Originally Posted by Vegaslegal

Vegaslegal,,I hope one day we can agree on a topic that has nothing to do with the Crossfire,,,

John: Where in my post do you get the idea that I thought chasing these guys was a good idea. The last two sentences make it clear that on a cost benefit analysis vis a vis the cop issue, you would probably come out on the south end of the contest. Also, nothing in the post suggests an immunity from civil liability, just a defense if one is charged criminally. Further, I qualified it as 'some states,' and local jurisdictions can obviously differ. As to the "reasonable" language you cite, it only applies in your context in one of the cases. "Reasonable" doesn't appear in the other, and in the third it is the acts that will reasonably result in securing the perpetrator, not acting reasonably to secure the perpetrator. This is a distinction with a difference as the right to secure the perpetrator remains constant in the former. I.e., is it reasonably expected that the acts will result in apprehension, not were the acts reasonable in light of other surrounding circumstances. Yeah, we lawyers are wordy hyper-technical sobs.