Take a gander at this: http://www.legis.nd.gov/assembly/60-2007/bill-text/HAVO0300.pdf The state: North Dakota. The bill is HB 1319. It’s 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. I’m 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.