Legality of self defense in the home?

imported post

From the link TheSzerdi provided..

Sec. 1. (1) Except as provided in subsection (2), it is a rebuttable presumption in a civil or criminal case that an individual who uses deadly force or force other than deadly force under section 2 of the self-defense act has an honest and reasonable belief that imminent death of, sexual assault of, or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another individual will occur if both of the following apply:
(a) The individual against whom deadly force or force other than deadly force is used is in the process of breaking and entering a dwelling or business premises or committing home invasion or has broken and entered a dwelling or business premises or committed home invasion and is still present in the dwelling or business premises, or is unlawfully attempting to remove another individual from a dwelling, business premises, or occupied vehicle against his or her will.
(b) The individual using deadly force or force other than deadly force honestly and reasonably believes that the individual is engaging in conduct described in subdivision (a).

Click to expand...

So, if someone is breaking into your home and you honestly and reasonably believe they are breaking into your home the law allows you to assume a reasonable belief that you are under imminent threat of death, rape, or great bodily harm.
Go to the link TheSzerdi provided because there are exceptions that you should be aware of.
Bronson

imported post

Listen man, I don't want to keep this thing going on and on but it sounds like we agree on where to shoot, with what to shoot and the outcome would be the same. You just don't like the words I use. You remind me of a former President we had back in the 90's, an expert at parcing words. It is what it is, I don't care who might be reading what I write. :banghead:

imported post

Yes, and if you defend yourself, and someone sues you, a good prosecuting attorney will be looking for things like this to use against you. The law does not permit people to 'shoot to kill'. PERIOD.

http://articles.sfgate.com/2009-05-30/news/17202338_1_shot-robber-ski-mask-teenager

Read this article. He obviously 'shot to kill' when the robber was no longer a threat, and now he's in prison.

If you want to be spanked with murder, go right ahead. Your simple Miranda rights start with "You have the right to remain silent, anything you say can, and will be used against you in court of law".

THAT INCLUDES THIS FORUM. What you say here is HIGHLY monitored by police, because police do not like OC.

Utilize your right, remain silent. Choose your wording carefully. I'm not trying to censor you, I'm trying to protect you from your own idiocy in case you ever have to protect yourself.

imported post

I think some folks are way too concerned about the danger of posting things here. Forums can be hacked, posts altered, IP addresses spoofed, IP logs changed etc...it would be very unlikely that it could be proven beyond reasonable doubt that words here were actually posted by me. Its all hearsay.

If you shoot an intruder in your home. Go to the hospital to be checked out for hearing damage, stress and any other health problems that may have resulted from the incident. Don't speak to anyone about the incident except your attorney. You are innocent of any crime.

imported post

If this were a trial where the perp lived, and he had a lawyer, I could see where they could try to use this post/site as evidence, but it won't hold up in court. If the perp is dead the state might try me but they would have to go by the Law, & the Law says I can use deadly force regardless of what I said in the past about this issue. Besides There is no proof I am writing this stuff, it could be my son on my computer, or my wife. Next it is all hear say, just because I say it, it doesn't mean it is what I really believe.

Besides I have a legal right to use Deadly Force, & I will. So I stick my tongue out to any bureaucrat who's listening...Including King Hussein:celebrate

I hope right now there is a white house aide/SNITCH monitoring my conversation on his little Commy White House computer.

imported post

conservative85 wrote:

If this were a trial where the perp lived, and he had a lawyer, I could see where they could try to use this post/site as evidence, but it won't hold up in court. If the perp is dead the state might try me but they would have to go by the Law, & the Law says I can use deadly force regardless of what I said in the past about this issue. Besides There is no proof I am writing this stuff, it could be my son on my computer, or my wife. Next it is all hear say, just because I say it, it doesn't mean it is what I really believe.

Besides I have a legal right to use Deadly Force, & I will. So I stick my tongue out to any bureaucrat who's listening...Including King Hussein:celebrate

I hope right now there is a white house aide/SNITCH monitoring my conversation on his little Commy White House computer.

Click to expand...

:lol:

imported post

T.J. wrote:

If you" LET him live" he may return and endanger your family.If he's DEAD, he can't return. Think of your family. Remember, he is not wanted there.

Click to expand...

How are you going to protect your family if your behind bar's.

