Kansas .... Castle Doctrine & using deadly force

Kansas .... Castle Doctrine & using deadly force

This is a discussion on Kansas .... Castle Doctrine & using deadly force within the Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; I have to give a thanks to our legislature on this one. I point this out because it points out how you have to watch ...

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 20

Thread: Kansas .... Castle Doctrine & using deadly force

  1. #1
    VIP Member Array Eagleks's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Kansas
    Posts
    7,874

    Kansas .... Castle Doctrine & using deadly force

    I have to give a thanks to our legislature on this one. I point this out because it points out how you have to watch the "holes" in the law, and what the Legislature meant is not necessary how a Judge will interpret it.

    In a case here, the person drew his gun ... but did not fire it ... because the "threat terminated" at that point. So, he was arrested and was not allowed to use self-defense as an argument in his defense and was convicted for aggravated assault (pointing a gun at someone and threatening them with it). The Judge said, the "law" did not permit pointing a gun to terminate a threat, only shooting it.

    The Legislature passed the following .... unanimiously.... 100% YES and sent to the Govenor for his signature. The new law says that IF you pull a gun because you feel you or another's life is threatened with deadly force or with great bodily harm, and if the threat terminates at that point you are NOT quilty of a crime. The key, they also made it retroactive ... so the conviction on the person found guilty would be automatically reversed and dismissed.


    The Governor's turn - KSCCW.com Forum

    On Tuesday, March 30, the Kansas State Senate unanimously passed Senate Bill 381(http://www.kslegislature.org/bills/2010/381.pdf). This bill, commonly known as “castle doctrine legislation,” would make important corrections to Kansas’ current self-defense statute. The bill now moves to the desk of Governor Mark Parkinson (D) for his consideration.
    The recent Kansas Supreme Court Ruling in State v. Hendrix stated that if a person threatens force instead of actually using deadly force, the individual is not entitled to a self-defense jury instruction and could be charged with aggravated assault. The ruling was applied to an individual who threatened force (but never discharged the firearm), when his fiancée was assaulted and was subsequently charged and given a felony conviction. He is now a prohibited person for exercising his god-given right of self-defense.
    NRA has diligently worked with the legislature in both chambers to make sure that Kansas citizens’ self defense rights are clearly articulated to minimize the chances that the State Supreme Court will misinterpret the legislature's intent.


  2. #2
    Senior Member Array Gun Bunny's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    IN
    Posts
    759
    That sucks for this fellow! Sounds like the court ruined this mans life just to prove or make a point!!!
    Kahr CW9
    Sig P239/9mm
    Ruger LC9 (when the girlfriend lets me carry her gun)


    "First Duty is To Remember"

  3. #3
    VIP Member Array Eagleks's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Kansas
    Posts
    7,874
    Yep, the Judge was really saying, if you pull it you better use it. I don't think people at times read what's "not said" in the laws (the holes) and how that could be used or interpreted.

    The argument, "well, everyone knows what they meant".... uh, want to bet your future on that one ?

  4. #4
    VIP Member Array sgtD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Kansas
    Posts
    2,292
    Quote Originally Posted by Eagleks View Post
    Yep, the Judge was really saying, if you pull it you better use it. I don't think people at times read what's "not said" in the laws (the holes) and how that could be used or interpreted.

    The argument, "well, everyone knows what they meant".... uh, want to bet your future on that one ?
    lol, no one knows what the heck they meant. some judges don't even care what the legislature meant if the judge can twist the actual text to mean what they want it to say, then that becomes the law instead. They are lawyers and that is what they are trained to do.

    Legislative intent is actually one of the least persuasive methods of covincing a court and a true "texualist" judge will not even listen to it. Of course there is good reason for it. Legislative history is spotty and written by aides who often have an axe to grind and thus get things into the legislative record that distort the true intent of the majority of the legislative body. Thus textualists say, "the best thing we have to go with is the language that actually passed and if the legislature doesn't like it they can rewrite the law, but we have to go with what we have on the books now." Seems to be the case here.
    Last edited by sgtD; April 2nd, 2010 at 12:42 PM.
    When you've got 'em by the balls, their hearts & minds will follow. Semper Fi.

  5. #5
    Member Array sammage's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Wichita, KS
    Posts
    186
    Good stuff, now to get it signed.

  6. #6
    Member Array KSDeputy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    NE KS
    Posts
    90

    Smile Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions

    We must hope Gov. Parkinson will sign it. I just sent him an e-mail asking him to do just that. I urge all KS residents to do so too.

  7. #7
    Member Array doctruptwn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Kansas
    Posts
    281
    Already sent mine to him. It passed with such numbers however that a Gov. Veto would just be over ruled but it s the principle.
    Kansas Concealed Carry Website

    NRA/Ks. Firearms instructor
    Cheif Range Safety Officer

  8. #8
    VIP Member Array crzy4guns's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Kansas
    Posts
    2,637
    Quote Originally Posted by Eagleks View Post
    Yep, the Judge was really saying, if you pull it you better use it. I don't think people at times read what's "not said" in the laws (the holes) and how that could be used or interpreted.

