AJG
Regular Member
TY
Thank You...
Thank You...
-
We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
-
If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
-
Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.
VCDL's LOOK AT THE CASTLE DOCTRINE FOR VIRGINIA
- Thread starter ed
- Start date
ed
Founder's Club Member - Moderator
Many constituents went to their legislature reps and said 5 words "Happy New Year, Castle Doctrine". So.. everyone is doing a version. VCDL will support a "correct one" if it exists. My gut says it will not this session. Dan and I went back and forth with Cucinelli on a couple points and then spent an hour on the phone going over language with Dick Black. Even Richard Gardner and Kurt Mueller have chimed in. Bob Herron also spend alot of time commenting. If it takes next session to make it perfect, then so be it.
Ed
TFred
Regular Member
wylde007
Regular Member
I'd just like to see us set back about 151 years.
user
Accomplished Advocate
I'm with you on that. But then, as a History major in college, the one thing I came away with was the perception that the only thing that has really changed in the last eight thousand years of recorded data is that humans have learned to move bigger and heavier things farther and faster. People are pretty much the same. There's just lots more of them, now.
ed
Founder's Club Member - Moderator
We have been working on two important gun bills this year. The first is the Castle Doctrine and the second is the Long Gun Bill. The Long Gun Bill will streamline the sale of rifles and shot guns, by streamlining the process for sales at gun shows. The Castle Doctrine, which was our top priority, has proven to be quiet complex. On the one hand, we want to retain the extensive protections afforded by Virginia common law. On the other hand, we must avoid creating loop holes for misconduct. Dan Hawes, an attorney working with VCDL, has done numerous revisions and many people have made suggested changes.
Having a late election season and having just been elected, it has not left a lot of time for extensive research. The 2012 Legislative Session begins on Wednesday and we are simply out of time to perfect this bill. As it stands, the bill is quiet complex. However, capturing the extensive body of common law is not an easy task. You should be aware that Virginia already has broad protections imbedded in its extensive case law on this topic extending back to the 1600’s. We must be careful to avoid a misstep that would unintentionally diminish gun rights in Virginia.
A number of key gun rights leaders and I have concluded that we cannot safely introduce the Castle Doctrine bill this year and that we should thoroughly prepare for next year’s legislative session.
I’d like to thank everyone who has worked tirelessly with me in an attempt to craft the perfect Castle Doctrine Bill. I appreciate all of your help.
Dick
Richard H. Black
Senator-Elect, 13th District
21029 Rodney Lane
Leesburg, VA 20176
(703) 468-1342
SenatorBlack@usa.net
www.DickBlack4Senate.com
Having a late election season and having just been elected, it has not left a lot of time for extensive research. The 2012 Legislative Session begins on Wednesday and we are simply out of time to perfect this bill. As it stands, the bill is quiet complex. However, capturing the extensive body of common law is not an easy task. You should be aware that Virginia already has broad protections imbedded in its extensive case law on this topic extending back to the 1600’s. We must be careful to avoid a misstep that would unintentionally diminish gun rights in Virginia.
A number of key gun rights leaders and I have concluded that we cannot safely introduce the Castle Doctrine bill this year and that we should thoroughly prepare for next year’s legislative session.
I’d like to thank everyone who has worked tirelessly with me in an attempt to craft the perfect Castle Doctrine Bill. I appreciate all of your help.
Dick
Richard H. Black
Senator-Elect, 13th District
21029 Rodney Lane
Leesburg, VA 20176
(703) 468-1342
SenatorBlack@usa.net
www.DickBlack4Senate.com
TFred
Regular Member
I can live with this as long as everyone else can be convinced to do so as well.
Out of only 285 real bills (ignoring the joint resolutions which mostly are "atta-boys", etc.) thus far listed on the LIS site, 5 of them (HB14, HB47, HB48, SB4, SB64) are some form of Castle Doctrine. It's a tidal wave right now, it is going to take quite some effort to hold it back a full year.
