• 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.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • 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.

Comparing FL and VA Self Defense Laws

BillB

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
200
Location
NOVA
Here is an article that speaks to the legal use of deadly force. Some points in the article will probably generate some discussion as they seem to be at odds with the the prevailing opinions on this forum. For example here is a clip from the article:

If you are in a public place in which you are legally allowed (e.g. public parks, sidewalks, restaurants, etc.), the situations in which you can use deadly force in Florida and Virginia are very similar. There is an important difference, though.

In both Florida and Virginia you may use lethal force to defend yourself from a reasonable fear death or great bodily harm. In Florida, though not in Virginia, you are allowed to use lethal force to “repel forcible felonies” (e.g. rape, arson, robbery).


Link to article: http://rvanews.com/news/florida-vs-virginia-comparing-self-defense-laws/58745
 
Last edited:

The Wolfhound

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 3, 2009
Messages
728
Location
Henrico, Virginia, USA
Last time I checked...

I see no reason not to interpret threats of rape, robbery, or arson, where my person or the persons of my loved ones are involved, as threats of "great bodily harm". Still justified for lethal force.
 

skidmark

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jan 15, 2007
Messages
10,444
Location
Valhalla
I see no reason not to interpret threats of rape, robbery, or arson, where my person or the persons of my loved ones are involved, as threats of "great bodily harm". Still justified for lethal force.

Dog-piling on ^

Rape, robbery and arson are violent felonies - by definition they threaten imminent death or great bodily harm if not stopped. The use of deadly force in stopping a violent felony, so our esteemed I-am-an-attorney-but-not-your-attorney has learned us, is justified. Even if the victim is an innocent "other".

stay safe.
 

Esanders2008

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 27, 2012
Messages
576
Location
Virginia Beach, VA
Dog-piling on ^

Rape, robbery and arson are violent felonies - by definition they threaten imminent death or great bodily harm if not stopped. The use of deadly force in stopping a violent felony, so our esteemed I-am-an-attorney-but-not-your-attorney has learned us, is justified. Even if the victim is an innocent "other".

stay safe.

Also, I'm hoping User will pop in here, but if I am not incorrect, we have the common law protections to repel forcible felonies, but IANAL

ETA: ah you were talking about User.. lol
 
Last edited:

skidmark

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jan 15, 2007
Messages
10,444
Location
Valhalla
Also, I'm hoping User will pop in here, but if I am not incorrect, we have the common law protections to repel forcible felonies, but IANAL

ETA: ah you were talking about User.. lol

Are you aware that many of us are lawyers (a person knowlegable regarding the law) but not attorneys (persons who have passed the guild initiation, paid the yearly tribute, and thus allowed to argue with judges as well as with each other)?

I can give you my opinion on what a/the law means, but must never-ever ask for or receive anything (except possibly your admiration or thanks) for doing so, else I be accused of the illegal practice of law. As opposed to the illegal getting it right of law. (Yes, I've heard that old saw about amateurs practicing till they get it right as opposed to professionals practicing till they cannot get it wrong. But based on that, attorneys and weatherpersons are very rank amateurs.:p )

stay safe.
 

SouthernBoy

Regular Member
Joined
May 12, 2007
Messages
5,837
Location
Western Prince William County, Virginia, USA
Bovine excrement.

As relates to "In Florida, though not in Virginia, you are allowed to use lethal force to “repel forcible felonies” (e.g. rape, arson, robbery)", there are five felonies for which force can be used as a response in Virginia, up to and including deadly force. In no particular order, they are: burglary, robbery, arson, rape, and murder.

Time for user to step in and settle this one.
 

BillB

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
200
Location
NOVA
The article cites two Richmond area criminal defense attorneys by name, one of them is Matt Rawls. Here is another cut-and-paste from the article:

Here’s a hypothetical example to distinguish the laws in the two states. Imagine a person approaches you on the sidewalk and tries to steal your wallet. They have no weapon. In Florida, you are allowed to shoot them because they are committing the forcible felony of robbery. However, Virginia does not afford you that same automatic legal privilege to use lethal force. “Remember,” says Rawls, “you must have a reasonable fear of death or great bodily harm in order to use lethal force. Just because someone wants to steal your wallet, doesn’t mean you have a reasonable fear they’re going to kill you. And if they don’t have a weapon, it’s difficult to establish your reasonable fear in the situation.”
 

