Originally Posted by
myrridin
A "criminal" can sue for just about any cause, whether real or imagined. And read the california code, use of pepper spray is classed in the same way as deadly force---which by definition is "excessive" and illegal in california to protect property... And since you seem to be backing away from the pepper spray argument, your arm lock and defending yourself isn't likely to help you when their lawyer paints you as a vigilante who misinterpreted their actions and started the violence...
Oh, and I have no sympathy for thieves (of any kind), one of the reasons I live in Texas, where lethal force is an option to protect property..
It is rather strange that you assume you know California law better than a person who used the law. Use of pepper spray is not the same as using lethal force and is not even close. I'm not "backing off" of the pepper spray use at all. I have used it, and I recommend the use of it when appropriate. I used the example of an arm lock as another method of using force that is perfectly legal.
As far as some scum bag trying to sue me in court for pepper spraying them or putting an arm lock on them, it is possible but highly unlikely that it will ever happen. It didn't happen when I pepper sprayed that punk car thief kid and I doubt it will ever happen. Lawyers are not dumb and they are not going to take a case they know they will lose. The first question that will be asked to their client is, "what were you doing when you got pepper sprayed?" Answer: I was stealing the defendant's bike. Next case.
How about this, I won't lecture you on Texas laws and you don't lecture me on California law.