Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 31

Thread: Castle Doctrine or Stand Your Ground?

  1. #1
    Regular Member trevorthebusdriver's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Kent, Washington, USA
    Posts
    592

    Castle Doctrine or Stand Your Ground?

    Does WA have any specific "Castle Doctrine" or "Stand Your Ground" laws, or just RCW 9A.16.050(Justifiable Homicide)?

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Tacoma, Washington, USA
    Posts
    1,327
    No specific legislation that I am aware of, but some significant case law (someone who knows better how to look that stuff up will hopefully fill in the particulars)

  3. #3
    Opt-Out Members BigDave's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Yakima, Washington, USA
    Posts
    3,463
    Washington Practice Series TM
    Database Updated November 2011

    Washington Pattern Jury Instructions--Criminal
    2008 Edition Prepared by the Washington Supreme Court Committee On Jury Instructions, Hon. Sharon S. Armstrong, Co-Chair, Hon. William L. Downing, Co-Chair

    Part IV. Defenses
    WPIC CHAPTER 16. Justifiable Homicide


    WPIC 16.08 No Duty To Retreat

    It is lawful for a person who is in a place where that person has a right to be and who has reasonable grounds for believing that [he][she] is being attacked to stand [his][her] ground and defend against such attack by the use of lawful force. The law does not impose a duty to retreat.


    NOTE ON USE

    The instruction supplements the other instructions in WPIC Chapter 16. It should be combined with other instructions when warranted by the facts in a particular case.

    COMMENT

    The instruction is based upon State v. Allery, 101 Wn.2d 591, 682 P.2d 312 (1984). In Allery, a prosecution for second degree murder, the court held that because the evidence showed that the defendant was feloniously assaulted in a place where she had a right to be, the jury should have been instructed that the defendant had no duty to retreat, and that it was reversible error to refuse to give a “no duty to retreat” instruction.

    This instruction is not necessary in every case in which there is sufficient evidence to support a self-defense instruction. State v. Studd, 137 Wn.2d 533, 973 P.2d 1049 (1999); State v. Frazier, 55 Wn.App. 204, 777 P.2d 27 (1989); State v. Thompson, 47 Wn.App. 1, 733 P.2d 584 (1987). A “no duty to retreat” instruction need not be submitted if the defendant was actively retreating at the time of the fatal act. State v. Thompson, 47 Wn.App. 1, 5–6, 733 P.2d 584 (1987). Care must be taken, however, to distinguish a full-fledged retreat from the “ebb and flow” or “circling” common in a street fight. See State v. Williams, 81 Wn.App. 738, 742–43, 916 P.2d 445 (1996). Failure to give a “no duty to retreat” instruction in the latter circumstance is error. State v. Williams, 81 Wn.App. at 744.

    In Williams, the Court of Appeals “clarif[ied] the rule” to hold that “where a jury may conclude that flight is a reasonably effective alternative to the use of force in self-defense, the no duty to retreat instruction should be given.” Noting that other states would require the taking of an available withdrawal rather than the use of deadly force and that the wisdom of a contrary policy was “open to debate,” the court adhered to what it called the long standing policy of Washington that one “should not be made to yield and flee by a show of unlawful force against him.” 81 Wn.App. at 744. See also State v. Wooten, 87 Wn.App. 821, 945 P.2d 1144 (1997).

    The Washington Supreme Court has approved the Court of Appeals' holding in Williams, and further indicated that a no-duty-to-retreat instruction should be given where a defendant's testimony includes speculation regarding the chances for a successful retreat. State v. Redmond, 150 Wn.2d 489, 494–95, 78 P.3d 1001 (2003).
    A defendant is not entitled to a no-duty-to-retreat instruction where there is no evidence that anyone other than the defendant was the original aggressor. State v. Benn, 120 Wn.2d 631, 845 P.2d 289 (1993).
    [Current as of July 2008.]

    Westlaw. © 2011 Thomson Reuters. No Claim to Orig. U.S. Govt. Works.

    11 WAPRAC WPIC 16.08
    Last edited by BigDave; 02-17-2013 at 02:53 PM.
    • Being prepared is to prepare, this is our responsibility.
    • I am not your Mommy or Daddy and do not sugar coat it but I will tell you simply as how I see it, it is up to you on how you will or will not use it.
    • IANAL, all information I present is for your review, do your own homework.

