Hacker News Reader

Comment by sneak | Hacker News Reader

> grabbed him by his hoodie collar, and pinned him down

I was referring to the battery.

> I’m a photographer and a distance runner and I’m good enough at both to have made money off of them. Both reactions were instinctive.

The experiences and training you have had post-birth have no bearing on your innate human instinctual responses, which are shared in common with all members of your species, including the ones that aren't runners or photographers. It is likely you meant "subconscious" or perhaps "automatic".

View on HN

Citizen’s arrest is not illegal in CA: https://www.shouselaw.com/ca/defense/penal-code/837/ Considering the guy was almost a foot taller than me, I was pinning him down with only a fraction of his body weight.

My usage of instinct, something that I did subconsciously and without thinking, is covered under several dictionary definitions and examples [1-3].

[1] https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/insti... [2] https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/instinct [3] https://www.dictionary.com/browse/instinct

Citizens in California are allowed to make a citizen's arrest including use of reasonable force.

1 - https://www.shouselaw.com/ca/defense/penal-code/837/#3.1

> Citizens in California are allowed to make a citizen's arrest including use of reasonable force.

For a misdemeanor (as the shoplifting described in this case appears to be), only if the arrested party actually committed the offense and it occurred in the arresting party’s presence (for a felony, the terms are somewhat looser.)

As the description clearly indicates that the offense did not occur in the poster’s presence and he wasn’t even aware of the offense until after using force to restrain his victim, he committed both battery and false imprisonment by violence, the latter of which is a felony offense, and the former is at a minimum a violent misdemeanor.

I judged the given probability P(crime | guy being chased in the streets & SF) as much higher than chance, which is what led me to yield to instinct.

I realize that I was over my head considering the guy was much bigger than me and I had no way of knowing if he was armed or not, but I sleep better at night knowing I did what I could to act as a decent human being.

What do the courts mean by "in the presence?" Although they have not had occasion to elaborate much, they have said that the crime must have been "apparent to the senses," but that this requirement should be interpreted "liberally." Thus, it will be satisfied if the citizen was aware of circumstances from which he could reasonably infer that a crime was occurring in his presence

- https://le.alcoda.org/publications/files/CITIZENSARREST.pdf

I think this would qualify as committing the crime "in the presence" of the above commenter. Running away is part of the theft and that was done in the presence of the commenter.

> What do the courts mean by "in the presence?"

Even the most liberal definition doesn’t include the arrestor being only aware of the crime after the arrest (even the looser felony citizen arrest rules require both knowledge of the offense and reasonable belief that the arrestee committed it, as well as, as in the misdemeanor case, actual guilt.)

I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree here. I think it is perfectly obvious that if you witness theft taking place then the crime is taking place "in your presence".

"I was referring to the battery."

Fuck off.

Home (or storefront) invasion is a violent act. Theft is a violent act. We (all of us) have a duty to respond - with violence if necessary.

We need more good people like (psychomugs) in San Francisco and he deserves our thanks.

Petty theft is not violence; violence is crime against a person's body. The only violence that happened here was the guy attacking the thief.

In almost all cases, escalating a relatively minor crime into physical violence against a human being is the wrong move, and needlessly increases the risk in a situation.

Grab the wrong person by accident? In a lot of states that might endanger your own life if the person decides to defend themselves.

Escalating to violence over simple objects (property) is to have priorities out of whack.

PS: be nice. I will not fuck off.

Play armchair critic with your hypothetical scenarios all you want, but the objective outcome of this ordeal was preventing a bad actor from getting away with a legally and morally unjust act. The only thing violated was his pride by getting caught by someone a full head shorter and probably >50lbs lighter than him.

Instinct has more meanings than just the strict biological one that you are referencing. Perhaps you need a grammar class and not just biology classes?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com