Captain Nemo
Regular Member
I don't know about the rest of you but I am getting tired of all the law enforcement and media hype concerning "castle doctrine'. Especially so when they try to imply that the new Wisconsin law was central to the Bo Morrison and Taryvon Martin cases. If they would take the time to read the Washington County District Attorneys report concerning the Morrison case they would conclude that the new Wisconsin castle doctrine law had no bearing on the DA's conclusion. As the DA stated; Kind was exhonerated under the old Wisconsin defense of self, others and property laws (ss939.48 and 939.49). I realize that those are idle words because some law enforcement, and for certain all anti-gun circles have a self serving agenda to march to, and will take any opportunity presented to foster that agenda.
Under the forementioned statutes Wisconsonites have always had the lawful privilege to use deadly force to protect their well being, the well being of others and the protection of property. Wisconsonites have always had a "stand your ground" privilege. There is no former or current statute requirement that a threatened Wisconsin citizen must purposedly attempt to retreat from danger before using deadly force.
For sure, the Wisconsin judicial system has set the bar very high when it concerns use of deadly force, but perhaps justifiably so. Under any circumstance the taking of another human beings life is a traumatic and life changing event. We must not be flippant about it.
The recently enacted Wisconsin "castile doctrine" law really didn't bring much new to the table. It clarify the "property" aspects and specifically included other buildings and vehicles as being included under it's umbrella. Other than that the only other significant impact is that it put the burden of proof on the prosecution to prove deadly force was not necessary. Under the old statute it was a burden on the defense to prove that deadly force was needed to quell a situation. Don't mis-understand me. That in itself is HUGE. It re-establishes an innocent until proven guitly position. That by itself makes all the effort to establish a castle doctrine law more than worthwhile.
Wisconsonites have had a long standing privilege to stand their ground and protect themselves, others and property from imminent danger and bodily harm. The new castle doctrine law fortifies that privilege but rest assured, under the complexion of the Wisconsin court judicial system, if you see someone ransacking your out-buildings or vehicle and you shoot them from hiding or from inside your home, you will have a hard road to travel. Under the current court philosophy there must certainly be some element of personal danger involved, in spite of the castle doctrine.
Under the forementioned statutes Wisconsonites have always had the lawful privilege to use deadly force to protect their well being, the well being of others and the protection of property. Wisconsonites have always had a "stand your ground" privilege. There is no former or current statute requirement that a threatened Wisconsin citizen must purposedly attempt to retreat from danger before using deadly force.
For sure, the Wisconsin judicial system has set the bar very high when it concerns use of deadly force, but perhaps justifiably so. Under any circumstance the taking of another human beings life is a traumatic and life changing event. We must not be flippant about it.
The recently enacted Wisconsin "castile doctrine" law really didn't bring much new to the table. It clarify the "property" aspects and specifically included other buildings and vehicles as being included under it's umbrella. Other than that the only other significant impact is that it put the burden of proof on the prosecution to prove deadly force was not necessary. Under the old statute it was a burden on the defense to prove that deadly force was needed to quell a situation. Don't mis-understand me. That in itself is HUGE. It re-establishes an innocent until proven guitly position. That by itself makes all the effort to establish a castle doctrine law more than worthwhile.
Wisconsonites have had a long standing privilege to stand their ground and protect themselves, others and property from imminent danger and bodily harm. The new castle doctrine law fortifies that privilege but rest assured, under the complexion of the Wisconsin court judicial system, if you see someone ransacking your out-buildings or vehicle and you shoot them from hiding or from inside your home, you will have a hard road to travel. Under the current court philosophy there must certainly be some element of personal danger involved, in spite of the castle doctrine.