  4. #4
    Regular Member trevorthebusdriver's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Kent, Washington, USA
    Posts
    592
    Thanks, Big Dave! Interesting that it would be in Jury Instructions, but not in RCW.

  5. #5
    Opt-Out Members BigDave's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Yakima, Washington, USA
    Posts
    3,463
    Quote Originally Posted by trevorthebusdriver View Post
    Thanks, Big Dave! Interesting that it would be in Jury Instructions, but not in RCW.
    Welcome, in Washington State stand your ground is based in case law and many feel this is much stronger as it has been through the Washington State Courts, cited cases listed in the notes.

    Note that even though our state supports the stand your ground it must be necessary and reasonable.
    Last edited by BigDave; 02-17-2013 at 03:12 PM.
    • Being prepared is to prepare, this is our responsibility.
    • I am not your Mommy or Daddy and do not sugar coat it but I will tell you simply as how I see it, it is up to you on how you will or will not use it.
    • IANAL, all information I present is for your review, do your own homework.

  6. #6
    Regular Member hermannr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Okanogan Highland
    Posts
    2,332
    Quote Originally Posted by trevorthebusdriver View Post
    Does WA have any specific "Castle Doctrine" or "Stand Your Ground" laws, or just RCW 9A.16.050(Justifiable Homicide)?
    You might also want to read RCW 9A.16.110

  7. #7
    Regular Member 1245A Defender's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    north mason county, Washington, USA
    Posts
    4,381

    Well,,,

    Quote Originally Posted by BigDave View Post
    Welcome, in Washington State stand your ground is based in case law and many feel this is much stronger as it has been through the Washington State Courts, cited cases listed in the notes.

    Note that even though our state supports the stand your ground it must be necessary and reasonable.
    I do think that "necessary and reasonable" is bull scat,,, that you just made up....
    The whole point of "stand your ground" is that "you" do NOT,,, have to find a place to run away to, or from, a threat....

    Washington state has , both Castle doctrin, and Stand you ground, either through RCW or case law,,, and they both work great!!!
    EMNofSeattle wrote: Your idea of freedom terrifies me. So you are actually right. I am perfectly happy with what you call tyranny.....

    “If ever a time should come, when vain and aspiring men shall possess the highest seats in Government, our country will stand in need of its experienced patriots to prevent its ruin.”

    Stand up for your Rights,, They have no authority on their own...

    All power is inherent in the people,
    it is their right and duty to be at all times ARMED!

  8. #8
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338
    Quote Originally Posted by 1245A Defender View Post
    I do think that "necessary and reasonable" is bull scat,,, that you just made up....
    The whole point of "stand your ground" is that "you" do NOT,,, have to find a place to run away to, or from, a threat....

    Washington state has , both Castle doctrin, and Stand you ground, either through RCW or case law,,, and they both work great!!!
    And we are still free jurors in this state jury instructions hold no weight of law.
    Last edited by sudden valley gunner; 02-20-2013 at 09:20 AM.
    I am not anti Cop I am just pro Citizen.

    U.S. v. Minker, 350 US 179, at page 187
    "Because of what appears to be a lawful command on the surface, many citizens, because
    of their respect for what only appears to be a law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their
    rights, due to ignorance." (Paraphrased)

  9. #9
    Opt-Out Members BigDave's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Yakima, Washington, USA
    Posts
    3,463
    Quote Originally Posted by 1245A Defender View Post
    I do think that "necessary and reasonable" is bull scat,,, that you just made up....
    The whole point of "stand your ground" is that "you" do NOT,,, have to find a place to run away to, or from, a threat....

    Washington state has , both Castle doctrine, and Stand you ground, either through RCW or case law,,, and they both work great!!!
    Bull Scat, lol with out it being necessary and reasonable then anyone could go about shooting anyone who might have looked at them in a different way, said the wrong thing, bumped into them while waiting in line.
    Does this concept really shake you to the core?
    Don't you think someone needs cause before possibly taking a life?

    You think I made up the definition or how it applies to entire chapter in RCW 9A.16, Necessary and Reasonable, take a look at RCW 9A.16.010 Definitions and are requirements, exactly what are you afraid of an epiphany?

    The definition of Necessary in 9A.10.010 does not require anyone to try and run away or hide but is a requirement of a lesser force, if reasonable to defend yourself or another against an unlawful force.