TFred
2a4all
Regular Member
Yup. It's the right thing to do.
User's bill is an excellent start, but we need to take some more time to discuss its ramifications. Once Castle Doctrine is codified, a simple oversight could lead to an explosion of the law of unintended consequences. (Think of the "closed container" exception to bringing a loaded HG onto school property.) A discussion of a Virginia Castle Doctrine bill could be a forum unto itself. Mods??
Last edited:
TFred
Regular Member
He didn't say if he was going to be the sponsor, but here is where you can find the list of Senator Black's bills submitted so far:
http://leg1.state.va.us/cgi-bin/legp504.exe?121+mbr+S83C
TFred
http://leg1.state.va.us/cgi-bin/legp504.exe?121+mbr+S83C
TFred
Jonesy
Regular Member
Wow, User's draft bill is really good, I especially like the provisions requiring a knock and so forth by officers. I guess it makes sense to wait to perfect this, but it is too bad it can not get done this year.
Thanks TF but I'd already checked that and it isn't under weapons either.
I'm hoping it doesn't have the "C" word in it. I'm trying to start the session with lower blood pressure.:lol:
TFred
Regular Member
Walt_Kowalski
Regular Member
nuc65
Activist Member
Reasonable belief may provide the remedy for not waiting for an overt act in the middle of the night... if it is forced entry in the middle of the night it seems that a reasonable person would be in fear of imminent harm.
TFred
Regular Member
Our worst fears are still on track.
Just got this in my inbox... the NRA does not get it, and are pushing these bills that will hurt the cause. Very disappointing, because I know that they know about the ramifications of this issue.
TFred
Just got this in my inbox... the NRA does not get it, and are pushing these bills that will hurt the cause. Very disappointing, because I know that they know about the ramifications of this issue.
TFred
user
Accomplished Advocate
I'm pretty sure they have not. When I saw TFred's post, first thing I did was to send the NRA-ILA a "what, are you nuts?" message via their website contact form. I was a more polite than that, but they clearly don't have a clue.
I had another thought about the proposal I wrote. There's all this stuff about codification of the law as it is, and how we need to wait a year to be sure that I'm right about that. But what difference does that make, really, other than to help the political machine feel comfortable about passing a bill. My feeling is that if this is what we want the law to be, regardless of what it's been, then (dammit) pass that bill.
Btw, in response to another post earlier about the no-knock warrants. That provision I wrote doesn't get rid of no-knock entry, nor does it have anything to do with the evidentiary rulings by the U.S. Sup. Ct. having to do with the reasonableness of a search in connection with the Fourth Amendment and the "exclusionary rule". What it does, and this is the heart of the common law castle doctrine, is to provide that a person who, in good faith, uses force to repel invaders, not realizing they're cops on a lawful mission, is not criminally responsible for the use of force. When people dressed like ninja burglars bust in unannounced and shoot the family dog and aim guns at the children, it is not a criminal offense to shoot them. Any bill that does not contain that provision is not the castle doctrine.
MSC 45ACP
Regular Member
Thank you once again for all your hard work, Mr. Hawes. You are truly a Defender of our Freedom in Virginia. If only more folks would listen to Common Sense. Unfortunately, "Common Sense" isn't so common anymore...
m
user
Accomplished Advocate
But all of these purported "castle doctrine" bills eliminate the "reasonably held, good faith belief, based on objective fact" element of personal defense law. These bills all require an actual attack as a matter of scientifically verifiable fact. There's nothing in any of them about a reasonable belief.
And, as pointed out in another post, they also eliminate the defense of habitation law, as well as the defense of stopping a serious felony in progress. Not only that, they require a combination of factors where only one was required before: there has to be both an intrusion AND an attack.
I may be cynical, but I can't help thinking that some organization is behind the scenes attempting to gut the Virginia law of personal defense as a trick designed to turn us all into Marylanders. I think they know perfectly well what they're doing and assumed we could be duped the way people have been in other states that have passed "castle doctrine" bills.