Welcome to the APBWeb.
Results 1 to 20 of 20

Thread: Castle Doctrine

  1. #1
    Bjohnson63's Avatar
    Bjohnson63 is offline King of the Shit Bucket
    Verified LEO
    Join Date
    07-02-11
    Location
    Western Wisconsin
    Posts
    435
    Rep Power
    794533

    Castle Doctrine

    "MADISON, Wis. (AP) - Gov. Scott Walker has signed a bill that allows homeowners to legally kill intruders.

    The bill, nicknamed the "Castle Doctrine," creates a presumption of legal immunity for someone who kills or injures a person breaking into his or her home, vehicle or workplace. The measure requires a judge to presume that the use of deadly force was necessary.

    The immunity presumption would not apply to a shooter who attacked someone he or she should have known was a public safety officer.

    The Republican-controlled Legislature passed the bill early last month. Walker signed it into law Wednesday afternoon."



    ---I find it funny that the average joe blow has more right to shoot and kill someone than a LEO, but is required to have little or no training at all. If a LEO shoots a guy who has a knife, he/she gets crucified in the media for not using a taser, but now a guy can shoot a kid breaking into a car who is trying to steal the spare change or a CD player and its ok. WOW.

  2. #2
    Cidp24's Avatar
    Cidp24 is offline Tempus Fugit
    Premium Lifetime Member
    Verified LEO
    Join Date
    07-17-06
    Location
    Crossroads of the Sunny South
    Posts
    8,131
    Rep Power
    3999639
    We got the same law several years back. I have no problem with it. I see your point though.
    *************************
    "It wouldn't take much for me to up and run...
    to another life somewhere in the sun."
    *************************
    "There's something inherently wrong with having to put on a bullet-proof vest and a gun to go to work."-(An old friend)


    Any statements or opinions given in my postings or profile do not reflect the opinions, views, policies, and/or procedures of my employer or anyone else other than me. They are my personal opinions or statements only, thereby releasing my employer , any other entity, or any other person of any liability or involvement in anything posted under the username "Cidp24" on O/R.

  3. #3
    Bjohnson63's Avatar
    Bjohnson63 is offline King of the Shit Bucket
    Verified LEO
    Join Date
    07-02-11
    Location
    Western Wisconsin
    Posts
    435
    Rep Power
    794533
    I am ok with it for the home... but a car? a business? I mean, just imagine, you own a store, and come to open up and find a guy inside stealing some power tools. bang bang dead baddy, armed or not, doesn't matter.

    believe me, I am not advocating for the baddy, but there really should be a common sense line drawn. I have no problem with someone who catches the baddy, holding at gun point, and of course shooting if justified. But giving a guy free rain without the threat of great bodily harm/death from the bad guy seems a little much. Again, the point stands, joe blow can shoot a guy with immunity, but if we shoot a guy with a knife, we used to much force and get raked over the coals. I think what government lacks at this point is common sense. Everythingis extreme now in politics, either extreme right, or extreme left.

    I used to be into politics alot... but over last 4 or 5 years have been totally turned off.

  4. #4
    Pudge's Avatar
    Pudge is online now Site Admin
    Verified LEO
    Super Moderator
    Join Date
    12-04-05
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    10,320
    Rep Power
    8591418
    Quote Originally Posted by Bjohnson63 View Post
    " The measure requires a judge to presume that the use of deadly force was necessary."

    That's the key. Simply because the intruder is there isn't enough to justify the action.
    "Like" us on facebook! https://www.facebook.com/pages/Offic...93147194083228

    Follow members of O/R as they tweet a "Ride a long" on their shifts on the front page of the site and on twitter at the following links:

    www.twitter.com/PoliceRideAlong
    www.twitter.com/lewisipso
    www.twitter.com/ORgopher
    www.twitter.com/SecondChance122
    www.twitter.com/pojmm
    www.twitter.com/ORGIB

    The opinions given in my posts & threads DO NOT reflect the opinions, views, policies, and/or procedures of my employing agency. They are my personal opinions only, thereby releasing my agency of any liability, or involvement in anything posted under the username "Pudge" on Officerresource.com

  5. #5
    Cidp24's Avatar
    Cidp24 is offline Tempus Fugit
    Premium Lifetime Member
    Verified LEO
    Join Date
    07-17-06
    Location
    Crossroads of the Sunny South
    Posts
    8,131
    Rep Power
    3999639
    I agree with you totally that officers are "Monday morning quarterbacked" to death. I also feel that if a person is unlawfully entering another's home, vehicle, or business while any of those are occupied, there can be an assumed threat of death or bodily harm. In which case, deadly force is reasonable. I do not condone shooting an unarmed suspect if they turn and run after being confronted by the victim but I do not think that the victim should face charges if that does happen.