    As seen recently in Chehalis where a home owner defended himself in their home versus in Vancouver, WA where a man shot another during car prowl, fight and then according to the news the car prowler was walking away and shot 4 times in the chest, many will not see that as being reasonable as the imminent threat had dissipated.
    • Being prepared is to prepare, this is our responsibility.
    • I am not your Mommy or Daddy and do not sugar coat it but I will tell you simply as how I see it, it is up to you on how you will or will not use it.
    • IANAL, all information I present is for your review, do your own homework.

  10. #10
    Regular Member 1911er's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Port Orchard Wa. /Granite Oklahoma
    Posts
    836
    Quote Originally Posted by BigDave View Post
    Bull Scat, lol with out it being necessary and reasonable then anyone could go about shooting anyone who might have looked at them in a different way, said the wrong thing, bumped into them while waiting in line.
    Does this concept really shake you to the core?
    Don't you think someone needs cause before possibly taking a life?

    You think I made up the definition or how it applies to entire chapter in RCW 9A.16, Necessary and Reasonable, take a look at RCW 9A.16.010 Definitions and are requirements, exactly what are you afraid of an epiphany?

    The definition of Necessary in 9A.10.010 does not require anyone to try and run away or hide but is a requirement of a lesser force, if reasonable to defend yourself or another against an unlawful force.

    As seen recently in Chehalis where a home owner defended himself in their home versus in Vancouver, WA where a man shot another during car prowl, fight and then according to the news the car prowler was walking away and shot 4 times in the chest, many will not see that as being reasonable as the imminent threat had dissipated.
    the car prowler was walking away and shot 4 times in the chest!!!W T F dosen't sound like he was walking away to me if he was shot in the chest.
    I truly Love my Country, But the government scares the he!! out of me.

    DEMAND IT
    Congress SHALL NOT receive A salary greater than any service member and will be given EQUIVELANT insurance as any service member

    I came into this world kicking and screaming covered in someone else's blood. And if necessary to protect the Constitution of The United States of AMERICA. I will go out the same way

    All hail the Domain of Neptunus Rex

  11. #11
    Regular Member rapgood's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Bothell, WA
    Posts
    565
    Quote Originally Posted by 1245A Defender View Post
    I do think that "necessary and reasonable" is bull scat,,, that you just made up....
    The whole point of "stand your ground" is that "you" do NOT,,, have to find a place to run away to, or from, a threat....

    Washington state has , both Castle doctrin [sic], and Stand you ground, either through RCW or case law,,, and they both work great!!!
    ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, are irritating. Please learn the use of PERIODS (these things .................................................. .................................................. .................................................. .................................................. .................................................. .................................................. ..................)
    Rev. Robert Apgood, Esq.

    A right cannot be lost by exercising it. McDonald v. Chicago, 561 U.S. 3025, 130 S. Ct. 3020, 3021, 177 L. Ed. 2d 894 (2010) (citing Near v. Minn., 283 U.S. 697 (1931)).

    Although IAAL, anything I say here is not legal advice. No conversations we may have privately or otherwise in this forum constitute the formation of an attorney-client relationship, and are not intended to do so.

  12. #12
    Opt-Out Members BigDave's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Yakima, Washington, USA
    Posts
    3,463
    Quote Originally Posted by 1911er View Post
    the car prowler was walking away and shot 4 times in the chest!!!W T F dosen't sound like he was walking away to me if he was shot in the chest.
    Through the years I have seen on several occasions people back up from a threat and often holding their hands up to show no threat, yes while backing away.
    Last edited by BigDave; 02-19-2013 at 08:37 PM.
    • Being prepared is to prepare, this is our responsibility.
    • I am not your Mommy or Daddy and do not sugar coat it but I will tell you simply as how I see it, it is up to you on how you will or will not use it.
    • IANAL, all information I present is for your review, do your own homework.

  13. #13
    Regular Member 1245A Defender's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    north mason county, Washington, USA
    Posts
    4,381

    Wowwie!!!

    Quote Originally Posted by BigDave View Post
    Bull Scat, lol with out it being necessary and reasonable then anyone could go about shooting anyone who might have looked at them in a different way, said the wrong thing, bumped into them while waiting in line.
    Does this concept really shake you to the core?
    Don't you think someone needs cause before possibly taking a life?

    You think I made up the definition or how it applies to entire chapter in RCW 9A.16, Necessary and Reasonable, take a look at RCW 9A.16.010 Definitions and are requirements, exactly what are you afraid of an epiphany?

