act of 1925, approved March 3, 1925 (43 Stat. 1119; D.C. Code § 50-2201.01 et seq.), and listed in the following table:


Offense: Specified in -
Reckless driving ................. section 9(b) (D.C. Code § 50-2201.04(b))
Fleeing from the scene of an
accident section 10(a) (D.C. Code § 50-2201.05(a))
Operating or physically
controlling a vehicle when under
the influence of intoxicating
liquor or drugs, when operating
ability is impaired by
intoxicating liquor, or when the
operator's blood, breath, or urine
contains the amount of alcohol
which is prohibited by section
10(b) section 10(b) (D.C. Code § 50-2201.05(b))
Operating a motor vehicle when the
operator's permit is revoked or
suspended section 13(e) (D.C. Code
§ 50-1403.01(e)).
(a-1) A law enforcement officer may arrest a person without an arrest warrant if the officer has probable cause to believe the person has committed an intrafamily offense as provided in section 16-1031(a).
(a-2) A law enforcement officer may arrest a person without an arrest warrant if the officer has probable cause to believe the person has committed an offense as provided in Chapter 23 of Title 22.
(a-3) A law enforcement officer may arrest a person without a warrant if the officer has probable cause to believe the person has committed an offense as provided in sections 22-3312.01, 22-3312.02, and 22-3312.03.
(a-4) A law enforcement officer may arrest a person without a warrant if the officer has probable cause to believe the person has committed the offense of unlawful entry of a motor vehicle as provided in section 102 of the Omnibus Public Safety and Justice Amendment Act of 2009, passed on 3rd reading on July 31, 2009 (Enrolled version of Bill 18-151) [D.C. Code § 22-1341].
(a-5) A law enforcement officer may arrest a person without a warrant if the officer has probable cause to believe the person has committed the offense of tampering with a detection device as provided in section 103 of the Omnibus Public Safety and Justice Amendment Act of 2009, passed on 3rd reading on July 31, 2009 (Enrolled version of Bill 18-151) [D.C. Code § 22-1211].
(b) A law enforcement officer may, even if his jurisdiction does not extend beyond the District of Columbia, continue beyond the District, if necessary, a pursuit commenced within the District of a person who has committed an offense or who he has probable cause to believe has committed or is committing a felony, and may arrest that person in any State the laws of which contain provisions equivalent to those of section 23-901.

(July 29, 1970, 84 Stat. 629, Pub. L. 91-358, title II, § 210(a); 1973 Ed., § 23-581; 1981 Ed., § 23-581; Dec. 1, 1982, D.C. Law 4-164, § 601(g), 29 DCR 3976; Aug. 2, 1983, D.C. Law 5-24, § 4, 30 DCR 3341; Apr. 30, 1988, D.C. Law 7-104, § 7(d), 35 DCR 147; April 30, 1990, D.C. Law 8-261, § 3, 37 DCR 5001; May 5, 1992, D.C. Law 9-96, § 5, 38 DCR 7274; Nov. 17, 1993, D.C. Law 10-54, § 8, 40 DCR 5450; Nov. 20, 1993, D.C. Law 10-62, § 7(c), 40 DCR 7237; Feb. 5, 1994, D.C. Law 10-68, § 55(a), 40 DCR 6311; May 20, 1994, D.C. Law 10-117, § 8(c), 41 DCR 524; June 12, 2001, D.C. Law 13-309, § 3, 48 DCR 1613; Mar. 13, 2004, D.C. Law 15-105, § 93, 51 DCR 881; Oct. 18, 2005, D.C. Law 16-24, § 3, 52 DCR 8080; Dec. 10, 2009, D.C. Law 18-88, § 222, 56 DCR 7413.)
 
Unnk

Unnk

Well-Known Member
guy incognito said:
Is someone rummaging through my neighbors house an emergency? Not enough that i'm willing to risk my life or assume liability trying to apprehend someone, unless I thought someone's life was in danger.
Click to expand...


so what if you knew your neighbors well

the person def was not family nor was freind

you know your friend is at work

if you see someone going through their house i would think you would want to do the very least of callin the cops

not doing anyhting is whats wrogn i dont care if you just call the cops just dont get scared and choose to do nothing outa self preservation
 
ClaytonBigsby

ClaytonBigsby

Well-Known Member
I think what Icongnito is talking about is more crimes against property, domestic violence, etc. When I was young, naive, and idiological, I intervened in three different domestic violnces and in ALL three I ended up fighting him AND her. "Leave him alone" they all yelled while hitting me. Fuck bitches who stay in those relationships and make the rest of us uncomfortable. I have made two citizens arrests for what was clearly an assault on somone who didn't deserve it. Judgment is everything.
 
