Deadly Force Law in NC

imported post

While the elements of self-defense are outlined in the case laws cited above, the law regarding self defense in the home is cited below:

§ 14‑51.1. Use of deadly physical force against an intruder.

(a) A lawful occupant within a home or other place of residence is justified in using any degree of force that the occupant reasonably believes is necessary, including deadly force, against an intruder to prevent a forcible entry into the home or residence or to terminate the intruder's unlawful entry (i) if the occupant reasonably apprehends that the intruder may kill or inflict serious bodily harm to the occupant or others in the home or residence, or (ii) if the occupant reasonably believes that the intruder intends to commit a felony in the home or residence.

(b) A lawful occupant within a home or other place of residence does not have a duty to retreat from an intruder in the circumstances described in this section.

(c) This section is not intended to repeal, expand, or limit any other defense that may exist under the common law. (1993 (Reg. Sess., 1994), c. 673, s. 1.)

Click to expand...

imported post

This may help....CONCEALED HANDGUN PERMITS
AND THE USE OF DEADLY FORCE

http://www.ncsheriffs.org/images/Conceled%20Handgun%20Permits%20and%20The%20Use%20of%20Deadly%20Force.pdf

imported post

.40 Cal wrote:

Although it is a parody of the law, it represents the idea behind self defense shooting in NC. You are not allowed to shoot a person who is fleeing (makes sense), you are not allowed to shoot a person who is not equally armed or in a position to cause lethal bodily harm (you aren't allowed to be proactive), you can't shoot a person in yourhomeunless he attacks you (just havinghim in proximity to your family wouldn't justify lethal force, however if he is pounding on your door you may shoot through the door... makes sense?), and you may use deadly force if you witness an assault that a reasonable person would consider would lead to a homicide or rape (even in rape prevention lethal force is questionable).

Click to expand...

I have bolded the part that irks me the most about NC law.......My wife and I are gone 8 - 10 hours a day 5 days a week. If you are stupid enough to break in while we are there, then it is my duty to make sure it is the last stop on your criminal train.

If someone breaks into an occupied dwelling, you should be allowed to use deadly force (even if they aren't armed). It is disgusting that the homeowner must prove that the perp is armed and intent on killing you.:cuss:

This part of the law gives the rights to criminals that break into homes and legally disarms citizens when it comes to shootings in their homes.:banghead:

IMHO: when put in this situation do not speak to the police when they arrive (anything you say will be misquoted and used against you) and have a home defense firearm that will ensure there is only one story when the police arrive.

My 2 cents...

imported post

ocgso wrote:

.40 Cal wrote:

Although it is a parody of the law, it represents the idea behind self defense shooting in NC. You are not allowed to shoot a person who is fleeing (makes sense), you are not allowed to shoot a person who is not equally armed or in a position to cause lethal bodily harm (you aren't allowed to be proactive), you can't shoot a person in yourhomeunless he attacks you (just havinghim in proximity to your family wouldn't justify lethal force, however if he is pounding on your door you may shoot through the door... makes sense?), and you may use deadly force if you witness an assault that a reasonable person would consider would lead to a homicide or rape (even in rape prevention lethal force is questionable).

Click to expand...

I have bolded the part that irks me the most about NC law.......My wife and I are gone 8 - 10 hours a day 5 days a week. If you are stupid enough to break in while we are there, then it is my duty to make sure it is the last stop on your criminal train.

If someone breaks into an occupied dwelling, you should be allowed to use deadly force (even if they aren't armed). It is disgusting that the homeowner must prove that the perp is armed and intent on killing you.:cuss:

This part of the law gives the rights to criminals that break into homes and legally disarms citizens when it comes to shootings in their homes.:banghead:

IMHO: when put in this situation do not speak to the police when they arrive (anything you say will be misquoted and used against you) and have a home defense firearm that will ensure there is only one story when the police arrive.

My 2 cents...

Click to expand...

The way I look at it, If a person or persons force their way into my home while My family is there....if they make it past the threshold, they are intending to do me bodily harm. I am not some sort Rambo, in fact as a Christian I dread the thought of having to use lethal force. However, I will do what I can to prevent my family from being assaulted.

I think this law is worded this way to keep people from shooting someone they just did not like or an unexpected acquaintance who happened to enter their home...Either way, If you fear that they are trying to kill you or any of your family, if you suspect they intend to cause you great bodily harm, or some sort of sexual assault then lethal force is justified.

Traumatic events take place very quickly, with no time to question your understanding of the legal use of lethal force...That's why I am taking my Concealed handgun class this Saturday.

imported post

I have to agree with .40 cal
As a kid growing up in the back woods of NC the thing that bugged me was hearing my uncle and grandpa talking about how a man could walk in the front door and out the back and we couldn't do a darn thing about it.
Well you can but you would be outside the law...
Atleast thats what the LEO's told my grandpa.

imported post

In fact you are not powerless


§ 15A‑404. Detention of offenders by private persons.

