Ohio Castle Doctrine Through the Eyes of the Police and Prosecution

Ohio Castle Doctrine Through the Eyes of the Police and Prosecution

This is a discussion on Ohio Castle Doctrine Through the Eyes of the Police and Prosecution within the Carry & Defensive Scenarios forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; What is Castle Doctrine and how does it apply to me? | The Marion Star | marionstar.com Not a bad read from some folks at ...

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 18
Like Tree1Likes

Thread: Ohio Castle Doctrine Through the Eyes of the Police and Prosecution

  1. #1
    VIP Member
    Array Mike1956's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Marion County, Ohio
    Posts
    10,683

    Ohio Castle Doctrine Through the Eyes of the Police and Prosecution



  2. #2
    Distinguished Member Array kelcarry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    charleston, SC
    Posts
    1,876
    Quote Originally Posted by Mike1956 View Post
    Read the article and have no problem with comments except for the second paragraph that says "trying to enter the house" followed by "but not attempting to enter". Wish I understood how you can "try"without "attempting".
    Bottom line comes down to "imminent danger", "no retreat" and, probably most important is "your state's case law" particularly at the local prosecutorial level---ie: how have they ruled on these kind of cases in the past?, and is there a seemingly pro opinion by the prosecutor when it comes to home invasion? In SC it is pretty clear--we value castle doctrine 100%--you invade someone's home you better have life insurance for your surviving family. I am sure other states have your more hypocritical lawmakers--ya know the ones that either do not want this or pass it reluctantly with provisions BUT ARE ARMED TO THE TEETH IN THEIR OWN HOMES TO PROTECT THEMSELVES.

  3. #3
    VIP Member
    Array oneshot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    +42.893612,-082.710236 , Mi.
    Posts
    8,177
    Quote Originally Posted by kelcarry View Post
    Read the article and have no problem with comments except for the second paragraph that says "trying to enter the house" followed by "but not attempting to enter". Wish I understood how you can "try"without "attempting". Bottom line comes down to "imminent danger", "no retreat" and, probably most important is "your state's case law" particularly at the local prosecutorial level---ie: how have they ruled on these kind of cases in the past?, and is there a seemingly pro opinion by the prosecutor when it comes to home invasion? In SC it is pretty clear--we value castle doctrine 100%--you invade someone's home you better have life insurance for your surviving family. I am sure other states have your more hypocritical lawmakers--ya know the ones that either do not want this or pass it reluctantly with provisions BUT ARE ARMED TO THE TEETH IN THEIR OWN HOMES TO PROTECT THEMSELVES.


    ^^^^^^^Here is the paragraph^^^^^^^^^^

    in its entirety.
    I believe you maybe misunderstood the way they had it worded kelcarry.


    From article;
    The person has to be trying to enter your home. If someone is on your property, but not attempting to enter your home, you need to call the police so they can be charged with criminal trespassing. You cannot use deadly force.

    What the law is saying is, if somebody is On Your Property BUT NOT trying to enter your residence, you cannot shoot them.

    Good read for Ohioans, but whoever Maj. Collins is, his thought process would scare me.
    The County prosecuting Atty. sounds as though he's got his head on straight though, as evidenced by the two sentences below from the article;

    It is an affirmative defense provision, said Brent Yager, Marion County prosecutor. "It says that if you find someone breaking into your car or home, you can use deadly force."

    Maj. Bill Collins said the Castle Doctrine basically says "someone has to be in fear for their life, or someone else's life, in order to use deadly force."


    He sounds as though you would have to wait until the house-crashers are beating or killing you or yours.
    Mighty dangerous thought process.
    If somebody I don't know is breaking into my house uninvited, they should expect lots of resistence from the get-go.
    soada101 likes this.
    If you want to make God laugh, tell him your plans.

    Washington didn't use his freedom of speech to defeat the British, He shot them!

    Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it whether it exists or not, diagnosing it incorrectly, and applying the wrong remedy." -- Ernest Benn

  4. #4
    VIP Member
    Array Mike1956's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Marion County, Ohio
    Posts
    10,683
    Quote Originally Posted by kelcarry View Post
    Read the article and have no problem with comments except for the second paragraph that says "trying to enter the house" followed by "but not attempting to enter". Wish I understood how you can "try"without "attempting".
    From the article: "The person has to be trying to enter your home. If someone is on your property, but not attempting to enter your home, you need to call the police so they can be charged with criminal trespassing. You cannot use deadly force."
    That seems clear enough to me. One cannot use deadly force on the guy walking around in the yard.

  5. #5
    VIP Member Array nedrgr21's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Midwest
    Posts
    3,641
    The prosecutor should rephrase that - sounds like if you look outside to find someone breaking into your car you can open fire. I really doubt that's the case.

  6. #6
    Distinguished Member Array kelcarry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    charleston, SC
    Posts
    1,876
    Hey repliers: I got it on trying and attempting. The words in the video leave a bit to question. I would assume that we can all be on the same page of understanding the law if someone is attempting to breakdown your door who is not suppose to be there and your presumption, as a reasonable person, is that if you wait to see them once the door has been defeated, you will be in more imminent danger than you already believe you are in---in other words you have every right to shoot them thru the door. May come down to case law and prosecutorial decisions in your area but in SC--do not screw around at peoples' homes--you will die.

  7. #7
    VIP Member Array dukalmighty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    texas
    Posts
    15,179
    Quote Originally Posted by nedrgr21 View Post
    The prosecutor should rephrase that - sounds like if you look outside to find someone breaking into your car you can open fire. I really doubt that's the case.
    I realise your talking about Ohio's Laws,but in Texas at night if somebody is breaking into your car you CAN use deadly force.
    But like a lot of people have pointed out,do you really want to shoot somebody that isn't an imminent threat to your life.
    "Outside of the killings, Washington has one of the lowest crime rates in the country,"
    --Mayor Marion Barry, Washington , DC .

  8. #8
    VIP Member Array JDE101's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    6,577
    Pretty good article, considering. Glad to see more publicity about Ohio's castle doctrine. A few days ago, a Dayton home owner shot and killed an 18 year old woman who broke into his home and "threw something at him". News papers didn't say what she threw, but he was cleared of any charges. Good shoot! One less scumbag to enter the revolving jail system and come back out to break into someone elses home. BTW, it wasn't her first time breaking into someone's house.
    Live to ride, ride to live. Harley Road King And keep a .45 handy Kimber Custom TLE II

  9. #9
    Distinguished Member Array kelcarry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    charleston, SC
    Posts
    1,876
    Quote Originally Posted by dukalmighty View Post
    I realise your talking about Ohio's Laws,but in Texas at night if somebody is breaking into your car you CAN use deadly force.
    But like a lot of people have pointed out,do you really want to shoot somebody that isn't an imminent threat to your life.
    In SC we go one step further, at night. If you presume someone has committing a felony (view, have information of a felony, or view larceny), has entered a dwelling house without permission, has broken into or is breaking into an accessory house to plunder, has possession of stolen property or being under circumstances which raise just suspicion of his design to steal or to commit a felony, and affect a citizens arrest and they try to evade your arrest, you can use any means possible including death to stop the evasion of the arrest. Believe this was written way before cars but covers an awful lot of ground.

  10. #10
    Distinguished Member Array DontTreadOnI's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    1,442
    Quote Originally Posted by nedrgr21 View Post
    The prosecutor should rephrase that - sounds like if you look outside to find someone breaking into your car you can open fire. I really doubt that's the case.
    I noticed that also. The way it is stated it is untrue, you or someone else would have to be in the car and fearing for your life for that wording to be correct.
    If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude than the animated contest of freedom, go from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.

  11. #11
    Senior Member Array Crescentstar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    582
    Montgomery County (Dayton, Ohio) has been pretty liberal with the Castle Doctrine. As mentioned earlier, they just cleared the shooting of a woman committing a burglary last week.

    The case I found interesting was a few months ago. A known drug dealer was in his car making a deal when his customer tried to rob him. The dealer shot the guy and was cleared. I was surprised that they applied the Castle Doctrine when the shooter was engaged in criminal activity at the time, but they cited his being in his car and being robbed at gunpoint.

    The guy did what he had to do, I guess, but I don't like seeing cases like that. It will surely lead to challenges to the Castle Doctrine that could affect more legitimate victims.