    The argument, "well, everyone knows what they meant".... uh, want to bet your future on that one ?
    How true, how true, I am glad you brought all this to light!
    God bless our troops!

  9. #9
    VIP Member Array Eagleks's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Kansas
    Posts
    7,874
    Parkinson's statement was; he was against passage of ANY conceal carry laws in the first place.

  10. #10
    VIP Member Array ccw9mm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    28,324
    Quote Originally Posted by sgtD View Post
    lol, no one knows what the heck they meant. some judges don't even care what the legislature meant if the judge can twist the actual text to mean what they want it to say, then that becomes the law instead. They are lawyers and that is what they are trained to do.
    That's right.

    Convictions win Brownie Points. Nothing else does. And that sets an entire array of ugly side-effects in motion.

    A very wise person once suggested that, early in my days of carrying for defense. It explains much, to see our "legal" (not "justice") system through such a lens.
    Your best weapon is your brain. Don't leave home without it.
    Thoughts: Justifiable self defense (A.O.J.).
    Explain: How does disarming victims reduce the number of victims?
    Reason over Force: The Gun is Civilization (Marko Kloos).
    NRA, SAF, GOA, OFF, ACLDN.

  11. #11
    Member Array mossweed's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Wichita, Ks.
    Posts
    15
    This thread is more then 2 years old. Hasn't Kansas changed the wording on this? Thought i read where it was all cleared up and no chance of a Judge misinterpreting it? Could someone that knows clarifly this? Thanks. Well i re read the first post and it sounds like the govenor must have signed off of this 2 years ago so it's not a problem now I hope?

  12. #12
    Senior Member Array sdprof's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Near the Black Hills of SD
    Posts
    1,157
    If you follow the linked thread, the Gov. did sign the law, on the last possible day.
    ~~~~~
    The only common sense gun legislation was written about 224 years ago.

    I carry always not because I go places trouble is likely, but because trouble has a habit of not staying in its assigned zone.

  13. #13
    VIP Member Array SmokinFool's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    2,297
    It's sad that this had to even be an issue. Sometimes common sense needs a little help from the lawmakers. I'm glad it has been addressed.

  14. #14
    VIP Member Array Eagleks's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Kansas
    Posts
    7,874
    Quote Originally Posted by mossweed View Post
    This thread is more then 2 years old. Hasn't Kansas changed the wording on this? Thought i read where it was all cleared up and no chance of a Judge misinterpreting it? Could someone that knows clarifly this? Thanks. Well i re read the first post and it sounds like the govenor must have signed off of this 2 years ago so it's not a problem now I hope?
    Yes, the Legislature fixed it.....
    I don't make jokes. I just watch the government and report the facts. --- Will Rogers ---
    Chief Justice John Roberts : "I don't see how you can read Heller and not take away from it the notion that the Second Amendment...was extremely important to the framers in their view of what liberty meant."

  15. #15
    VIP Member
    Array ANGLICO's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    I'm the guy next door that is polite, but does not tell you crap.
    Posts
    3,947
    Awesome! Thanks for sharing this.

    It is very rare these days that you see politicians doing the right thing.
    Socialism Kills! Time proven, with a very large body count! We are a Constitutional Republic....... not a Democracy, get it correct!

    Don't be mistaken for a Gecko45: http://lonelymachines.org/mall-ninjas/

    Watch: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=14qTdp-Dd30

    ANGLICO Images

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Sponsored 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
  •  

Similar Threads

  1. Kansas Governor Signs Castle Doctrine Clean Up Bill
    By kccad in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: April 20th, 2010, 09:59 PM
  2. Va Castle Doctrine?
    By Flippinstk in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: January 6th, 2008, 12:55 PM
  3. Castle Doctrine in MS
    By FLSquirrelHunter in forum In the News: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: September 30th, 2007, 02:55 PM
  4. PA Castle Doctrine
    By tryzub in forum Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: August 18th, 2006, 07:42 PM
  5. Castle Doctorine & Deadly Force or "Please Don't Shoot Me On Duty!"
    By Mark Garrity in forum Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions
    Replies: 73
    Last Post: August 9th, 2006, 08:53 AM

Search tags for this page

castle doctrine in kansas
,

castle doctrine kansas

,
castle law in kansas
,
castle law kansas
,

kansas castle doctrine

,
kansas castle doctrine law
,
kansas castle doctrine laws
,

kansas castle law

,
kansas castle law doctrine
,
kansas castle laws
,
kansas deadly force laws
,
ks castle law
Click on a term to search for related topics.