Castle Doctrine

[Dreamstalker]

Beating an intruder to a pulp once he's already down (or chasing him down and shooting him after he'd fled the property) would be excessive; if you do kill them and can prove there was no other option that is a legal defense.

The ex claimed that a homeowner can shoot anyone coming onto their property (he made it sound like even setting one foot on the grass was grounds for guns blazing) and they don't need to give any warning...that to me does not seem legally defensible.

[Boozy]

The castle doctrine will make for some trigger-happy accidents, I think.

Shoot first, ask questions later.

[BlackIronCrown]

The ex claimed that a homeowner can shoot anyone coming onto their property (he made it sound like even setting one foot on the grass was grounds for guns blazing) and they don't need to give any warning...that to me does not seem legally defensible.

It isn't. One of the fun items about castle doctrine is that you have to reasonably prove you felt that you were in danger of your life. It's not an exceptionally high standard - if there were 3 teenagers in my home at 3AM ransacking the house, I'd feel in danger, armed or unarmed.

But level your shotgun at a 13 year old walking on your grass, like that guy in....um...Ohio did? Not defensible under castle doctrine.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2006...unviolence.usa

[Difdi]

But, let's face it, shooting someone is a hell of a lot easier than bludgeoning them.

I disagree. My home defense weapon is a broadsword with a long hilt. Sortof a hybrid between an assegai and a glaive. Within the sort of ranges you'd expect to use a sawed-off 12 gauge shotgun at, it's more lethal than any pistol. Sword VS pistol at ranges of 10-15 feet, favors the swordsman by about 3-1.

No risk of overpenetration, and it's damned scary looking.

[Slytovhand]

I disagree. My home defense weapon is a broadsword with a long hilt. Sortof a hybrid between an assegai and a glaive. Within the sort of ranges you'd expect to use a sawed-off 12 gauge shotgun at, it's more lethal than any pistol. Sword VS pistol at ranges of 10-15 feet, favors the swordsman by about 3-1.

No risk of overpenetration, and it's damned scary looking.

Say What?????

Your asigari (almost) is more lethal than a pistol at point-blank range? What sort of pistol are you referring to?

And then there's the issue of ease of use... fine if you've got plenty of room to move, or trying to impale ...


Anyways... back to the 'debate'.

I just posted in Slippery Slope, so I won't repeat it all, but....

Criminals usually aren't looking for a fight, and certainly not a murder (yes... there are exceptions...).

And they don't want to be caught.

So... they invade your home (presumably in the wee hours of the morning) the best thing you can do (other than ring the police) is to turn on a light, call out that you know they're there and that you've already called the police.

Most will run straight away... it's not worth hanging around for... and not worth the time and trouble to try to get stuff on the way out.

The exception might be your psychopath out to murder you (for whatever reason). And in that case - it won't really matter what you've got, you're almost gone if they really want you dead. (yes.. ok... I can see how a gun is going to help here... but this is still a very extreme case... and far more unlikely than accidental shootings).


Your stuff can be replaced with home and contents insurance. No life insurance policy in the world is going to bring back a life.


Slyt

[Boozy]

Your asigari (almost) is more lethal than a pistol at point-blank range? What sort of pistol are you referring to?

Maybe I misunderstood, but did Difdi not say a range of 10-15 feet? That's not point-blank range. Most people can't hit shit with a pistol at that range.

[Slytovhand]

Boozy... I was using the technical meaning for 'point blank'.. as in - distance til bullet deviates downwards...not just the real up close and personal (3').

But people can't hit a large (1foot by 2 foot) target at 15feet??? Damn... I was shooting at about 10 meters (30') or more and hitting ok...(slightly wider target, though).


Oh... and I did think about what he said...yeah... I didn't take into consideration the tearing and rending effects... only the single thrust.


Slyt

[Difdi]

Say What?????

Your asigari (almost) is more lethal than a pistol at point-blank range? What sort of pistol are you referring to?

And then there's the issue of ease of use... fine if you've got plenty of room to move, or trying to impale ...

