Ohio man claims castle in car gun case

This is a discussion on Ohio man claims castle in car gun case within the Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; I guess I'm driving from now on! From Ohio AG CHL Handbook: via Tapatalk...

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 35
Like Tree31Likes

Thread: Ohio man claims castle in car gun case

  1. #16
    Member Array eeeZnow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Location, Location
    Posts
    78
    I guess I'm driving from now on! From Ohio AG CHL Handbook:


    via Tapatalk
    "They have gun control in Cuba. They have universal health care in Cuba. So why do they want to come here?" ~ Paul Harvey

  2. Remove Ads

  3. #17
    Distinguished Member Array Burns's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Oshkosh, Wisconsin
    Posts
    1,330
    "He was fined $100 and ordered to stay away from the other man."

    Ordered to stay away from the man who tried to open the door of his girls car? What is this world coming to?
    Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable- JFK

  4. #18
    Moderator
    Array buckeye .45's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    7,396
    Quote Originally Posted by luvmy40 View Post
    I'll double down on everything that buckeye.45 said and add that it really doesn't surprise me that this occurred in one of the 3Cs(Cleveland, Columbus and Cincinnati), The worst liberal, anti 2A areas in a fairly liberal state. We have made great progress in the last decade in the 2A area but for all that, Ohio is a Dem. stronghold.

    In my neck of the woods(very rural) the local constabulary would have chastised me for not beating the hell out of someone who tried to open my car door uninvited.
    Actually, although the City of Cincinnati tends to be rather liberal in some regards, the Hamilton County Prosecutor, Joe Deters, is not. He seems to be a firm believer in Castle Doctrine/Self Defense, and has refused to take several even high profile cases to the grand jury because they were good shoots. At least this is the impression I get from studying such cases when they come up in the area. There is also an interesting read about him and the death penalty in the Enquirer currently.
    Fortes Fortuna Juvat

    Former, USMC 0311, OIF/OEF vet
    NRA Pistol/Rifle/Shotgun/Reloading Instructor, RSO, Ohio CHL Instructor

  5. #19
    VIP Member
    Array Mike1956's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Marion County, Ohio
    Posts
    9,069
    It appears the defendant failed to convince the judge that his belief he was under an attack which merited the use of deadly force was honest and reasonable.
    buckeye .45 likes this.
    "Who are the ones that we kept in charge? Killers, thieves, and lawyers"

    Tom Waits, God's Away on Business

  6. #20
    Distinguished Member Array mr.stuart's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    usa-southeast texas
    Posts
    1,645
    Probably a lot more to this story than we know- "The odd twist is the car’s owner, Sarah Geers, knew both men – she was Edward’s girlfriend and Taylor’s ex-girlfriend. Both men testified at Edward’s November trial they didn’t know each other at the time." When you involve love,lost love,jealousy and all that mess,you just never know what might happen. Seems like the girlfriend would really press the issue that the current boyfriend did not point the weapon at anyone. Maybe she ain't so sweet.
    Pain is the best teacher,but nobody wants to go to his class.


    When the past smothers the present, there is only desperation. When the future absorbs the present, life stands still. In either case a decision must be made because you only live now and you are only what you are now.

  7. #21
    VIP Member Array Eagleks's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Kansas
    Posts
    7,411
    Here, they were about to pass the Castle Doctrine, and then went in and added some extra to it... then passed it. The "extra" was, the Castle Doctrine extends to any vehicle you are legally in, and someone attempts to enter it illegally or without permission. In other words, it would be no different legally... than if they were illegally entering your home while it was occupied. It is assumed under the law, that if you enter a house or vehicle illegally while it is occupied, then you mean the occupants harm.

    I'm glad they did what they did, it took some "question" out of things and made them much clearer.
    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."

  8. #22
    Senior Member Array Chad Rogers's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Metro DC
    Posts
    958
    Under no circumstances would I have ever gone out with this woman to begin with:

    The odd twist is the car’s owner, Sarah Geers, knew both men – she was Edward’s girlfriend and Taylor’s ex-girlfriend. Both men testified at Edward’s November trial they didn’t know each other at the time.
    "People who take an Internet handle of a great warrior, are usually the first to go fetal when crunch time comes." - Me

  9. #23
    Senior Member Array Chad Rogers's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Metro DC
    Posts
    958
    For all you folks who sit up at night dreaming of ways you can justifiably pull out your heater, scratch this scenario from the list.
    "People who take an Internet handle of a great warrior, are usually the first to go fetal when crunch time comes." - Me

  10. #24
    VIP Member Array ccw9mm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    24,161
    Quote Originally Posted by mr.stuart View Post
    Probably a lot more to this story than we know
    All I've seen is the appeals court claim on "Castle" applicability, not the original case.

    OH AG CHL Handbook:

    However, being a lawful occupant of a residence or vehicle is not a license to use deadly force against an attacker. The person who is attacked, without fault of his own, may use deadly force only if he reasonably and honestly believed that deadly force was necessary to prevent serious bodily harm or death.
    Fairly standard stuff, that. There still must be an attack, it presumes a breach of barriers (else it's not really imminent), and there must be a reasonable and credible threat of death or serious injury. Lacking details, it's hard to comment on whether the statutes' requirements were met in this guy's case.


