INDIAN HILL - Indian Hill lawyer and former congressional candidate Paul Hackett - armed with a loaded assault rifle - chased down three men in a car after it crashed into a fence at his home in the early morning hours of Nov. 19.

Read more...

Now, the basic facts of the story are that three men crashed a car into Hackett's fence, Hackett tracked them down while carrying an AR-15 rifle, and placed them under citizen's arrest until the police could arrive.

Setting aside the matter of what the specific Ohio laws may be, the questions for debate are these:

1) What should Hackett have done, and why?

2) What boundaries, if any, did Hackett overstep?

3) What should the law do to Hackett, and why?

1) What should Hackett have done, and why?

Everything I read here states that the people who were arrested by Hackett had committed, at most, a misdemeanor. (Property damage by vehicle.) It may have even been purely an accident. (Once they attempt to leave, of course, it becomes a violation of law. I'm not sure how serious a crime it is to leave the scene of an accident involving only property damage. It's clearly not as serious as leaving the scene of an accident involving injury.) There is some speculation on the link provided as to whether even a police officer has the right to arrest someone for a misdemeanor.

It's hard to read Hackett's mind. Did he honestly feel that he was in danger from the men? Or was he (understandably) upset at the property damage? In the first case, some degree of self-defense can be justified. In the latter case, the threat of force would be a step too far. I'd really have to know about exactly what Hackett said to the men.

What makes this case interesting and complicated is that, by what I can see, Hackett never aimed the weapon at the men, or threatened to use it. Is just carrying a weapon a threat of deadly force? A fascinating question, which I leave to legal minds.

2) What boundaries, if any, did Hackett overstep?

I would say this depends on how serious a threat the men really were, and to what degree Hackett threatened the men. At most, he may have exceeded the power of a citizen to arrest someone (if the crime counts as a misdemeanor.)

3) What should the law do to Hackett, and why?

Probably not much. At most, if he exceeded the power of arrest, remind him of the limitations of that power.

Overall, this seems to be a fairly minor incident. The three teenagers in the vehicle may have acted like jerks, and Hackett may have lost his temper, but there were no tragic consequences.

1) What should Hackett have done, and why?
Should have gotten their plate number and called police

2) What boundaries, if any, did Hackett overstep?

I am nearly certain that he could not have shot anyone in OH for running into his fence and if he did not have a license to carry the loaded gun he was in violation