  12. #12
    Senior Member Array The Old Anglo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Orlando,Fl
    Posts
    691
    The guy`s right,we all need to pay attention OR have a LARGE fund to pay the lawyers. How many of us can afford to put 5-10 grand UPFRONT for the legal hassles??. Think about it. Here in Florida,Castle Doctrine rules BUT you better have it right!.

  13. #13
    Distinguished Member Array kelcarry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    charleston, SC
    Posts
    1,876
    Quote Originally Posted by DontTreadOnI View Post
    I noticed that also. The way it is stated it is untrue, you or someone else would have to be in the car and fearing for your life for that wording to be correct.
    If this is at night in SC, you can affect a citizens arrest and if the BG runs, you can shoot him in the back. Kindly read my reply #9.

  14. #14
    Member Array lordofwyr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Austin, Texas
    Posts
    306
    There will always be caveats to every law and situation, especially when deadly force is used, so no District Attorney can (or will) say positively that any shooting is justified until all the facts are in on each individual case.

    If someone is trying to break into your home (a car is not worth shooting someone unless you or a loved one is inside it, then shoot away if necessary) and there is time, I always recommend getting 911 on the line, even if it is to set the phone down and let them record your shouts at the bad guy(s) to go away, that you are armed and will shoot them if they break in, that the cops have been called, etc. Nothing like having a recorded event to show you tried everything you could to warn them off.

    I say lay the phone down because I do not recommend trying to hold a gun and a phone. If you are distracted by the 911 operator, your mind will get caught up with too much multitasking and you might have a time lag just when you need to act.

    And remember, you might not be the best shot in the world, but if you cannot hit the area the size of a doorway/entryway at inside the house distances, perhaps you should be hitting the gun range more often and getting professional training. Never let them get past the doorway, because then they become a moving target inside an open area and are harder to hit. Police call the doorway "The Fatal Funnel" for a reason.
    Fortune Favors the Bold!

  15. #15
    Distinguished Member Array kelcarry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    charleston, SC
    Posts
    1,876
    Quote Originally Posted by lordofwyr View Post
    There will always be caveats to every law and situation, especially when deadly force is used, so no District Attorney can (or will) say positively that any shooting is justified until all the facts are in on each individual case.

    If someone is trying to break into your home (a car is not worth shooting someone unless you or a loved one is inside it, then shoot away if necessary) and there is time, I always recommend getting 911 on the line, even if it is to set the phone down and let them record your shouts at the bad guy(s) to go away, that you are armed and will shoot them if they break in, that the cops have been called, etc. Nothing like having a recorded event to show you tried everything you could to warn them off.

    I say lay the phone down because I do not recommend trying to hold a gun and a phone. If you are distracted by the 911 operator, your mind will get caught up with too much multitasking and you might have a time lag just when you need to act.

    And remember, you might not be the best shot in the world, but if you cannot hit the area the size of a doorway/entryway at inside the house distances, perhaps you should be hitting the gun range more often and getting professional training. Never let them get past the doorway, because then they become a moving target inside an open area and are harder to hit. Police call the doorway "The Fatal Funnel" for a reason.
    Case law and recent prosecutor decisions on shooting someone who is in the process of doing something that a reasonable person would assume is larceny around a truck AT NIGHT in SC after attempting a citizens arrest is clear and unmistakeable. Not for me but it has happened more than once.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Search tags for this page

can i kill someone who breaks in my house in ohio
,
can i shoot someone breaking into my house in ohio
,

can i shoot someone in my house in ohio

,
can i shoot someone on my property in ohio
,
can you shoot people for breaking into your house in the state of ohio
,
can you shoot someone breaking into your car in ohio
,
can you shoot someone for breaking into your car in ohio
,
can you shoot someone on your property in ohio
,
if somebody breaks in yoir house in ohio can you shoot them
,

if someone breaks into your house can you shoot them in ohio

,
in ohio can i shoot someone who breaks into my house?
,
ohio castle doctrine
Click on a term to search for related topics.

» Log in

User Name:

Password:

Not a member yet?
Register Now!

» DefensiveCarry Sponsors