    The definition of Necessary in 9A.10.010 does not require anyone to try and run away or hide but is a requirement of a lesser force, if reasonable to defend yourself or another against an unlawful force.

    As seen recently in Chehalis where a home owner defended himself in their home versus in Vancouver, WA where a man shot another during car prowl, fight and then according to the news the car prowler was walking away and shot 4 times in the chest, many will not see that as being reasonable as the imminent threat had dissipated.

    Seriously,, bigdave??
    did my post about SYG, imply that I, you, or anyone could, should or would use deadly force under those circumstances???
    EMNofSeattle wrote: Your idea of freedom terrifies me. So you are actually right. I am perfectly happy with what you call tyranny.....

    “If ever a time should come, when vain and aspiring men shall possess the highest seats in Government, our country will stand in need of its experienced patriots to prevent its ruin.”

    Stand up for your Rights,, They have no authority on their own...

    All power is inherent in the people,
    it is their right and duty to be at all times ARMED!

  14. #14
    Regular Member 1245A Defender's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    north mason county, Washington, USA
    Posts
    4,381

    Well,,,

    Quote Originally Posted by rapgood View Post
    ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, are irritating. Please learn the use of PERIODS (these things .................................................. .................................................. .................................................. .................................................. .................................................. .................................................. ..................)
    Sooo,,, A lawyer, that I met, in Olympia, on feb 8, during a 2A rally, and I was impressed with...
    Has Nothng to write about my post about SYG...
    He doesnt even respond to bigdaves rediculas reply...
    He just wants to complain about my excessive use of ........... and ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

    I write like I talk...
    When I tell you something,,, you will know when my sentence ends,,, and when I am making a point!!!

    When I need to call a Good lawyer,, especially if it is a Stand your ground case,,,
    I will NOT be calling YOU,,,
    my wallet is thinner now, I just took out your card,,, tore it in half,, and threw it in the trash..............
    EMNofSeattle wrote: Your idea of freedom terrifies me. So you are actually right. I am perfectly happy with what you call tyranny.....

    “If ever a time should come, when vain and aspiring men shall possess the highest seats in Government, our country will stand in need of its experienced patriots to prevent its ruin.”

    Stand up for your Rights,, They have no authority on their own...

    All power is inherent in the people,
    it is their right and duty to be at all times ARMED!

  15. #15
    Regular Member bmg50cal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    WA - North Whidbey/ Deception Pass
    Posts
    307
    I'm sure some sarcasm was lost in translation somewhere in here.

  16. #16
    Opt-Out Members BigDave's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Yakima, Washington, USA
    Posts
    3,463
    Quote Originally Posted by 1245A Defender View Post
    I do think that "necessary and reasonable" is bull scat,,, that you just made up....
    The whole point of "stand your ground" is that "you" do NOT,,, have to find a place to run away to, or from, a threat....
    Washington state has , both Castle doctrin, and Stand you ground, either through RCW or case law,,, and they both work great!!!
    Quote Originally Posted by 1245A Defender View Post
    Seriously,, bigdave??
    did my post about SYG, imply that I, you, or anyone could, should or would use deadly force under those circumstances???
    As with your earlier post "necessary and reasonable" is bull scat,,, that you just made up...." your statement is 100% wrong.
    You can read for yourself in RCW 9A.16.010 (1) "Necessary" means that no reasonably effective alternative to the use of force appeared to exist and that the amount of force used was reasonable to effect the lawful purpose intended.

    This is about State Law and is required through out Chapter 9A.16 which range from use of force to deadly force be it in the home or any legal area you have a right to be (hint that covers stand your ground and castle doctrine).

    Your post suggested that there is no restrictions and clearly there are.
    • Being prepared is to prepare, this is our responsibility.
    • I am not your Mommy or Daddy and do not sugar coat it but I will tell you simply as how I see it, it is up to you on how you will or will not use it.
    • IANAL, all information I present is for your review, do your own homework.

  17. #17
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Slightly right of center
    Posts
    166
    Quote Originally Posted by 1245A Defender View Post
    Sooo,,, A lawyer, that I met, in Olympia, on feb 8, during a 2A rally, and I was impressed with...
    Has Nothng to write about my post about SYG...
    He doesnt even respond to bigdaves rediculas reply...
    He just wants to complain about my excessive use of ........... and ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

    I write like I talk...
    When I tell you something,,, you will know when my sentence ends,,, and when I am making a point!!!