ScurrFace

ScurrFace

Member
ClaytonBigsby said:
I think what Icongnito is talking about is more crimes against property, domestic violence, etc. When I was young, naive, and idiological, I intervened in three different domestic violnces and in ALL three I ended up fighting him AND her. "Leave him alone" they all yelled while hitting me. Fuck bitches who stay in those relationships and make the rest of us uncomfortable. I have made two citizens arrests for what was clearly an assault on somone who didn't deserve it. Judgment is everything.
Click to expand...
abuse is addictive. You have to divide and conquer, surveillance, monitoring, and intelligence before you act
 
ScurrFace

ScurrFace

Member
guy incognito might not be a cop, but the way he is reacting, I'm thinking he is. Cops hate vigilantes very deep down. He's either a cop who is literally telling you he is, or he truly doesn't understand the law and has been brainwashed by cops
 
guy incognito

guy incognito

Well-Known Member
Even if I didn't know my neighbors I would call the cops. I was talking about a literal citizens arrest, like going over and trying to stop the guy and hold him until police got there. That would be very dangerous, and I would be assuming liability. If I thought someone was in physical danger then I would risk it, but if no one was home I would simply call the cops and surveil the area.
 
cannabineer

cannabineer

Ursus marijanus
ScurrFace said:
Not that going as far as to killing them. But severely hurting them because they have hurt others and generally being a huge bully. These are adults in their 50s I'm talking about. If you had the power that you could reverse engineer them into a situation where they're alone, would you beat them for retribution?
Click to expand...
Someone who is severely hurt can still testify, and that testimony need not have complete (or any) fidelity to what happened. So, in my opinion ... No.
I would have a binary choice:
1) Don't engage.
2) Disappear the target.
There is no advisable in-between, and since 2) is drastic, I would be truly loath to invoke it. Could I? maybe. But I send an invocation to all who watch that I never be placed in a position to seriously ponder it.

Because if I do seriously ponder it, target is already a walking ghost. It's all over except the muffled screams. cn
 
ScurrFace

ScurrFace

Member
cannabineer said:
Someone who is severely hurt can still testify, and that testimony need not have complete (or any) fidelity to what happened. So, in my opinion ... No.
I would have a binary choice:
1) Don't engage.
2) Disappear the target.
There is no advisable in-between, and since 2) is drastic, I would be truly loath to invoke it. Could I? maybe. But I send an invocation to all who watch that I never be placed in a position to seriously ponder it.

Because if I do seriously ponder it, target is already a walking ghost. It's all over except the muffled screams. cn
Click to expand...
It would be funny for someone who beats their wife to go home and he him self got beat black and blue. The embarrassment would halt him from any legal action, and due to the beating, the abusee would be in a state of intense adrenaline, and his memory will be pretty much erased. Fake memories can be put in place of real ones. Stockholmes syndrome
 
cannabineer

cannabineer

Ursus marijanus
Different people react differently. I have known abusive people who were "taught", but the lesson did not take or even properly register. Many abusive people are so locked in a self-pitying victim mentality that it makes teaching anything that resembles "personal responsibility" a tough job indeed. So, since the beaten-up person is not certain (or, imo, even likely) to accept that treatment for what it is meant to be, I assume the basic attitude of intel people everywhere. Capability = threat. So ... maintain cover, or restore cover? To me those are the only tenable choices. cn
 
Winter Woman

Winter Woman

Well-Known Member
My bff finally had enough of being beaten by her husband when they were in a pool hall(their hangout spot). She took a pool cue to him and everyone just stood by. They knew what he had done to her over the years and let her go. She left him on the floor and walked out. They actually cheered her as she left.

He tried to press charges but there were no witnesses. He never touched her again and she divorced him.

Edit: I think I need to write book about everyone in my life. Something a kin to Peyton Place but more middle class. :wink:

ScurrFace said:
It would be funny for someone who beats their wife to go home and he him self got beat black and blue. The embarrassment would halt him from any legal action, and due to the beating, the abusee would be in a state of intense adrenaline, and his memory will be pretty much erased. Fake memories can be put in place of real ones. Stockholmes syndrome
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top