SouthernBoy

Regular Member
Joined
May 12, 2007
Messages
5,837
Location
Western Prince William County, Virginia, USA
The article cites two Richmond area criminal defense attorneys by name, one of them is Matt Rawls. Here is another cut-and-paste from the article:

Here’s a hypothetical example to distinguish the laws in the two states. Imagine a person approaches you on the sidewalk and tries to steal your wallet. They have no weapon. In Florida, you are allowed to shoot them because they are committing the forcible felony of robbery. However, Virginia does not afford you that same automatic legal privilege to use lethal force. “Remember,” says Rawls, “you must have a reasonable fear of death or great bodily harm in order to use lethal force. Just because someone wants to steal your wallet, doesn’t mean you have a reasonable fear they’re going to kill you. And if they don’t have a weapon, it’s difficult to establish your reasonable fear in the situation.”

Robbery is theft with the implied or actual use of force or violence in commission of the crime. (I welcome corrections to this from those more knowledgeable than myself).

And since robbery is one of the five felonies for which force can be used, up to and including deadly force to repel it, I fail to see where one could not pull their gun in the face of robbery in Virginia. What else would one be expected to do? Just hand over their wallet and wish the perp a good day?

And then there is this. How would you know they are not armed if they are attempting to rob you? The fact that they may not be armed is not important. What is important is your perception that their action is predicated upon the fact that they are armed.
 
Last edited:

skidmark

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jan 15, 2007
Messages
10,444
Location
Valhalla
Just because someone wants to steal your wallet, doesn’t mean you have a reasonable fear they’re going to kill you. And if they don’t have a weapon, it’s difficult to establish your reasonable fear in the situation.

Bovine scat!

I walk up to you and say "Give me your wallet." I am not your parent, your spouse, or your friend who wants to help you get your DL out to show the nice policeman, or the like. That's Robbery. Additional details of the encounter may or may not cause a reasonable and prudent person to conclude that they were in imminent danger of death or serious bodily harm. Tone of voice will be one of those details, as will body language.

I walk up to you with one hand in my pocket and say "Give me your wallet, or else." A reasonable and prudent person could conclude that you had your hand on a weapon hidden in your pocket, and thus that they were in imminent danger of death or serious bodily harm. That's Armed Robbery.

I walk up to you with a big stick in my hand and say "Give me your wallet." A reasonable and prudent person could conclude that they were in imminent danger of death or serious bodily harm. That's Armed Robbery.

I walk up to you and shove a gun in your face, saying "Give me your wallet." You laugh and tell me I don't have the guts to shoot you. That's natural selection in action. (OK, not really. But maybe it ought to be.:uhoh:)

stay safe.
 

BillB

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
200
Location
NOVA
I've sent an email to Matt Rawls asking him if he would support his contention. I also provided a link to this thread and invited him to join it if he desired.
 

TFred

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 13, 2008
Messages
7,750
Location
Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
Virginia Duty to Retreat?

"Experts" are coming out of the woodwork, it would seem. This time, State Senator Richard Stewart, of Stafford, extensively quoted in a Monday article of the Free Lance-Star regarding self defense law in Virginia.

Senator Stuart claims that in Virginia, we have a duty to retreat. First I've ever heard that claim. I posted an e-mail to User, but I don't know if he is inclined to leave comments on the newspaper's website.

In Virginia, self-defense is clearly spelled out

“We do have a duty to retreat in Virginia,” Stuart added. “If you are threatened, and you have the ability to retreat and remove yourself from the threat, then you’ve got a responsibility to do that before you shoot to kill.”

Maybe my understanding is wrong, but if Stuart is wrong, it's extremely unfortunate that our law-makers would be mistaken about something so critically important.