    It's kind of an apples to oranges comparison. Under most circumstances other than ambush, a trained police officer is or should be prepared for violence when in contact with any individual. The officer has been trained and equipped to prepare for and respond to threats. A civilian, minding their own business in their car, home or business, should have an expectation of security. If they feel that they are under threat of death or injury, they should be protected in taking steps to stop the threat. Being untrained and unprepared, they should have more lattitude. Again, I feel that there is an assumed threat of injury and death if a suspects breaks into an occupied space.
    *************************
    "It wouldn't take much for me to up and run...
    to another life somewhere in the sun."
    *************************
    "There's something inherently wrong with having to put on a bullet-proof vest and a gun to go to work."-(An old friend)


    Any statements or opinions given in my postings or profile do not reflect the opinions, views, policies, and/or procedures of my employer or anyone else other than me. They are my personal opinions or statements only, thereby releasing my employer , any other entity, or any other person of any liability or involvement in anything posted under the username "Cidp24" on O/R.

  6. #6
    Bjohnson63's Avatar
    Bjohnson63 is offline King of the Shit Bucket
    Verified LEO
    Join Date
    07-02-11
    Location
    Western Wisconsin
    Posts
    435
    Rep Power
    794533
    I am gonna have to read the bill... the way the newspaper writes it leaves it way to open to various interpretations.

  7. #7
    Captain America's Avatar
    Captain America is offline Reed and Malloy were my FTOs
    Supporting Member Lvl 1
    Verified LEO
    Site Moderator
    Join Date
    05-01-08
    Location
    Louisiana
    Posts
    8,640
    Rep Power
    6643983
    Quote Originally Posted by Bjohnson63 View Post
    ... the way the newspaper writes it leaves it way to open to various interpretations.

    That's a surprise.
    SI VIS PACEM PARA BELLUM

    "It's a great life. You risk your skin catching killers and the juries turn them loose so they can come back and shoot at you again. If your honest , your poor your whole life. And , In the end , you wind up dying all alone on some dirty street. For what? For nothing. For a tin star."
    -Ex-Sheriff Martin Howe to Will Kane in "High Noon"

    Far from being a handicap to command, compassion is the measure of it. For unless one values the lives of his soldiers and is tormented by their ordeals , he is unfit to command.
    -General Omar Bradley, United States Army

    Renniger-Richards-Griswold-Owens

  8. #8
    Jks9199 is offline The Reason People Hate Cops & Causer of War
    Verified LEO
    Join Date
    04-16-06
    Location
    Northern VA
    Posts
    4,128
    Rep Power
    6583115
    Quote Originally Posted by Bjohnson63 View Post
    I am ok with it for the home... but a car? a business? I mean, just imagine, you own a store, and come to open up and find a guy inside stealing some power tools. bang bang dead baddy, armed or not, doesn't matter.

    believe me, I am not advocating for the baddy, but there really should be a common sense line drawn. I have no problem with someone who catches the baddy, holding at gun point, and of course shooting if justified. But giving a guy free rain without the threat of great bodily harm/death from the bad guy seems a little much. Again, the point stands, joe blow can shoot a guy with immunity, but if we shoot a guy with a knife, we used to much force and get raked over the coals. I think what government lacks at this point is common sense. Everythingis extreme now in politics, either extreme right, or extreme left.

    I used to be into politics alot... but over last 4 or 5 years have been totally turned off.
    I agree. I'd have to see exactly what it allows as far as using lethal force to defend a car, especially. I could see it for a carjacking or otherwise defending yourself in an occupied car -- but simply to defend your car from someone breaking into it? No. With a very few exceptions, lethal force isn't justifiable to defend simple property. Somebody's trying to steal your Ipod or even the car itself, while you're safe in your house? No. Not a justifiable situation for lethal force, in my opinion.
    Voting against incumbents until we get a Congress that does its job.

    TASER: almost as good as alcohol for teaching white boys to dance

    "Don't suffer from PTSD -- Go out and cause it!"
    -- Col. David Grossman, US Army, ret.

    All opinions expressed are my own and are not official statements of my employer.

  9. #9
    Cidp24's Avatar
    Cidp24 is offline Tempus Fugit
    Premium Lifetime Member
    Verified LEO
    Join Date
    07-17-06
    Location
    Crossroads of the Sunny South
    Posts
    8,131
    Rep Power
    3999639
    This is ours.

    1) The killing of a human being by the act, procurement or omission of another shall be justifiable in the following cases:

    (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;

    A “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;
    *************************
    "It wouldn't take much for me to up and run...
    to another life somewhere in the sun."
    *************************
    "There's something inherently wrong with having to put on a bullet-proof vest and a gun to go to work."-(An old friend)


    Any statements or opinions given in my postings or profile do not reflect the opinions, views, policies, and/or procedures of my employer or anyone else other than me. They are my personal opinions or statements only, thereby releasing my employer , any other entity, or any other person of any liability or involvement in anything posted under the username "Cidp24" on O/R.