Most people who are not skilled swordsmen drastically underestimate the effective range of a sword lunge, as well as overestimate the time it takes to perform one.

Likewise, most non-swordsmen underestimate the amount of damage a properly sharpened blade can do to an unarmored opponent.

I can cleave through a 4 inch thick piece of oak without much difficulty. A wrist is nowhere near that tough. Soft tissue damage is even nastier. Seeing someone coming at you with a blade as long as your arm has psychological impact too, which is far greater than most firearms, since the novelty of it has an effect as well.

The amount of force exerted by a broadsword exceeds that of a 9mm round in a lunge, and the entry wound is larger. The amount of damage such an attack inflicts is more consistent with a 12 gauge shotgun than a pistol, especially if the swordsman follows through on the attack. Granted, it's messier than a pistol or even most shotgun wounds, but that guy is going nowhere afterwards. Both stopping power and killing power in spades.

[Slytovhand]

Yeah... fairy floss...

I tend to think of 'pistol' as something more akin to .357 than .22. (granted... I also prefer rapiers )

I'm not a skilled swordsman, only slightly trained... so I've been on the receiving end of both speed and range

4" oak? Really?? I've not really tried to imagine it, but since they cut through bits of plate armour, it's not surprising....


But it's all academic.... I hope


Slyt

[Difdi]

I tend to think of 'pistol' as something more akin to .357 than .22

<snip>

But it's all academic.... I hope

It's my home defense weapon. Some people favor baseball (or cricket) bats, some people like guns. I own a decidedly non-period weapon that never existed in history. Take a naginata-style blade, scaled up to glaive proportions, stick it on a balanced hilt with a sturdy guard on it, like a long twohand sword hilt. Basically an assegai that you can use like a broadsword.

It's not the least bit academic, I train with the thing (that's my label for it, the thing...it's the platypus of melee weapons )

[Slytovhand]

It's not the least bit academic, I train with the thing (that's my label for it, the thing...it's the platypus of melee weapons )

I meant as much as using on an assailant...

And wouldn't it be a pain using in confined spaces?


Back to the regular program... (here and elsewhere...)

Wiki has a nice easy way to link to all the US states with CD, and even then links to the specific areas of the state legislature where it is written...
This is the Stand Your Ground lot, from which we get nice little bits such as:

Alabama:

A person may use deadly physical force, and is legally presumed to be justified in using deadly physical force in self-defense or the defense of another person pursuant to subdivision (4), if the person reasonably believes that another person is: ..... (3) Committing or about to commit a kidnapping in any degree, assault in the first or second degree, burglary in any degree, robbery in any degree, forcible rape, or forcible sodomy.

Georgia:

A person who uses threats or force in accordance with Code Section 16-3-21, relating to the use of force in defense of self or others, Code Section 16-3-23, relating to the use of force in defense of a habitation, or Code Section 16-3-24, relating to the use of force in defense of property other than a habitation, has no duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground and use force as provided in said Code sections, including deadly force."

Idaho:

18-4009. JUSTIFIABLE HOMICIDE BY ANY PERSON. Homicide is also justifiable
when committed by any person in either of the following cases:
1. When resisting any attempt to murder any person, or to commit a
felony, or to do some great bodily injury upon any person; or

Illinois:

(720 ILCS 5/7‑2) (from Ch. 38, par. 7‑2)
Sec. 7‑2. Use of force in defense of dwelling.
(a) A person is justified in the use of force against another when and to the extent that he reasonably believes that such conduct is necessary to prevent or terminate such other's unlawful entry into or attack upon a dwelling. However, he is justified in the use of force which is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm only if: ... (2) He reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent the commission of a felony in the dwelling.

And I couldn't be bothered going through all the rest.

Some states in between do make it quite clear that defense of property only is not reasonable grounds for lethal force, or that there must also be an act of violence or 'tumultuousness' in accessing the property (ie - break in).

So.. the concept of shooting someone in the back as they leave the premises with your tv being legal isn't so hard to imagine.

There was one I saw (and can't be bothered going through them all... they aren't always an easy read...) which basically stated that as soon as they are in your house without your permission (and aren't entitled to be there) then you have the right to shoot to kill.