(a) No Arrest; Detention Permitted. – No private person may arrest another person except as provided in G.S. 15A‑405. A private person may detain another person as provided in this section.

(b) When Detention Permitted. – A private person may detain another person when he has probable cause to believe that the person detained has committed in his presence:

(1) A felony,

(2) A breach of the peace,

(3) A crime involving physical injury to another person, or

(4) A crime involving theft or destruction of property.

(c) Manner of Detention. – The detention must be in a reasonable manner considering the offense involved and the circumstances of the detention.

(d) Period of Detention. – The detention may be no longer than the time required for the earliest of the following:

(1) The determination that no offense has been committed.

(2) Surrender of the person detained to a law‑enforcement officer as provided in subsection (e).

(e) Surrender to Officer. – A private person who detains another must immediately notify a law‑enforcement officer and must, unless he releases the person earlier as required by subsection (d), surrender the person detained to the law‑enforcement officer. (1973, c. 1286, s. 1.)

imported post

The flip side is this... If you wake up at 3am and someone is sitting on your couch eating cereal and watching the simpsons, you cant shoot them...

unlikely to happen, but i can see why that would be a homicide charge.

imported post

AWDeanSr wrote:

The way I look at it, If a person or persons force their way into my home while My family is there....if they make it past the threshold, they are intending to do me bodily harm. I am not some sort Rambo, in fact as a Christian I dread the thought of having to use lethal force. However, I will do what I can to prevent my family from being assaulted.

I think this law is worded this way to keep people from shooting someone they just did not like or an unexpected acquaintance who happened to enter their home...Either way, If you fear that they are trying to kill you or any of your family, if you suspect they intend to cause you great bodily harm, or some sort of sexual assault then lethal force is justified.

Traumatic events take place very quickly, with no time to question your understanding of the legal use of lethal force...That's why I am taking my Concealed handgun class this Saturday.

Click to expand...

I agree with you that is someone comes into my home while it is occupied, I will use deadly force. Think about it, most people are away from home 8 - 10 hours a day, if a perp is waiting until you are there, then he is most likely not afraid to kill you....

With that said, the way the law is written, if the DA think you murdered the perp and they are not armed, you will havea very hard time walking away free.

Ditto that 40 cal hit the nail on the head. It shouldn't be that way, but it is.

Oh, and REX: I still agree with 40 cal, because you can tell a perp he is being detained and he can tell you where to stick it and walk out with your flat screen. If you shoot him and he is unarmed, you are still on the wrong side of the law.

I ain't sayin it's right, I am just saying it depends on the DA.

imported post

I would venture to say anyone stupid enough to do a home-invasion type break in is probably armed with at least a crowbar or screwdriver, BOTH of which are considered "deadly weapons".

I would also venture the guess that anyone stupid enough to do a home-invasion probably has a substantial rap-sheet already, and that information can be use to "establish a pattern" of their criminal intent.

If this ever happens, after you've made your 911 call, the first thing you need to do is DON'T talk to the police without a lawyer present.

The second thing to remember is DON'T TALK TO THE POLICE WITHOUT A LAWYER PRESENT.

imported post

I still agree with 40 cal, because you can tell a perp he is being detained and he can tell you where to stick it and walk out with your flat screen. If you shoot him and he is unarmed, you are still on the wrong side of the law.

Click to expand...

Officer, I swear he tried to throw that TV at me, I feared for my life and shot to stop him:monkey

imported post

mekender wrote:

I still agree with 40 cal, because you can tell a perp he is being detained and he can tell you where to stick it and walk out with your flat screen. If you shoot him and he is unarmed, you are still on the wrong side of the law.

Click to expand...

Officer, I swear he tried to throw that TV at me, I feared for my life and shot to stop him:monkey

Click to expand...

99 times out of 100 if a LEO walks up on a BG committing a felony, he might not use it but he will unholster his firearm & command them to stop. Well guess what a lot of them will just stop at that point. Just the sight of a firearm affects people in different ways.

imported post

mekender wrote:

I still agree with 40 cal, because you can tell a perp he is being detained and he can tell you where to stick it and walk out with your flat screen. If you shoot him and he is unarmed, you are still on the wrong side of the law.

Click to expand...

Officer, I swear he tried to throw that TV at me, I feared for my life and shot to stop him:monkey

Click to expand...

Like Daddy always says "when the cops get there, there better be one story"

imported post

Only something this totally stupid has to be from good ol North Carolina.











