Hi from Thieveland, Ohydro
This is a discussion on Hi from Thieveland, Ohydro within the New Members Introduce Yourself forums, part of the DefensiveCarry.com Forum Office category; Welcome. I'm not familiar with your state's laws, but in Mississippi we have the "Castle Doctrine" which allows for defense of your home, business, or ...
July 26th, 2007 11:51 AM
Welcome. I'm not familiar with your state's laws, but in Mississippi we have the "Castle Doctrine" which allows for defense of your home, business, or occupied vehicle regardless of whether the perpetrator is armed. Regardless, when it comes to personal protection, you have to do what is in your and your family's best interest.
§ 97-3-15. Homicide; justifiable homicide; use of defensive force; duty to retreat.
(1) The killing of a human being by the act, procurement or omission of another shall be justifiable in the following cases:
(a) When committed by public officers, or those acting by their aid and assistance, in obedience to any judgment of a competent court;
(b) When necessarily committed by public officers, or those acting by their command in their aid and assistance, in overcoming actual resistance to the execution of some legal process, or to the discharge of any other legal duty;
(c) When necessarily committed by public officers, or those acting by their command in their aid and assistance, in retaking any felon who has been rescued or has escaped;
(d) When necessarily committed by public officers, or those acting by their command in their aid and assistance, in arresting any felon fleeing from justice;
(e) When committed by any person in resisting any attempt unlawfully to kill such person or to commit any felony upon him, or upon or in any dwelling, in any occupied vehicle, in any place of business, in any place of employment or in the immediate premises thereof in which such person shall be;
(f) When committed in the lawful defense of one's own person or any other human being, where there shall be reasonable ground to apprehend a design to commit a felony or to do some great personal injury, and there shall be imminent danger of such design being accomplished;
(g) When necessarily committed in attempting by lawful ways and means to apprehend any person for any felony committed;
(h) When necessarily committed in lawfully suppressing any riot or in lawfully keeping and preserving the peace.
(2) (a) As used in subsection (1)(c) and (d) of this section, the term "when necessarily committed" means that a public officer or a person acting by or at the officer's command, aid or assistance is authorized to use such force as necessary in securing and detaining the felon offender, overcoming the offender's resistance, preventing the offender's escape, recapturing the offender if the offender escapes or in protecting himself or others from bodily harm; but such officer or person shall not be authorized to resort to deadly or dangerous means when to do so would be unreasonable under the circumstances. The public officer or person acting by or at the officer's command may act upon a reasonable apprehension of the surrounding circumstances; however, such officer or person shall not use excessive force or force that is greater than reasonably necessary in securing and detaining the offender, overcoming the offender's resistance, preventing the offender's escape, recapturing the offender if the offender escapes or in protecting himself or others from bodily harm.
(b) As used in subsection (1)(c) and (d) of this section the term "felon" shall include an offender who has been convicted of a felony and shall also include an offender who is in custody, or whose custody is being sought, on a charge or for an offense which is punishable, upon conviction, by death or confinement in the Penitentiary.
(c) As used in subsections (1)(e) and (3) of this section, "dwelling" means a building or conveyance of any kind that has a roof over it, whether the building or conveyance is temporary or permanent, mobile or immobile, including a tent, that is designed to be occupied by people lodging therein at night, including any attached porch;
(3) A person who uses defensive force shall be presumed to have reasonably feared imminent death or great bodily harm, or the commission of a felony upon him or another or upon his dwelling, or against a vehicle which he was occupying, or against his business or place of employment or the immediate premises of such business or place of employment, if the person against whom the defensive force was used, was in the process of unlawfully and forcibly entering, or had unlawfully and forcibly entered, a dwelling, occupied vehicle, business, place of employment or the immediate premises thereof or if that person had unlawfully removed or was attempting to unlawfully remove another against the other person's will from that dwelling, occupied vehicle, business, place of employment or the immediate premises thereof and the person who used defensive force knew or had reason to believe that the forcible entry or unlawful and forcible act was occurring or had occurred. This presumption shall not apply if the person against whom defensive force was used has a right to be in or is a lawful resident or owner of the dwelling, vehicle, business, place of employment or the immediate premises thereof or is the lawful resident or owner of the dwelling, vehicle, business, place of employment or the immediate premises thereof or if the person who uses defensive force is engaged in unlawful activity or if the person is a law enforcement officer engaged in the performance of his official duties;
(4) A person who is not the initial aggressor and is not engaged in unlawful activity shall have no duty to retreat before using deadly force under subsection (1) (e) or (f) of this section if the person is in a place where the person has a right to be, and no finder of fact shall be permitted to consider the person's failure to retreat as evidence that the person's use of force was unnecessary, excessive or unreasonable.
(5) (a) The presumptions contained in subsection (3) of this section shall apply in civil cases in which self-defense or defense of another is claimed as a defense.
(b) The court shall award reasonable attorney's fees, court costs, compensation for loss of income, and all expenses incurred by the defendant in defense of any civil action brought by a plaintiff if the court finds that the defendant acted in accordance with subsection (1) (e) or (f) of this section. A defendant who has previously been adjudicated "not guilty" of any crime by reason of subsection (1) (e) or (f) of this section shall be immune from any civil action for damages arising from same conduct.