TFred
 

SouthernBoy

Regular Member
Joined
May 12, 2007
Messages
5,837
Location
Western Prince William County, Virginia, USA
"Experts" are coming out of the woodwork, it would seem. This time, State Senator Richard Stewart, of Stafford, extensively quoted in a Monday article of the Free Lance-Star regarding self defense law in Virginia.

Senator Stuart claims that in Virginia, we have a duty to retreat. First I've ever heard that claim. I posted an e-mail to User, but I don't know if he is inclined to leave comments on the newspaper's website.

In Virginia, self-defense is clearly spelled out

“We do have a duty to retreat in Virginia,” Stuart added. “If you are threatened, and you have the ability to retreat and remove yourself from the threat, then you’ve got a responsibility to do that before you shoot to kill.”

Maybe my understanding is wrong, but if Stuart is wrong, it's extremely unfortunate that our law-makers would be mistaken about something so critically important.

TFred

He's wrong, plain and simple. Virginia is a "true man state" (user's words). As long as we have a legal right to be where we are and are not party to the instigation or escalation of an incident, we may stand our ground. This man is confusing situations where someone is part of the problem (verbal fisticuffs, flipping the bird, etc.). In such a situation, you must retreat, telling your antagonist that you do not wish to fight, until you can no longer retreat in safety. At that point, you regain the vale of innocence (not a legal term) and may use deadly force if necessary.
 
Last edited:

peter nap

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Oct 16, 2007
Messages
13,551
Location
Valhalla
He's wrong, plain and simple. Virginia is a "true man state" (user's words). As long as we have a legal right to be where we are and are not party to the instigation or escalation of an incident, we may stand our ground. This man is confusing situations where someone is]/i] part of the problem (verbal fisticuffs, flipping the bird, etc.). In such a situation, you must retreat, telling your antagonist that you do not wish to fight, until you can no longer retreat in safety. At that point, you regain the vale of innocence (not a legal term) and may use deadly force is necessary.


Gee....a politician not knowing the law.:uhoh:

Joe Morrissey, who among other things (Mostly bad), prides himself on his environmental bills....was just fined a thousand bucks for building a flood wall at his home on the river. He said he didn't think he needed a permit.:lol::lol:
 

AtackDuck

Regular Member
Joined
May 21, 2006
Messages
214
Location
King George, Virginia, USA
Dan is there

"Experts" are coming out of the woodwork, it would seem. This time, State Senator Richard Stewart, of Stafford, extensively quoted in a Monday article of the Free Lance-Star regarding self defense law in Virginia.

Senator Stuart claims that in Virginia, we have a duty to retreat. First I've ever heard that claim. I posted an e-mail to User, but I don't know if he is inclined to leave comments on the newspaper's website.

In Virginia, self-defense is clearly spelled out

“We do have a duty to retreat in Virginia,” Stuart added. “If you are threatened, and you have the ability to retreat and remove yourself from the threat, then you’ve got a responsibility to do that before you shoot to kill.”

Maybe my understanding is wrong, but if Stuart is wrong, it's extremely unfortunate that our law-makers would be mistaken about something so critically important.

TFred

Dan Hawes has a vey well written comment on the article. I was quite disappointed in my senator (Stuart) saying "duty to retreat" is the law in Virginia. Dan straightens that out.
 

peter nap

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Oct 16, 2007
Messages
13,551
Location
Valhalla
Dan Hawes has a vey well written comment on the article. I was quite disappointed in my senator (Stuart) saying "duty to retreat" is the law in Virginia. Dan straightens that out.

I'm not sure if I'd rather have Dan become a Judge, Senator or remain the protector of the innocent. It'd be nice if we could clone him!
 

peter nap

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Oct 16, 2007
Messages
13,551
Location
Valhalla
Ever notice how much he looks like Santa Claus?


(Good Lord, I hope I didn't just dig a hole for myself with that.)

Skid looks like Santa. Dan looks more like the Father Winter :eek:

images
 
Last edited:
Top