    When I need to call a Good lawyer,, especially if it is a Stand your ground case,,,
    I will NOT be calling YOU,,,
    my wallet is thinner now, I just took out your card,,, tore it in half,, and threw it in the trash..............
    So you talk like a valley girl?

  18. #18
    Regular Member rapgood's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Bothell, WA
    Posts
    565
    Quote Originally Posted by 1245A Defender View Post
    When I need to call a Good lawyer,, especially if it is a Stand your ground case,,,
    I will NOT be calling YOU,,,
    my wallet is thinner now, I just took out your card,,, tore it in half,, and threw it in the trash..............
    Well, when you need a lawyer (especially if it is a "stand your ground" case), please feel free to call me anyway and I will gladly refer you to several superb attorneys who can provide you excellent representation.
    Rev. Robert Apgood, Esq.

    A right cannot be lost by exercising it. McDonald v. Chicago, 561 U.S. 3025, 130 S. Ct. 3020, 3021, 177 L. Ed. 2d 894 (2010) (citing Near v. Minn., 283 U.S. 697 (1931)).

    Although IAAL, anything I say here is not legal advice. No conversations we may have privately or otherwise in this forum constitute the formation of an attorney-client relationship, and are not intended to do so.

  19. #19
    Regular Member 1245A Defender's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    north mason county, Washington, USA
    Posts
    4,381

    Well,,

    Quote Originally Posted by rapgood View Post
    Well, when you need a lawyer (especially if it is a "stand your ground" case), please feel free to call me anyway and I will gladly refer you to several superb attorneys who can provide you excellent representation.
    Ok I am making an,, "Im sorry" to you...

    I got all but hurt because you complained about my puncutuation instead of the value of my words,
    I get mad sometimes because folks get off on the wrong things, they waste the band width.

    I am sorry I said mean things to you.

    I still have your card,
    I am still impressed with our meeting.

    I am tired now, and I will stop writing........................................... .................................................. .................................................. .....................really,,,,, I cant stop making these............................................. .................................................. .................................................. .................................................. .................................................. .................................................. .................................................. .................................................. ....................................
    Last edited by 1245A Defender; 02-21-2013 at 09:11 AM.
    EMNofSeattle wrote: Your idea of freedom terrifies me. So you are actually right. I am perfectly happy with what you call tyranny.....

    “If ever a time should come, when vain and aspiring men shall possess the highest seats in Government, our country will stand in need of its experienced patriots to prevent its ruin.”

    Stand up for your Rights,, They have no authority on their own...

    All power is inherent in the people,
    it is their right and duty to be at all times ARMED!

  20. #20
    Opt-Out Members BigDave's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Yakima, Washington, USA
    Posts
    3,463
    Quote Originally Posted by 1245A Defender View Post
    I get mad sometimes because folks get off on the wrong things, they waste the band width.
    Agreed, Yes you do, Waste band width!
    Last edited by BigDave; 02-21-2013 at 10:10 AM.
    • Being prepared is to prepare, this is our responsibility.
    • I am not your Mommy or Daddy and do not sugar coat it but I will tell you simply as how I see it, it is up to you on how you will or will not use it.
    • IANAL, all information I present is for your review, do your own homework.

  21. #21
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Ritzville, Washington, United States
    Posts
    7

    new and

    I am new to this forum, for the most part I like what I read. I really was hoping to learn something from this thread, but I did not learn anything new to me. I would be great if we had a Castle doctrine like Texas, I really believe that I should have the ability to use force to protect my property. I earned it, it is mine and no one else can have it without my permission. If you wait for the cops, they "are to busy" to investigate property crimes, there for if they find it by accident you may get it back. Any way, to much bickering, does not make for a good forum of information. Every ones penis is a pixal on the internet. Just saying.

  22. #22
    Regular Member Grim_Night's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Pierce County, Washington
    Posts
    792
    Quote Originally Posted by 1sgDavo View Post
    I am new to this forum, for the most part I like what I read. I really was hoping to learn something from this thread, but I did not learn anything new to me. I would be great if we had a Castle doctrine like Texas, I really believe that I should have the ability to use force to protect my property. I earned it, it is mine and no one else can have it without my permission. If you wait for the cops, they "are to busy" to investigate property crimes, there for if they find it by accident you may get it back. Any way, to much bickering, does not make for a good forum of information. Every ones penis is a pixal on the internet. Just saying.
    what people don't understand is that washington state does in fact have a stand your ground law as well as a castle doctrine.they are both included in the same law and they are just not called "stand your ground" or "castle doctrine".