Sources: Codes, Hutchinson's 1848, ch. 64, art. 12, Title 3 (2); 1857, ch. 64, art. 168; 1871, § 2631; 1880, § 2878; 1892, § 1152; Laws, 1906, § 1230; Hemingway's 1917, § 960; Laws, 1930, § 988; Laws, 1942, § 2218; Laws, 1983, ch. 382; Laws, 2006, ch. 492, § 1, eff from and after July 1, 2006.
July 26th, 2007 12:02 PM
July 26th, 2007 12:16 PM
Welcome from Middle Tennessee!
July 26th, 2007 12:17 PM
Greetings, from pee-ay!
Chris - P95
NRA Certified Instructor & NRA Life Member.
"To own a gun and assume that you are armed
is like owning a piano and assuming that you are a musician!."
- a portal for 2A links, articles and some videos.
July 26th, 2007 12:53 PM
from Central Florida!
The last Blood Moon Tetrad for this millennium starts in April 2014 and ends in September 2015...according to NASA.
Certified Glock Armorer
NRA Life Member[/B]
July 26th, 2007 02:30 PM
"A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on."
- Sir Winston Churchill
July 26th, 2007 02:40 PM
quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
July 26th, 2007 03:55 PM
Welcome! I'm in KY now, but bleed scarlet and grey!
Shooting an intruder may get you in trouble if you answer the question 'was he armed' with 'no'. Like force is a sketchy thing, and you need to prove you were afraid for your life. You might be prepared for a huge effort to prove that during a drawn out investigation into your decision to use your gun. I've been told that if you do shoot, make it a lethal decision (as opposed to wounding), because the lawsuit that he guy comes back on you with will RUIN you!
Originally Posted by SIXTO
A man in the hands of his enemies is flesh, and shudderingly vulnerable. - author unknown
July 26th, 2007 05:30 PM
"To disarm the people is the best and most effective way to enslave them."
"Gun control is a job-safety program for criminals."
John R. Lott
July 26th, 2007 07:36 PM
Welcome from southern Louisiana!
July 26th, 2007 10:57 PM
Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the universe. Albert Einstein
July 27th, 2007 12:27 AM
welcome from Texas!
....check the laws for your state they are all different in regard to this scenario
Certified Glock Armorer
"I got a touch of hangover bureaucrat, don't push me"
Independence is declared; it must be maintained. Sam Houston-3/2/1836
If loose gun laws are good for criminals why do criminals support gun control?
July 27th, 2007 08:17 AM
"You can get more with a kind word and a gun than you can with a kind word alone." - Al Capone
The second amendment is the reset button of our Constitution.
July 27th, 2007 09:23 AM
Sixto sent me an email indicating that my advice was really bad. After looking at my post above, I realized that the sarcasm regarding 'shoot to kill' didn't come across. What I'm trying to say is that I've been told ALL SORTS of things about how to deal with this. It is probably a great idea to listen to someone who knows law, and I respectfully decline claim to anything of the sort.
Sixto, thanks for pointing that glaringly obvious gaff! Sorry, folks!
A man in the hands of his enemies is flesh, and shudderingly vulnerable. - author unknown
July 27th, 2007 10:18 AM
Welcome to DefensiveCarry, by the way!
Originally Posted by Toppers
If it's clearly an invasion and the threat/risk of violence is clear, you'll likely be fine. ARmed or not in a way you can positively confirm that? If the threat/risk of grave violence is there, it shouldn't make much difference. (Besides, how do you know for a fact he is unarmed ... merely because his hand is currently empty????) Check your state's laws and speak with your attorney, if in doubt.
Personally, I ... believe that the minute someone crosses into your threshold, it's life or death.
But if you're not being threatened, of course, the mere fact someone has just crossed the threshhold is very likely to not be sufficient cause to take a life. In such a case, you might have a very hard time explaining to and convincing that fine group on the Grand Jury that the taking of a life was necessary. I suggest reading up on your state's statutes regarding trespassing vs invasion, threatening/violent behavior, and the standards covering the use of lethal force. The legal standards by which you're expected to operate most definitely vary by state.
You're in Ohio. Ohio's going through growing pains, with respect to its firearms laws, so I haven't the first clue as to what your state's going to require of you in such a situation. Other Ohioans with qualified opinions (or your attorney) should be able to help you understand the limits and requirements.
Recall the trial of Bernard Goetz, whose stark philosophy about encounters (plus what he ostensibly saw/read in the eyes and behavior of his assailants) meant that most folks judging him saw a quick reaction from someone who had not overtly been threatened by a weapon. He spent a very long time attempting to convince those judging his actions of the sufficiency of what he saw in that situation that (in his mind) justified that quick and lethal response.
A decent place to start: Ability, Opportunity, Jeopardy, plus your state's laws and a discussion with your attorney about defense of your home vs defense of a person and when lethal force is to be deemed an acceptable option in your state.
Your best weapon is your brain. Don't leave home without it.
self defense (A.O.J.).
How does disarming
the number of victims?
Reason over Force: The Gun is Civilization (Marko Kloos)
NRA, SAF, GOA, OFF, ACLDN.