So.. in these states (and others), if someone is in your home who you don't identify, then you can reasonably presume they are there to at least steal something (burglary or robbery), and thus you have the right to shoot them dead without any form of warning.

For that matter, I could see a case where the intruders could be on their knees and executed, and it still being 'legal' in some places.

At the very least, I'm in support of a Duty to Retreat (which, according to Wiki, no US state has enacted). That'd mean you have an obligation to raise your shotgun - but give a warning first to give them a chance to leave. (of course - even with this, when it comes to trial, I'd bet everyone gives a warning before killing them... but maybe I'm just cynical ).

Slyt

[Difdi]

And wouldn't it be a pain using in confined spaces?

If it were a classic broadsword, yeah, it'd be a pain in a confined space. But an assegai is a thrusting weapon (Zulu spear). Mine just happens to have an unusually long edge. Lunge, twist, withdraw is how a standard assegai would be used, and that takes about the same amount of room as a standard shotgun. Replace withdraw with turn and upward slash, and you have my home defense weapon. And like an assegai, my weapon is balanced properly for throwing; I can hit a moving man-sized target 50 feet away every time, and reliably at 100 feet.

People are used to guns. They see them in movies all the time. While looking down the barrel on the wrong end of a 12 gauge shotgun is plenty intimidating, it's also a familiar thing. People don't encounter swords and spears as serious weapons all that much -- Realizing that you're about to get cut in half by a knife longer than your arm has considerable psychological shock value.

At the very least, I'm in support of a Duty to Retreat (which, according to Wiki, no US state has enacted). That'd mean you have an obligation to raise your shotgun - but give a warning first to give them a chance to leave. (of course - even with this, when it comes to trial, I'd bet everyone gives a warning before killing them... but maybe I'm just cynical.

Actually, most states that don't specifically have a stand your ground law do have a Duty to Retreat. The problem is, such a Duty has been used to jail people who for whatever reason felt they could not. If the court, which was never present at the time, disagrees, the result will be a ruling that it was not self defense. Are you injured and can't run? Is your family about to come home, but is not actually present at the time of the break-in? The court may not believe you were too impaired to run. If you stand your ground since you know your family will be home any minute, you're guilty of a felony. And so on.

[Zyanya]

So.. the concept of shooting someone in the back as they leave the premises with your tv being legal isn't so hard to imagine.

Find me a case where it's happened and the shooter wasn't in trouble.

For that matter, I could see a case where the intruders could be on their knees and executed, and it still being 'legal' in some places.

Find me a case where it's happened and the shooter wasn't in trouble.

At the very least, I'm in support of a Duty to Retreat (which, according to Wiki, no US state has enacted). That'd mean you have an obligation to raise your shotgun - but give a warning first to give them a chance to leave. (of course - even with this, when it comes to trial, I'd bet everyone gives a warning before killing them... but maybe I'm just cynical ).

Actually, the wiki is wrong, or at least misleading. Until Castle Doctrine made headway, there was a duty to retreat. That being, the VICTIM had to try to retreat. Castle Doctrine is a result of people getting fed up with being punished for not fleeing criminals fast enough and having to defend themselves.

[Zyanya]

People are used to guns. They see them in movies all the time. While looking down the barrel on the wrong end of a 12 gauge shotgun is plenty intimidating, it's also a familiar thing. People don't encounter swords and spears as serious weapons all that much -- Realizing that you're about to get cut in half by a knife longer than your arm has considerable psychological shock value.

There was a study done a few years back on the psychological response to weapons. People were more inclined to run from a knife than a gun, as it provoked a more primal response. They were more inclined to run from a snarling dog than human wielding a knife or a gun.


They were also more inclined to run from a larger man holding a weapon, it seems many people just don't think the small woman is willing to use a weapon, which sadly, means it's more likely the small woman will have to use her weapon.

[tropicsgoddess]

In FL, we have a law where if anybody breaks in/trespasses in your home and if you feel they are a threat, you have the right to use deadly force.