    RCW 9A.16.050 Homicide — By other person — When justifiable.

    RCW 9A.16.050
    Homicide — By other person — When justifiable.


    Homicide is also justifiable when committed either:

    (1) In the lawful defense of the slayer, or his or her husband, wife, parent, child, brother, or sister, or of any other person in his or her presence or company, when there is reasonable ground to apprehend a design on the part of the person slain to commit a felony or to do some great personal injury to the slayer or to any such person, and there is imminent danger of such design being accomplished; or

    (2) In the actual resistance of an attempt to commit a felony upon the slayer, in his or her presence, or upon or in a dwelling, or other place of abode, in which he or she is.

    [2011 c 336 § 354; 1975 1st ex.s. c 260 § 9A.16.050.]
    Unless I miss my guess, Ii would say that anyplace you are legally allowed to be while carrying a firearm, if somebody attempts to commit a felony in your presence or attempt to cause bodily harm to you, a family member or eve a 3rd party, you are within your rights to use lethal force with no expectation to retreat. That would be "stand your ground"

    As far as "castle doctrine", if you are in your home and somebody tries to commit a felony, you are within your rights to again use lethal force. This would include protection of property as long as the crime being commited was a felony such as a burglary.

    However, I would suggest that the use of lethal force should be carefully considered. If Rapgood or any other lawyer on these forums would chime in on my statements here, that would be appreciated.
    Armed and annoyingly well informed!

    There are two constants when dealing with liberals:
    1) Liberals never quit until they are satisfied.
    2) Liberals are never satisfied.

  23. #23
    Opt-Out Members BigDave's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Yakima, Washington, USA
    Posts
    3,463
    Quote Originally Posted by Grim_Night View Post
    what people don't understand is that washington state does in fact have a stand your ground law as well as a castle doctrine.they are both included in the same law and they are just not called "stand your ground" or "castle doctrine".

    RCW 9A.16.050 Homicide — By other person — When justifiable.

    RCW 9A.16.050


    Unless I miss my guess, Ii would say that anyplace you are legally allowed to be while carrying a firearm, if somebody attempts to commit a felony in your presence or attempt to cause bodily harm to you, a family member or eve a 3rd party, you are within your rights to use lethal force with no expectation to retreat. That would be "stand your ground"

    As far as "castle doctrine", if you are in your home and somebody tries to commit a felony, you are within your rights to again use lethal force. This would include protection of property as long as the crime being commited was a felony such as a burglary.

    However, I would suggest that the use of lethal force should be carefully considered. If Rapgood or any other lawyer on these forums would chime in on my statements here, that would be appreciated.
    If you are suggesting one can just use deadly force when witnessing a felony that would be Wrong, it must be justifiable in RCW 9A.16.010(1) "Necessary" means that no reasonably effective alternative to the use of force appeared to exist and that the amount of force used was reasonable to effect the lawful purpose intended.

    Stand Your Ground in Washington State is the use of lawful force (necessary and reasonable) to defend oneself or another where you have a legal right to be.
    Castle Doctrine is also the use of lawful force (necessary and reasonable) to defend yourself or others in your home.

    Both are based on the threat level, if it arises only to blocking their advancement, to placing your hands on them, to striking or kicking, to lethal force.
    Use of lawful force is often described as equal to the threat where a simple laying your hands on can stop the threat, where pulling a firearm would be excessive. There are those times where a firearm is the only choice depending on the threat.

    Several discuss on here as to being able to protect their property, yes the law provides for that with lawful force (necessary and reasonable), however it seems some want to jump right to lethal force regardless if there is actually a threat level, do not fall into that line of thinking, it can cost you your freedom.
    • Being prepared is to prepare, this is our responsibility.
    • I am not your Mommy or Daddy and do not sugar coat it but I will tell you simply as how I see it, it is up to you on how you will or will not use it.
    • IANAL, all information I present is for your review, do your own homework.

  24. #24
    Regular Member rapgood's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Bothell, WA
    Posts
    565
    Quote Originally Posted by Grim_Night View Post
    what people don't understand is that washington state does in fact have a stand your ground law as well as a castle doctrine.they are both included in the same law and they are just not called "stand your ground" or "castle doctrine".

