Everything Castle Laws

[Wake]

Do you think Castle Laws are legit?

A Castle Doctrine (also known as a Castle Law or a Defense of Habitation Law) is an American legal doctrine that designates a person's abode (or, in some states, any place legally occupied, such as a car or place of work) as a place in which the person has certain protections and immunities and may in certain circumstances use force, up to and including deadly force, to defend against an intruder without becoming liable to prosecution.[1] Typically deadly force is considered justified, and a defense of justifiable homicide applicable, in cases "when the actor reasonably fears imminent peril of death or serious bodily harm to himself or another".[1] The doctrine is not a defined law that can be invoked, but a set of principles which is incorporated in some form in the law of most states.

The term derives from the historic English common law dictum that "an Englishman's home is his castle". This concept was established as English law by 17th century jurist Sir Edward Coke, in his The Institutes of the Laws of England, 1628.[2] The dictum was carried by colonists to the New World, who later removed "English" from the phrase, making it "a man's home is his castle", which thereby became simply the Castle Doctrine.[2] The term has been used in England to imply a person's absolute right to exclude anyone from their home, although this has always had restrictions, and since the late twentieth century bailiffs have also had increasing powers of entry.[3]

The term "Make My Day Law" arose at the time of the 1985 Colorado statute that protects people from any criminal charge or civil suit if they use force – including deadly force – against an invader of the home.[4] The law's nickname is a reference to the line "Go ahead, make my day" uttered by actor Clint Eastwood's character Harry Callahan in the 1983 film Sudden Impact.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Castle_law

If reading this right, Castle Laws let you shoot an intruder on your property and not get in trouble for it. There's probably no way to discern why the guy(s) have broken into your home and are wearing black clothing, but it would seem reasonable to be able to shoot them to get them to back off.

Every person should have the right to forcibly repel an intruder, and not be jailed because of it. That route is better, imho, than running to the phone in hopes of contacting police, and waiting for them to arrive in time.

 

[/MSG/]

No, that's not what it means. It means you do not have a duty to try and escape if you are attacked, and it means if you do shoot someone and claim self defense, the state must prove that you were not acting in defense. Prior to, the duty of proof was on the defense.

 

[Disillusioned]

No, that's not what it means. It means you do not have a duty to try and escape if you are attacked, and it means if you do shoot someone and claim self defense, the state must prove that you were not acting in defense. Prior to, the duty of proof was on the defense.

If the state elects to press charges at all. But ya that burden of proof shifts.

I'm personally in favor of castle laws mostly because it reaffirms the idea that if you don't have a right to be in somebody's house, don't go there. Liberals can present all the laws about people being shot trying to get into the wrong house but it doesn't change the fact that it's not their house, it's not day time, they shouldn't be trying to break in.