The state: North Dakota. The bill is HB 1319. Itís a castle doctrine. The current law on the books puts the onus on the victim of an attack to use the least force necessary, and by default, to prove that the force used was necessary. HB 1319 makes it hard, if not impossible for a prosecutor to file charges in a case of self-defense.
Iím a veteran of many homicide investigations in California. I investigated a few of these cases. I am unequivocally in favor of this bill and plan to testify in favor of the bill. I have what I think are compelling arguments in favor of the bill. I want to hear your arguments in favor of this bill, and your thoughts on the philosophy and doctrine of self-defense.
But listening to arguments the opposition puts forward sharpens my thinking, so more important than arguments in favor of this bill, I want to hear arguments against this proposed change in the law. Why the least amount of force? Why the onus ought to be on the individual that uses deadly force?
Lock and load and fire away. Any opinions offered greatly appreciated.
The Bill seems like good law to me. Don't know why some prosecutors seem to be down on self-defense in any situation. I personally consider retreat to be the first self-defense option to be tried (cluck cluck), but it's sometimes not feasible.
Anyway, here's a few strawman arguments for you to knock down:
Statistically, very few breakins and robberies actually result in the death or serious injury of the victim. Is it proper to give them the right to kill just to protect possessions which can easily be replaced; in effect make them judge, jury, and executioner?
Given the fact that most people have had little or no self-defense training, wouldn't they, and surrounding innocent individuals, be safer if they tried to retreat rather than confronting an intruder and endangering bystanders with stray bullets?
In other states, there have been a number of incidents where innocent people mistakenly going to the wrong house were shot at the door by a homeowner. Current law reduces the chances of such a tragedy by imposing criminal and civil penalties for such actions, whereas this bill would free the homeowner from all liability.
Have at 'em.
There is no "overkill". There is only "open fire" and "I need to reload."
If anybody attempts to harm me or my loved ones the reaction by me will be deadly !! If anybody attempts to harm my home or my belongings the reaction by me will probably be deadly if they are cought in the act.
I work to hard for my things and my family for some varmnit to take it !!!
My first line of defense is a sign on the gate stating that their is a very mean , well trained dog who will probaly be talking to you while you read the sign which states that an attack by this animal will likly be fatal if I'm not their to stop it.
Second line of defense , "Sarge" the dog mentioned above
Third , locked doors and a security system.
fourth , me , a very well trained SWAT officer/instructor thats armed accordingly
The way I see it if you make it to my level you obvously have bad intentions for me and my family and more than likly sombody leaving in a bag!! like the old saying goes I'll take my chances being judged by twelve than carried by six!!
Now I'm all for giving the perp a chance if the before mentioned security levels are not in place.
when people ask me advise on how to handle a brake in I tell them to first call 911 , then make it known to the offending party the police are comming , then get into your defensive position in your room and wait , if the offender hasen't left he meens buisness , if he makes it to your room he deserves to die for it!! and the whole thing is going to be on a recorded tape at the police station from the 911 call.
From years of training I alway put my self in the tactical advantage no matter where I am , kinda sick I know but? I look at everything from a defensive stand point and all is mapped out in seconds after entering the area. I refuse to be a victom !!
I'm personaly SICK , of all these bleeding heart candy assed liberals making laws to protect the vermin and not the victom , I personaly urge as many people to take a class and get their CCW. If ore people refuse to be victomized and take hostile action against their offenders then their will be less crime. I live just minutes from the armpit of the nation (New Orleans) and I'm forced to pass through their for work as are thousands of others , many of which are victomized in one way or the other and the laws protect the criminals !!
Oh man this has got my Blood Pressure up I gotta go
JDJones, A little OT, but. Myself and a lot of others would love to get their CCW, but most sherrifs will not issue them. At least around here. They mainly say that there is not enough of a justification for it. I have tried several times to get one but have never heard back from them. I think I have a very good justifiction for one. I have a dealers lisc., 2 blown disc in my back, very bad knees, overweight, chain smoker, and could not run from a confrentation if I had to. Can't spell either. So what would be the trick to get one. My old ladies cousins husband is a detective on the local PD and he does not know what to tell me on how to get it. Thanks.
I have a concealed carry permit, so does my wife. Two big dogs. We live in a very rural area, our home is kinda out of place for the locale, getting along in years, a gun dealer and usually have a fair amount of cash on hand. Try to keep a low profile, but beleive this makes us prime candidates for home invasion. Somebody gets in my house, if I'm able, pure amd simple I'm gonna punch his ticket.
Retreat from an intruder in ones own home home should never even be a consideration,either by the homeowner or the law.Putting ones life at risk or the lives of others in the home (or even property) because the law expects the homeowner to speculate the level of deadly force the intruder is capable of,or intent on,should not be the responcibility of the homeowner.Im sure being a former law enforcement officer,you know better than most how fast the threat or level of deadly force can rise.Expecting a home owner to take the evaluation of this threat/level into consideration while being intruded/threatened upon under fear of later prosecution is a stipulation that may cause the homeowner(s) thier lives.I say pass the law,protect the home owner and let all responcibilty fall onto the intruder or the corpse of.
The Constitution shall never be construed to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms -Samuel Adams