What im wandering is this: is this one of those houses where you have to enter the yard in order to ring the bell/knock on the door? If so, this is an actual death trap - you dont know if this is the right house, and in order to verify you have to step into the property where you may be legally shot.
How do you protect yourself when you have to visit a house but are not sure which is the correct one?
I think there is a low in the US that if someone infiltrates your property you can legally shoot to kill. Not sure about the specifics. I assume this case was either too extreme or that there are more specifics to this law.
These laws, castle doctrine, are not anywhere near that crazy. They’re the same idea as self defense… however, normally you have a “duty to retreat”, what castle doctrine says is if you’re in your own home you no longer have that obligation.
You still have to meet the bar for self defense, i.e., they need to be a threat… someone walking in your yard or knocking on your door that’s not brandishing a weapon is not going to meet that bar.
Edit: Wikipedia disagrees with me … though I’m not sure if that’s a factual disagreement or an editorial disagreement.
Justifiable homicide[2] in self-defense which happens to occur inside one’s home is distinct, as a matter of law, from castle doctrine because the mere occurrence of trespassing—and occasionally a subjective requirement of fear—is sufficient to invoke the castle doctrine. The burden of proof of fact is much less challenging than that of justifying homicide in self-defense. It would be a misconception of law to infer that because a state has a justifiable homicide in self-defense provision pertaining to one’s domicile, it has a castle doctrine protecting the estate and exonerating any duty whatsoever to retreat therefrom.
There’s a lack of citation here which honestly should probably be raised on the wiki. The cited source does not support that text (I’ve added the appropriate citation requests on the wikipedia side – if anyone can prove these claims, we should contribute the reference there as well).
The laws on self-defense are extremely state specific. Your understanding of self defense laws is highly sensationalized and I recommend in the strongest possible terms you do some research before they become relevant to you personally one way or the other.
My posts here were full of “i think” and “not sure”. Also not sure which part here was an opinion.
And this is the internet. Not an academic paper. This IS the place to ask/discuss topics you are not sure about. Just dont go around claiming to be an expert in something you are not.
What im wandering is this: is this one of those houses where you have to enter the yard in order to ring the bell/knock on the door? If so, this is an actual death trap - you dont know if this is the right house, and in order to verify you have to step into the property where you may be legally shot.
How do you protect yourself when you have to visit a house but are not sure which is the correct one?
You can’t legally shoot someone for entering your yard…thats why he’s on trial.
I think there is a low in the US that if someone infiltrates your property you can legally shoot to kill. Not sure about the specifics. I assume this case was either too extreme or that there are more specifics to this law.
No, specifics depend on the state but in none are you allowed to shoot someone for entering your yard.
These laws, castle doctrine, are not anywhere near that crazy. They’re the same idea as self defense… however, normally you have a “duty to retreat”, what castle doctrine says is if you’re in your own home you no longer have that obligation.
You still have to meet the bar for self defense, i.e., they need to be a threat… someone walking in your yard or knocking on your door that’s not brandishing a weapon is not going to meet that bar.
Edit: Wikipedia disagrees with me … though I’m not sure if that’s a factual disagreement or an editorial disagreement.
There’s a lack of citation here which honestly should probably be raised on the wiki. The cited source does not support that text (I’ve added the appropriate citation requests on the wikipedia side – if anyone can prove these claims, we should contribute the reference there as well).
Yeah i remembered seeing something similar to this somewhere. Either way US laws are completely irrelevant to me so this is pure mild interest.
The laws on self-defense are extremely state specific. Your understanding of self defense laws is highly sensationalized and I recommend in the strongest possible terms you do some research before they become relevant to you personally one way or the other.
I dont live in the US and dont plan on visiting there in the near future. I am aware of the laws in my country.
But you had no qualms opining about those laws on the internet.
My posts here were full of “i think” and “not sure”. Also not sure which part here was an opinion.
And this is the internet. Not an academic paper. This IS the place to ask/discuss topics you are not sure about. Just dont go around claiming to be an expert in something you are not.