• FreeAdvice has a new Terms of Service and Privacy Policy, effective May 25, 2018.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our Terms of Service and use of cookies.

KS Gun Laws

Accident - Bankruptcy - Criminal Law / DUI - Business - Consumer - Employment - Family - Immigration - Real Estate - Tax - Traffic - Wills   Please click a topic or scroll down for more.

Status
Not open for further replies.

quincy

Senior Member
Maybe she had a feeling that the police might be needed. I don't know.

All were lucky no shots were fired.

I think your friend should speak to an attorney if he is charged.
 


Smittyks

Active Member
Maybe she had a feeling that the police might be needed. I don't know.

All were lucky no shots were fired.

I think your friend should speak to an attorney if he is charged.
The carport is attached to the house I just figured that for tresspassing
 

quincy

Senior Member
The carport is attached to the house I just figured that for tresspassing
If the repo man did not have to open gates or doors to hookup the car, it is not illegal for the repo man to enter onto the homeowner's property to repossess his/his client's vehicle.
 

Shadowbunny

Queen of the Not-Rights
No before the dog bit or the second gun was pulled the lady was on the phone with the police... The moment my neighbor opened the door and said tresspassing...the lady said we're talking to the police now.. so before any of the "action" ensued.
The repo people have enough experience to know that when someone hollers "trespassing" when they know perfectly well that the car was going to be repossessed that these are NOT reasonable people. Your neighbor is the reason gun owners get a bad reputation. He should be ashamed of himself.
 

Smittyks

Active Member
The repo people have enough experience to know that when someone hollers "trespassing" when they know perfectly well that the car was going to be repossessed that these are NOT reasonable people. Your neighbor is the reason gun owners get a bad reputation. He should be ashamed of himself.
And that's your opinion youre entitled to. But knowing my neighbors and being there to see the whole thing. I saw the agression of the repo people.. anyone would feel a way having something repossessed... All they said was tresspassing... And went to get the contents.. and I'm sorry if a gun was pulled on my family dog I'd do just what my neighbor did. Especially if someone was on my property.. knowing that dog is well behaved it percieved a threat... But that's just my opinion
 

Zigner

Senior Member, Non-Attorney
And that's your opinion youre entitled to. But knowing my neighbors and being there to see the whole thing. I saw the agression of the repo people.. anyone would feel a way having something repossessed... All they said was tresspassing... And went to get the contents.. and I'm sorry if a gun was pulled on my family dog I'd do just what my neighbor did. Especially if someone was on my property.. knowing that dog is well behaved it percieved a threat... But that's just my opinion
They KNEW the car was being repossessed and they yelled out "trespasser" because they were ignorant of the law. Again, had they truly believed someone was stealing their car (or breaking in to it), they wouldn't have gone out to get their things, they would have come out to scare them off. They allowed the dog to attack the folks who were lawfully on their property.
 

FlyingRon

Senior Member
Note that while "reasonable belief" is all that's required to use force under Kansas law to stop someone entering your home (not yard) or to stop someone from causing death or great bodily harm to another person (not animal), the law doesn't permit such in other defense of property cases.
In order to use force in other cases, the person you are acting against must be engaged in an unlawful act. ACTUALLY, ENGAGED IN THE ACT, not just that you BELIEVE he is acting unlawfully.

As has been stated, Kansas law is not on your side in this case where the repo man has not acted unlawfully, no people were threatened, nor was an attempt to enter the domicile. Threatening someone with a gun in such circumstance is unjustified aggravated assault under the law.
 

Smittyks

Active Member
The dog attacked because the repo man presented what it percieved as immediate danger. Not because my neighbor said ...sickem fido... ignorant of the law may have been the reason for yelling tresspassing... But going to get your contents and having a huge man walk up on a woman in order to stop her... IDKI mean if she didn't understand tresspassing..she sure doesn't understand the process of a repossession... the dog protected it's owner like any dog would.. from a legal standpoint sure that's right but all I saw was a woman being afraid and bullied.. law and real life don't always jive
 

TigerD

Senior Member
Tell your friend to get a lawyer and sue.

A repo agent may not use a threat of physical violence or disturb the peace to repossess a vehicle.

16a-5-112. (UCCC) Creditor's right to take possession after default. Upon default by a consumer, unless the consumer voluntarily surrenders possession of the collateral to the creditor, the creditor may take possession of the collateral without judicial process only if possession can be taken without entry into a dwelling and without the use of force or other breach of the peace.

Adding - a person who is breaching the peace by threatening to shoot a firearm at anything on a property is a deadly threat to everyone on the property.
 
Last edited:

quincy

Senior Member
Tell your friend to get a lawyer and sue.

A repo agent may not use a threat of physical violence or disturb the peace to repossess a vehicle.

16a-5-112. (UCCC) Creditor's right to take possession after default. Upon default by a consumer, unless the consumer voluntarily surrenders possession of the collateral to the creditor, the creditor may take possession of the collateral without judicial process only if possession can be taken without entry into a dwelling and without the use of force or other breach of the peace.
The link to the law was actually provided earlier.

It sounds as if the reason the woman called the police was to preserve the peace not breach it.

Based on what has been said, the only one who might have used force is the homeowner, whose dog not only bit the repo man but who aimed a gun when the repo man tried to protect himself from the dog and finish his job of legally repossessing the vehicle.

Certainly the homeowner can consult with an attorney in his area of Kansas but I do not see anything - at least based on anything stated here - that could support a homeowner claim against the repo man.
 

PayrollHRGuy

Senior Member
I was agreeing that the repo man was not "use(ing) a threat of physical violence or disturb the peace to repossess a vehicle" when he pulled out a gun, especially when he had been bitten.
 

Smittyks

Active Member
Guess what I found out?! That dog is my neighbors service dog! How about that?! Does that not make the dog an extension of herself?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Sponsored Ad

Top