Carjackings in Kalamazoo: An Empathetic Look at a Growing Problem
Carjackings have unfortunately become more common in recent years, even in smaller cities like Kalamazoo. As lawyers, it’s important we understand this issue empathetically from all sides.
Just last April, three suspects were arrested for an attempted armed carjacking at a gas station on Gull Road[1]. Thankfully no one was hurt, but two stolen firearms were found in the suspects’ vehicle. Situations like this can easily escalate and end tragically.
However, we must also consider what may have driven these individuals to such desperate measures. Poverty, lack of opportunity, mental health issues, or substance abuse could all be factors. As a community, perhaps we need to do more to address the root causes that lead people down the wrong path.
Another concerning carjacking occurred last July when a delivery driver was targeted specifically because of her occupation[5]. Three or four men stole her car at gunpoint, causing minor injuries. This incident shows the victimization some members of our community face just trying to earn a living.
As lawyers, how can we better protect vulnerable groups while also advocating for broader change? Tougher penalties certainly play a role, but rehabilitation and preventative measures are equally important.
The Complexity of Carjacking Cases
Legally, carjacking cases can be quite complex. The crime itself involves taking a motor vehicle from another person by force or threat of force. However, if a weapon is used, it becomes armed carjacking which carries even stiffer penalties.
There may also be additional charges like assault, battery, weapons violations, receiving stolen property, etc. Sorting through the evidence and building an effective prosecution strategy requires experience and nuance.
As defense attorneys, understanding our client’s unique circumstances is also key. For example, last July a 27-year-old carjacking suspect arrived at the hospital with a gunshot wound[2]. Police believe he was responsible for the carjacking, but how he came to be shot is unclear.
As lawyers, it’s our duty to uncover the full story while also counseling our clients to take accountability for their actions. An empathetic yet balanced approach leads to the fairest outcomes.
Preventing Future Carjackings
While dealing with current cases is important, preventing future carjackings should be a top priority for our community.
Improved security features on vehicles can certainly help. Features like auto-locking doors, interior motion sensors, engine immobilizers and GPS tracking make cars harder to steal. Push button ignitions have also reduced thefts compared to keyed ignitions.
However, technology is only one piece of the puzzle. Underfunded schools, lack of youth programs, unemployment and mental healthcare shortages also play a major role. By investing more in our people, especially disadvantaged groups, we make carjackings and other crimes less likely long-term.
Often police budgets receive outsized funding compared to social programs designed to uplift those at risk. As lawyers and community leaders, we must push for wiser use of public funds that address the root causes of criminality.
Self-Defense Considerations
With carjackings on the rise, questions around self-defense often arise as well. Individuals have a right to protect themselves or others from imminent danger. However, the specific line between lawful defense and criminal assault can be blurry.
In general, appropriate self-defense requires a reasonable belief that force is necessary to prevent death, severe injury or certain violent felonies like carjacking. Deadly force typically requires a reasonable fear of death or great bodily harm. Force must also match the level of perceived threat.
Notably, Michigan law presumes an occupied vehicle represents an extension of one’s home for self-defense purposes. There is no duty to retreat from one’s vehicle when facing a violent threat. This gives more legal leeway to those defending against carjackers.
However, mistakes in judgement can still lead to criminal liability. Use of force after the threat has ended or against non-threatening parties is not justified. When self-defense claims arise from complex, fast-moving situations, experienced legal guidance is essential.