    RCW 9A.16.050 Homicide — By other person — When justifiable.

    RCW 9A.16.050

    Unless I miss my guess, Ii would say that anyplace you are legally allowed to be while carrying a firearm, if somebody attempts to commit a felony in your presence or attempt to cause bodily harm to you, a family member or eve a 3rd party, you are within your rights to use lethal force with no expectation to retreat. That would be "stand your ground"

    As far as "castle doctrine", if you are in your home and somebody tries to commit a felony, you are within your rights to again use lethal force. This would include protection of property as long as the crime being commited was a felony such as a burglary.

    However, I would suggest that the use of lethal force should be carefully considered. If Rapgood or any other lawyer on these forums would chime in on my statements here, that would be appreciated.
    Quote Originally Posted by BigDave View Post
    If you are suggesting one can just use deadly force when witnessing a felony that would be Wrong, it must be justifiable in RCW 9A.16.010(1) "Necessary" means that no reasonably effective alternative to the use of force appeared to exist and that the amount of force used was reasonable to effect the lawful purpose intended.

    Stand Your Ground in Washington State is the use of lawful force (necessary and reasonable) to defend oneself or another where you have a legal right to be.
    Castle Doctrine is also the use of lawful force (necessary and reasonable) to defend yourself or others in your home.

    Both are based on the threat level, if it arises only to blocking their advancement, to placing your hands on them, to striking or kicking, to lethal force.
    Use of lawful force is often described as equal to the threat where a simple laying your hands on can stop the threat, where pulling a firearm would be excessive. There are those times where a firearm is the only choice depending on the threat.

    Several discuss on here as to being able to protect their property, yes the law provides for that with lawful force (necessary and reasonable), however it seems some want to jump right to lethal force regardless if there is actually a threat level, do not fall into that line of thinking, it can cost you your freedom.
    I don't see that you two are in disagreement. Grim's post is accurate and is, as I read it, "fleshed-out" by BigDave (and I particularly agree with BigDave's observation that both the Stand Your Ground and Castle Doctrine call for meeting the level of threat with nothing more than an equal level of defense). Those thoughts in mind, I don't disagree with what either of you has said.
    Rev. Robert Apgood, Esq.

    A right cannot be lost by exercising it. McDonald v. Chicago, 561 U.S. 3025, 130 S. Ct. 3020, 3021, 177 L. Ed. 2d 894 (2010) (citing Near v. Minn., 283 U.S. 697 (1931)).

    Although IAAL, anything I say here is not legal advice. No conversations we may have privately or otherwise in this forum constitute the formation of an attorney-client relationship, and are not intended to do so.

  25. #25
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Fife, WA
    Posts
    12
    Quote Originally Posted by 1245A Defender View Post
    Ok I am making an,, "Im sorry" to you...

    I got all but hurt because you complained about my puncutuation instead of the value of my words,
    I get mad sometimes because folks get off on the wrong things, they waste the band width.

    I am sorry I said mean things to you.

    I still have your card,
    I am still impressed with our meeting.

    I am tired now, and I will stop writing........................................... .................................................. .................................................. .....................really,,,,, I cant stop making these............................................. .................................................. .................................................. .................................................. .................................................. .................................................. .................................................. .................................................. ....................................
    I rarely post, but I'd thought I would login specifically to point out that writing like this makes you look bad. It makes everyone here look bad, because the posts you make on an activist board reflect on your fellow activists. Same basic idea as when employers require that you behave yourself while you are in company uniform, even if you aren't on the job. Bad behavior reflects poorly on the company, as well as the individual who is misbehaving.

    Libertarian/conservative/non-MSNBC viewers need to get their act together when we post online. We aren't going to impress anyone when we write like moderately-literate monkeys.

    • TYPING IN ALL CAPS DOES NOT MAKE YOU LOOK LIKE YOU ARE YELLING. IT MAKES YOU LOOK LIKE AN IDIOT WRITING IN ALL CAPS.
    • using no punctuation and refusing to capitalize the beginning of a sentence also makes you look foolish
    • You should not...type the way that you talk.........there should not be a ton of long pauses represented with.......a bunch of periods and commas......that's what commas and periods are for...............just one at a time........



    Misspellings and the occasional mistake are one thing, but people that support the right and responsibility to carry around a gun openly should probably be able to express their ideas with a modicum of professionalism and intelligence.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •