ChinChin
Regular Member
imported post
skidmark wrote:
Review it here: http://www.flsenate.gov/data/session/2005/Senate/bills/amendments_Com/pdf/sb0436am191782.pdf
In essence, it establishes without question that if there is an uninvited person inside of your home (robber, rapist, drugged up junkie) the law states that person is inside of your home to kill you; and thus you may defend yourself with deadly force.
It is applicable inside your home, your business, your car, hotel room, tent, etc.
It states you cannot be sued in civil court by the badguy's family or ambulance chasers looking for a payday over the death of their little angel.
the part I really like is where it states" : (1) A person who uses force as described in s.
776.012, s. 776.013, or s. 776.031 is justified in using such force and is immune from criminal prosecution and civil action for the use of such force. As used in this subsection, the term "criminal prosecution" includes wrongfully arresting, detaining in custody, and charging or prosecuting the defendant.
(2) A law enforcement agency may use standard procedures for investigating the use of force as described in subsection (1), but the agency may not arrest the person for using force unless it determines that there is clear and convincing evidence that the force that was used was unlawful.
So when it's 2:30AM and I shoot a robber inside of my home, call 911 and have police come out to mop-up. I have a massive adrenalin rush; my head isn't on straight after having to shoot a guy and for my safety and continued protection I shouldn't be chatty with po-po who want answers until I lawyer up. Because I won't answer their questions on the spot, with this version of Castle Doctrine they can't arrest me, they can't detain me or anything. It's giving victim rights back to the real victims.
skidmark wrote:
The best thing to do would be to take pre-existing castle doctrine laws as they exsist in other states and modify them to work within Virginia. After reviewing many I find myself very fond of the wording of the Florida.Let's play "semantics" - one of my favorite games.
"Castle Doctrine" - either under English Common Law (not case law) or as a specific piece of legislation. Essentially the "Stand Your Ground" statute, with specific definitions of what is allowed, and anything outside of those are not allowed, or the concept that "A man's home is his castle."
We then go to case law to see how the courts have interpreted either Common Law or the specific statute.
"Civil Immunity" - specific legislation saying you cannot be sued for defending yourself, so long as the limitations and conditions of the legislation were met. Word it one way or word it another way, you get different results. Need to be very careful in how it is worded so you can guide the judges in interpreting it.
I cannot call to mind the legal phrase that says a criminal should not be allowed to profit from his crime. It's the set of laws that keep you from inheriting or collecting on the life insurance after you bump off Mom & Dad. It's also the set of laws that prevents you from reaping any income from publishing a book about your criminal exploits. NY State calls theirs the "Son of Sam Law" after David Berkowitz wrote a book about his killing spree. Anyhow, we need that onntop of civil immunity to protect us from the criminal and his heirs/estate after it has been determined he was a criminal and/or that he died in the commission of acts that you proved were justifiable/excusable.
As ypu can see, just trying to give a quick overview gets confusing and wrapped up in technicalities. Imagine drafting the legislation so a Delegate or Senator can sponsor it and support it through the various committees it will be sent to. I know what I'm trying to say and I get confused. Think what your local GA member will feel like.
We need a brainstorming session. Who else wants to play?
stay safe.
skidmark
Review it here: http://www.flsenate.gov/data/session/2005/Senate/bills/amendments_Com/pdf/sb0436am191782.pdf
In essence, it establishes without question that if there is an uninvited person inside of your home (robber, rapist, drugged up junkie) the law states that person is inside of your home to kill you; and thus you may defend yourself with deadly force.
It is applicable inside your home, your business, your car, hotel room, tent, etc.
It states you cannot be sued in civil court by the badguy's family or ambulance chasers looking for a payday over the death of their little angel.
the part I really like is where it states" : (1) A person who uses force as described in s.
776.012, s. 776.013, or s. 776.031 is justified in using such force and is immune from criminal prosecution and civil action for the use of such force. As used in this subsection, the term "criminal prosecution" includes wrongfully arresting, detaining in custody, and charging or prosecuting the defendant.
(2) A law enforcement agency may use standard procedures for investigating the use of force as described in subsection (1), but the agency may not arrest the person for using force unless it determines that there is clear and convincing evidence that the force that was used was unlawful.
So when it's 2:30AM and I shoot a robber inside of my home, call 911 and have police come out to mop-up. I have a massive adrenalin rush; my head isn't on straight after having to shoot a guy and for my safety and continued protection I shouldn't be chatty with po-po who want answers until I lawyer up. Because I won't answer their questions on the spot, with this version of Castle Doctrine they can't arrest me, they can't detain me or anything. It's giving victim rights back to the real victims.