.

imported post

Makes me want to move to Vermont or Alaska where such silly regulations on where you can carry and how you can defend your own home. Doggone shame it is so cold in both of those states (that and Vermont's proximity to the socialist republic of new york)

imported post

Massad Ayoob - Judicious Use of Force. Part [1]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qW_xaTf5oqI&feature=related

Massad Ayoob - Judicious Use of Force. Part [2]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oGJIyxm2s_M

Massad Ayoob - Judicious Use of Force. Part [3]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gNCRL9SN2QA&feature=related

Massad Ayoob - Judicious Use of Force. Part [4]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AJazmbDH7S8&feature=related


http://www.laaw.com/uofdef.htm

imported post

A lawful occupant within a home or other place of residence is justified in using any degree of force that the occupant reasonably believes is necessary, including deadly force, against an intruder to prevent a forcible entry into the home or residence or to terminate the intruder's unlawful entry (i) if the occupant reasonably apprehends that the intruder may kill or inflict serious bodily harm to the occupant or others in the home or residence, or (ii) if the occupant reasonably believes that the intruder intends to commit a felony in the home or residence.

It's fairly reasonable to assume that a home invader or robber intends to commit a felony. The castle law only protects us if someone is trying to gain entry into our home unlawfully - once that person has entered we have to be slightly more careful and determine that there is some nefarious purpose. In other words, if I accidentally walk into your home, come to the wrong house drunk and try to crash on the couch, etc. then you will not likely have reason to believe that I intend to commit a felony. If I come in with a ski mask...

imported post

ocgso wrote:

If someone breaks into an occupied dwelling, you should be allowed to use deadly force (even if they aren't armed). It is disgusting that the homeowner must prove that the perp is armed and intent on killing you.:cuss:

This part of the law gives the rights to criminals that break into homes and legally disarms citizens when it comes to shootings in their homes.:banghead:

Click to expand...

whoever wrote this law and whoever make this law effective must either have received a boat load of cash from the criminal or doesn't have intention of put the criminal away or reducing crime.

imported post

Hi - please see my post above:

(ii) if the occupant reasonably believes that the intruder intends to commit a felony in the home or residence.

A criminal is not empowered in your home. If you believe a criminal is in your home to commit a felony then you have the right to use deadly force provided you have a reasonable belief that deadly force is necessary.

§ 14‑51. First and second degree burglary.
There shall be two degrees in the crime of burglary as defined at the common law. If the crime be committed in a dwelling house, or in a room used as a sleeping apartment in any building, and any person is in the actual occupation of any part of said dwelling house or sleeping apartment at the time of the commission of such crime, it shall be burglary in the first degree. If such crime be committed in a dwelling house or sleeping apartment not actually occupied by anyone at the time of the commission of the crime, or if it be committed in any house within the curtilage of a dwelling house or in any building not a dwelling house, but in which is a room used as a sleeping apartment and not actually occupied as such at the time of the commission of the crime, it shall be burglary in the second degree. For the purposes of defining the crime of burglary, larceny shall be deemed a felony without regard to the value of the property in question.
§ 14‑52. Punishment for burglary. Burglary in the first degree shall be punishable as a Class D felony, and burglary in the second degree shall be punishable as a Class G felony.


Remember, if you're in your home to defend it, then it is first degree burglary.

The only time that you are explicitly forbidden from using deadly force is if you have no reason to believe the person is there to commit a felony. I would say that it is reasonable to assume that a person intends to commit a felony in most circumstances.

imported post

CarryOpen wrote:

Hi - please see my post above:

(ii) if the occupant reasonably believes that the intruder intends to commit a felony in the home or residence.

A criminal is not empowered in your home. If you believe a criminal is in your home to commit a felony then you have the right to use deadly force provided you have a reasonable belief that deadly force is necessary.

§ 14‑51. First and second degree burglary.
There shall be two degrees in the crime of burglary as defined at the common law. If the crime be committed in a dwelling house, or in a room used as a sleeping apartment in any building, and any person is in the actual occupation of any part of said dwelling house or sleeping apartment at the time of the commission of such crime, it shall be burglary in the first degree. If such crime be committed in a dwelling house or sleeping apartment not actually occupied by anyone at the time of the commission of the crime, or if it be committed in any house within the curtilage of a dwelling house or in any building not a dwelling house, but in which is a room used as a sleeping apartment and not actually occupied as such at the time of the commission of the crime, it shall be burglary in the second degree. For the purposes of defining the crime of burglary, larceny shall be deemed a felony without regard to the value of the property in question.
§ 14‑52. Punishment for burglary. Burglary in the first degree shall be punishable as a Class D felony, and burglary in the second degree shall be punishable as a Class G felony.


Remember, if you're in your home to defend it, then it is first degree burglary.

The only time that you are explicitly forbidden from using deadly force is if you have no reason to believe the person is there to commit a felony. I would say that it is reasonable to assume that a person intends to commit a felony in most circumstances.

Click to expand...

I hear you LOUD AND CLEAR!! However, you know what they say about people who.........assume things........


The 2nd Amendment... brought to you by Beretta and the number 1787!!:X