"BETTER BE SURE"

imported post

malignity wrote:

T.J. wrote:

If you" LET him live" he may return and endanger your family.If he's DEAD, he can't return. Think of your family. Remember, he is not wanted there.

Click to expand...

By no means should anyone live with a close quarters round of 00 Buck, or multiple .40 caliber hallow points, and by no means do I expect someone to, should they break into my home. I don't shoot to kill, I shoot to stop the threat.

Does my shot to the head stop the threat? Yes.

Did I 'shoot to kill'? No, I shot to stop the threat.

WORDING is key here, and that's exactly what I'm trying to explain. We at MOC should know more about technical wording more than anyone else.

Click to expand...

This is the same idea I was trying to get across some time ago when the word "weapon" was flying around here, in reference to what a person carries on his/her belt. It wasn't well received. To my surprise, though, most people have stopped using the word weapon, and instead use firearm, pistol, handgun, rifle, etc. It's a public image thing, and it does work. A ring of keys is a weapon when used as such. So is a tomato. Don't beat yourself up trying to get it across, Malignity. Most folks understand. They'll be the quiet ones.

imported post

[align=center]SELF-DEFENSE ACT (EXCERPT)
Act 309 of 2006[/align]


780.972 Use of deadly force by individual not engaged in commission of crime; conditions.

Sec. 2.

(1) An individual who has not or is not engaged in the commission of a crime at the time he or she uses deadly force may use deadly force against another individual anywhere he or she has the legal right to be with no duty to retreat if either of the following applies:

(a) The individual honestly and reasonably believes that the use of deadly force is necessary to prevent the imminent death of or imminent great bodily harm to himself or herself or to another individual.

(b) The individual honestly and reasonably believes that the use of deadly force is necessary to prevent the imminent sexual assault of himself or herself or of another individual.

(2) An individual who has not or is not engaged in the commission of a crime at the time he or she uses force other than deadly force may use force other than deadly force against another individual anywhere he or she has the legal right to be with no duty to retreat if he or she honestly and reasonably believes that the use of that force is necessary to defend himself or herself or another individual from the imminent unlawful use of force by another individual.


History: 2006, Act 309, Eff. Oct. 1, 2006

imported post

It's amazing how people like to argue with you when they don't like what you aresaying.

imported post

the rule given to me that I pretty much live by as told to my cpl class by an officer of the law.


when and IF the situation ever arises where you need to use deadly
force, you will with out a doubt know it, and will not be thinking about the "am I in my legal bounds to protect my life" question.

it will be an act of instinctual survival, at least in my opinion.

also at that time you will have to make the moral judgement if you are willing to take another persons life or not.

I carry a gun, but if ever faced with a situation where I needed to defend my own life by taking someone elses? could I do it? I dunno, but I've asked myself this question many times when practicing with my gun, I honestly believe today that if I was ever faced with that situation, if letting the perp know I was armed was not enough to stop the encounter, and it was going to be him or me, it very well could be me ending up dead.

I am a person of high moral standing and the choice to take anyones life, wethe your life depends on it the most important choice someone could ever make, and chances are it will be made in a split second.

you have to live with that, even if you are right in your choice of defending yourself, the moral consiquences of your actions could very well eat up at you. think long and hard about where you actually stand.

however, the bottom line is, when and again IF the time ever comes when you are justified with the use of deadly force, you will absolutely know it.

imported post

In all the confusion I have lost who is for what in this thread

For the record, I am pretty sure the guy in my house at midnight w/o permission isn't Santa, Tooth Fairy, or some one looking for a Square Dancing Partner. There for any one in my house without permission is going to d...i...e....Shoot, Shovel, Shut up!

imported post

conservative85 wrote:

.Shoot, Shovel, Shut up!

Click to expand...

Hm...

http://www.clickondetroit.com/news/3451263/detail.html

Enough said?

*pours gasoline on the fire*

imported post

conservative85 wrote:

In all the confusion I have lost who is for what in this thread

For the record, I am pretty sure the guy in my house at midnight w/o permission isn't Santa, Tooth Fairy, or some one looking for a Square Dancing Partner. There for any one in my house without permission is going to d...i...e....Shoot, Shovel, Shut up!

Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure were on the same page. Thanks for the support.

imported post

A: Shoot to stop threat=(most likely) bad guy dead, good guy alive. Good guy goes on with no criminal charges filed.

B: Shoot to kill=(most likely) bad guy dead, good guy alive. Good guy said the wrong thing, could face jail or prison time.

Moral of the story, keep your mouth shut, except to your lawyer, even if you know beyond a shadow of a doubt that you were justified.

Words mean stuff.



eta:spelling error. haha

imported post

The laws are also set up to where if no criminal charges are filed, the family can not sue you for civil damages.

imported post

kyleplusitunes wrote:

the rule given to me that I pretty much live by as told to my cpl class by an officer of the law.


when and IF the situation ever arises where you need to use deadly
force, you will with out a doubt know it, and will not be thinking about the "am I in my legal bounds to protect my life" question.

it will be an act of instinctual survival, at least in my opinion.

also at that time you will have to make the moral judgement if you are willing to take another persons life or not.

I carry a gun, but if ever faced with a situation where I needed to defend my own life by taking someone elses? could I do it? I dunno, but I've asked myself this question many times when practicing with my gun, I honestly believe today that if I was ever faced with that situation, if letting the perp know I was armed was not enough to stop the encounter, and it was going to be him or me, it very well could be me ending up dead.

I am a person of high moral standing and the choice to take anyones life, wethe your life depends on it the most important choice someone could ever make, and chances are it will be made in a split second.

you have to live with that, even if you are right in your choice of defending yourself, the moral consiquences of your actions could very well eat up at you. think long and hard about where you actually stand.

however, the bottom line is, when and again IF the time ever comes when you are justified with the use of deadly force, you will absolutely know it.

Click to expand...

Honestly, the highlighted red areas need to be figured out ASAP. That is the very first question covered in lesson 1 ofthe NRA PPITH class. Trying to figure out if you're morally capable at the time of need will rob you or anyone of precious time that is needed for defensive action.

Also, during mental preparation/visualization that unanswered question will slow down the training process & affect reaction time.

blue highlights: respectfully as possible DO NOT EVER THINK THAT AGAIN. The will to survive is the #1 key to making it through just about anything. All the training in the world..firearms, hand 2 hand, emergency, etc. won't help if someone "gives up" or just doesn't have it in them to begin with. I will survive, I will make it home...no matter what!

On a side note, I agree with the "shoot to stop the threat" crowd in regards to terminology.

imported post

EM87 wrote:

From everything I've read and/or heard on the subject, if someone forces their way into my home and I shoot them, I am not guilty of any crime because it was a self-defense shooting.

My question is, how is an in-home shoot a self defense shooting if this person has not made any threat to you? Say you find someone in your room stealing your things but they make no move towards you and they don't have a weapon that you can see. How is it legal for you to shoot them?

I just need to make sure I have all my bases covered in case someone ever breaks in.

Click to expand...

Please keep in mind also:
Regardless of the answer to your question, please don't equate 'legally allowed to shoot someone' to 'morally justified to shoot someone'

If someone breaks in unarmed, and you hold them up, and they put their hands up, and you shoot them, will you go to jail? Probably not, because of the castle doctrine and how the self defense laws read [posted above by someone else]... but would you? I wouldn't, I would wait for the police.

Only reason I mention this is because the way your question is worded almost sounds like "I want to shoot them whether they're a threat or not, can I legally get away with it?"

imported post

office888 wrote:

EM87 wrote: Lethal force is only an option if your life, or the lives of others are being threatened.

You're more than welcome to wave a gun in their face all you want, but for your sake, never shoot an unarmed man.

-Richard-

Click to expand...

Blue is True,
your life and those of others can be threatened even if the person is unarmed,

Red is Dead,
Red suffers from HankT's Postulate of Idiocy


And also I personally agree with the 'Shoot to Stop the Threat' crowd, because liberal courts will do whatever they can to make the shooter appear the criminal, no matter what the truth is.

imported post

conservative85 wrote:

Shoot, Shovel, & SHUT UP!

Inside the home without permission is um how do I say this...Dangerous to your Health.

Shoot to Kill. I'd rather be tried by 12 than buried by 6!

All else fails Exercise your 4th & 5th Amendment Rights

Click to expand...

Fire, you need lots of fire.