    As for the "Castle" claim, it sure does seem ludicrous that a person has a right to defend against deadly attack in one's own car but not in another's, as if a deadliness of an attack has somehow changed into something else merely because of location.


    Has anyone found a link to details on the original case??
    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, GOA, OFF, ACLDN.

  11. #25
    VIP Member Array Badey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Posts
    2,562
    Quote Originally Posted by Chad Rogers View Post
    For all you folks who sit up at night dreaming of ways you can justifiably pull out your heater, scratch this scenario from the list.
    Well, we don't have all the details, just one side of the story from a journalist's point of view. You may be correct, but you may not be correct.
    "All you need for happiness is a good gun, a good horse, and a good wife." - Daniel Boone

  12. #26
    VIP Member Array JDE101's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    6,053
    The articles don't really give a whole lot of details. Too many questions remain. As an Ohio resident, I'm really interested in how this one turns out. I guess in the future, I'll be sure to drive my own truck or my wife's car! I don't intend to ride with any friends in their vehicles unless they also carry--then it would be up to them to protect us from potential carjackers while I just sit back and watch. I guess all I could do legally would be to call 911, since I wouldn't be covered by the law if I were to draw my own weapon. However, if the carjacker managed to get the door open, had a weapon and was about to kill or inflict grave bodily harm on the occupants of the vehicle, then I could draw my weapon and shoot them "to stop the threat" and I wouldn't have to rely on "castle doctrine" at all!
    Live to ride, ride to live. Harley Road King And keep a .45 handy Kimber Custom TLE II

  13. #27
    Member Array Doubledown's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Posts
    301
    I guess the way I see this you do not need to justify anything by proving deadly intent of the person attempting entry. As I asked (rhetorically) earlier how long do you need to wait before you begin to draw your weapon?

    Now I am asking for real. If you were the one sitting in the car engrossed in a phone conversation and you were surprised by an adult male attempting to enter your vehicle.

    Option one: you sit there and wait to see if the individual continues to try to gain entry.

    Option two: as stated earlier by another post even if he gains entry he does not have a weapon visible so you still wait to see what his intent is.

    Option three: when the individual attempts to gain entry you change position in the seat and access your weapon, either drawing the weapon or keeping your hand on the grip.

    Of course if it is some little old lady that mistakes your car for hers no real threat no response. An unknown adult male attempting to gain entry to my car I have to assume he is not trying to get in and chat about the weather. He may see a weapon.

    I think an interesting study would be to sit in a car with your carry gun (UNLOADED) and have someone enter the vehicle from the other side. Now try to draw your gun and get on target before the other person is on top of you. Since you know it is going to happen you may have a chance but add in a second or more to account for the surprise/startle reaction and I say there is no way you get to an IWB in a standard 3-4 o'clock position.

    This seems to me to justify the draw or exposing of a weapon upon the attempt at entry.

    I am sure I will get flamed with people saying they carry cross draw in the car, special holsters, etc. Keep the focus on the info at hand, you are driving another persons car so you are carrying as you normally do. How long will you wait to determine the intent. Not shoot and kill the person but draw and prepare.

  14. #28
    Distinguished Member Array kapnketel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Northern Kentucky
    Posts
    1,709
    The 1st District like the Supreme Court in Ohio is pretty conservative, so let's hope for a god decision. BTW, Joe Deter's mother in law is a jusge in that appellate court.
    I'd rather be lucky than good any day

    There's nothing that will change someone's moral outlook quicker than cash in large sums.

    Majority rule only works if you're also considering individual rights. Because you can't have five wolves and one sheep voting on what to have for supper.

  15. #29
    Ex Member Array apvbguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    NE FL
    Posts
    1,076
    Quote Originally Posted by HCF View Post
    Ohio Man Claims 'Castle Doctrine' In Car Gun Case | NBC 4i

    What's your thoughts? Man was riding with gf when a guy walked up and tried to open his door. He pulled his gun but didn't use it and was charged menacing and $100. He's licensed ccw holder
    without knowing ALL the details and not watching the link offered I'd say that it was wrong that he was charged, in FLA your castle is anywhere you happen to be, so obviously the castle provisions would protect you here, unless all the racists for hire get involved.

  16. #30
    Distinguished Member Array kelcarry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    charleston, SC
    Posts
    1,799
    Maybe that is the way the law works in nutcase states like Ohio, but try breaking into an occupied car in South Carolina---just try.

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 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

beating ccw case cincinnati
,
ccw court cases, ohio
,

ccw menacing

,
ccw ohio court cases
,

ccw ohio open display in car

,

gun case for car

,
gun cases ohio
,
how to beat ccw case
,

mnow with the castle doctrine can i have a gun in car when picking up child from school

,
ohio castle law unlocked vehicle
,
ohio court cases ccw self defense
,

ohio gun case law

Click on a term to search for related topics.