Ironduke

The Castle Doctrine is a legal concept that holds that a person's place of residence is a place where a person enjoys protection from illegal trespassing and violent attack, and thus, has the legal right to employ the use of deadly force in the event of violent attack by an intruder or an intrusion that may lead to deadly attack or is undertaken with another felonious intent.

What are your thoughts on the Castle Doctrine? Do you support it or are you opposed to it?

A map of states that currently have some form of the castle doctrine:

Attached Images

 

__________________
The Buck Stops Here

Silent Hunter

I don't know what the UK law is in this regard.

Before anyone brings up Tony Martin, he shot a guy fleeing his home.

BadKharma

I support the castle law even though my state currently does not have one. I believe everyone should have the right to defend their own property and family members in the bounds of their home.

Lunatock

Support it. My yard and house are what I call "Lunatock Island". And to be brief, am (usually) not a fan of trespassers.

gunnut

um...what does blue on the map mean?

I absolutely favor castle doctrine. I would extend that onto outdoor property and defense of material possession as well.

__________________
"Only Nixon can go to China." -- Old Vulcan proverb.

BadKharma

Blue unfortunately means no castle law

DaveinCoalinga

I absolutely believe in the Castle Law. A person should be safe in their home from any attack. In the time it takes for the police to be called, if possible, and secure the site, terrible things can happen to a person's home and family. If a person has the ability and means to defend their family from harm they should do it and suffer no legal consequences. The intruder gives up their rights when they enter the other person's home.

ANGLICOone

someone breaks into my home, it is reasonable to assume they might harm, even kill my wife and I. If they don't kill me first, run away, or surrender, I will take them down with my 12-ga S&W pump. If I can't get to that in time, I have a very sharp KA-BAR within reach of my bed, and a geology pick hammer elsewhere. I don't give a crap what the law says, nobody's going to harm my family without taking me out first.

__________________
Nightcover 1-4 Bravo

Ironduke

Fixed.

gunnut

Ah OK

Nevada, Arkansas, and Wisconsin don't have castle doctrine? While California, New York, and Illinois do? I think I need to lie down for this one.

BadKharma

An intruder deserves no rights, while technically, legally you are innocent until proven guilty by a court of law the fact is law abiding citizens have less rights than thugs.

RustyBattleship

In some states, the maximum limit of protecting one's self and property has some problems but are understandable.

For example, one person was convicted of "over protecting" his property when he set up a shotgun with a trip wire to shoot whoever it was that was stealing his tools, belongings, etc. while he was away at work. In California, at least, it is against the law to set up such "Booby Traps" which makes sense as you might kill a relative or friend by mistake.

But up in Saugus, California there was a case of a man who shot an intruder and the judge found him guilty of murder. The judge stated that since the home owner had an avenue of escape through another door, he was unjustified to shoot the intruder. The judge also was quoted as saying, "A home is not a man's Castle."

In other words, he was saying that if you are confronted by an intruder (regardless of the severity of the intrusion) you are to turn tail and run away and let the intruder rob you of everything you own.

Needless to say, the ruling got overturned in a higher court and the judge did not win his seat at the next election.

There are also restrictions in California where you can only open fire on an intruder AFTER he FORCES his way into your home. If the door was unlocked, then he did not FORCE his way in and the homeowner becomes the criminal.

Also, if there is no evidence of the intruder having a deadly weapon or his mannersisms do not display violence, you are not allowed to shoot him. Just call the Police and they should get there sometime that night after their doughnut break.

Also, you are not allowed to shoot anyone who is MERELY trespassing on your property. Well, this makes some sense as it could be a neighbor looking for his lost dog or cat, a gas meter reader, a cable company employee stringing extra or replacement cables for your TV, etc.

On the other hand, if the trespasser is armed and threatening you or a neighbor, that may be a different story.

A case in point is when my Aunt lived up in Pocoima, CA. Her husband worked at night and she was alone with 3 small children. There was a rash of intrusions throughout the neighborhood of a man forcing his way into homes of single women and raping them or attempting to rape them. What times he was seen indicated he was a former soldier or gymnast as he could run down the tops of concrete block walls without missing a step and would do single motion "combat" style leaps over the chain link fences around the flood control channel.

The local police had a meeting with several of the women who were alone at night. They told them to get a gun. If they didn't know how to use one, they would provide them with training.

Also, they said don't wait until he gets in the house. As soon as he jumps off the back wall and charges toward the door, shoot him down. Then call some of the other neighbors to drag his body half way across the door sill. Then call the police.

At least that division of the LAPD had some common sense.

__________________
Able to leap tall tales in a single groan.

ragman

I am an Alaskan and probably more heavily armed than the average. I am also fairly well trained and practiced. I am married to a woman who is a retired judge, and made up my mind a long time ago that an intruder would not survive the experience. No question, no hesitation. I do not however believe that its appropriate to administer the death penalty for theft. As a follower of Jesus I'm pretty sure that there are not very many circumstances he would endorse for amateur death penalty administration. I am not saying that a thief with violence in their heart would survive the experience, but I am in general against killing no matter what the reason for. Except in the case of the preservation of life. Mine, yours, our childrens' and the next door neighbors, the list goes on.

DragoonGuard

Surprised to see somebody actually voted negatively in the poll.

My wife said to me that the 10 foot wall we have surrounding our home/property in Brasil would not stop people gaining entry.

True I said, but it takes away the small time wasting decision process I have to make before putting a round through anybody's head who happens to be in my front porch after dark without my invite.

__________________

vaughn

My 16 gauge will take care of trespassers breaking in my house.

__________________
Hamp
USS LCI (L) & (G) 450
WW ll Gator Navy