  10. #10
    213th's Avatar
    213th is offline Solipsist
    Join Date
    12-19-05
    Location
    64.3° N 149.1° W
    Posts
    3,672
    Rep Power
    1712096
    Quote Originally Posted by Bjohnson63 View Post
    I am gonna have to read the bill... the way the newspaper writes it leaves it way to open to various interpretations.
    Yeah I was gonna say it sounds like you are reading the WI State Journal or The Capital Times lol
    He who has the money, signs the cheques.
    He who signs the cheques, makes the rules.
    He who makes the rules, has the power.
    He who has the power, has the money.

  11. #11
    Five-0's Avatar
    Five-0 is offline Super Moderator
    Premium Lifetime Member
    Verified LEO
    Super Moderator
    Join Date
    05-15-06
    Posts
    10,982
    Rep Power
    8357019
    Quote Originally Posted by Cidp24 View Post
    This is ours.
    I like that.

    Meanwhile, fishing in Russia:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkzV5AIK8iM
    "When plunder becomes a way of life for a group of men living together in society, they create for themselves in the course of time a legal system that authorizes it and a moral code that justifies it." -- Frederic Bastiat

    "Certainly there is no hunting like the hunting of man and those who have hunted armed men long enough and liked it, never really care for anything else thereafter." Ernest Hemingway

    The opinions given in my signatures & threads DO NOT reflect the opinions, views, policies, and/or procedures of my employing agency. They are my personal opinions only, thereby releasing my agency of any liability, or involvement in anything posted under the username "Five-0" on Officerresource.com

  12. #12
    Car 4's Avatar
    Car 4 is offline CID Chief
    Verified LEO
    Join Date
    10-02-07
    Location
    Pacific Northwest
    Posts
    2,171
    Rep Power
    2188916
    Washington is also a Castle Doctrine State. At about the same time, they also removed the "Duty to Retreat" clause. I don't see it as legal murder but it certainly frees lawful citizens from any issues which might arise from their lawful use of deadly force.

    Car 4
    I would like my country back. I used to believe that one man could never destroy this country. Not so sure anymore!

  13. #13
    jmur5074's Avatar
    jmur5074 is offline Moderator
    Premium Lifetime Member
    Verified LEO
    Site Moderator
    Join Date
    12-04-05
    Location
    Minnesota
    Posts
    9,051
    Rep Power
    6232623
    The only problem I see with the bill is that the thieves will leave WI and cross the river into my city.


    Otherwise, don't steal things...and it won't be a problem.
    No one has greater love than this, to lay down ones life for ones friends - John 15:13

    "The Wicked Flee When No Man Pursueth: But The Righteous Are Bold As A Lion".

    We lucky few, we band of brothers. For he who today sheds his blood with me shall be my brother.

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~
    The opinions, beliefs, and ideas expressed in this post are mine, and mine alone. They are NOT the opinions, beliefs, ideas, or policies of my Agency, Police Chief, City Council, or any member of my department.

  14. #14
    MacLean's Avatar
    MacLean is offline O/R Gun mod
    Verified LEO
    Super Moderator
    Join Date
    09-05-07
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    11,806
    Rep Power
    4604045
    Quote Originally Posted by Car 4 View Post
    Washington is also a Castle Doctrine State. At about the same time, they also removed the "Duty to Retreat" clause. I don't see it as legal murder but it certainly frees lawful citizens from any issues which might arise from their lawful use of deadly force.

    Car 4
    Indeed. Washington actually allows the use of lethal force to prevent a felony committed upon your person or someone in your presence *wherever* you happen to legally be.

    Why people get worked up over "home," "car," or "elsewhere" sort of escapes me.

    Commit felony, get deceased.

    Nobody should ever have to retreat or surrender, and I feel sorry for anyone who lives in a State where that is the case.
    I'm your huckleberry...

    Quemadmoeum gladis nemeinum occidit, occidentus telum est!

    You can be the weapon, and the gun in your hand is a tool - or the gun is a weapon and you are the tool.


    I was looking for a saint who was a devil of a lover,
    but every girl I found was either one way or the other...



  15. #15
    Jks9199 is offline The Reason People Hate Cops & Causer of War
    Verified LEO
    Join Date
    04-16-06
    Location
    Northern VA
    Posts
    4,128
    Rep Power
    6583115
    Quote Originally Posted by MacLean View Post
    Indeed. Washington actually allows the use of lethal force to prevent a felony committed upon your person or someone in your presence *wherever* you happen to legally be.

    Why people get worked up over "home," "car," or "elsewhere" sort of escapes me.

    Commit felony, get deceased.

    Nobody should ever have to retreat or surrender, and I feel sorry for anyone who lives in a State where that is the case.
    I agree that there should be no duty to retreat, and that you should be able to defend yourself with whatever force is reasonably necessary to successfully repel the attack. But I'm not supporting the use of lethal force for any felony. Simply defending property -- no I don't think that justifies lethal force, with a very few exceptions.
    Voting against incumbents until we get a Congress that does its job.

    TASER: almost as good as alcohol for teaching white boys to dance

    "Don't suffer from PTSD -- Go out and cause it!"
    -- Col. David Grossman, US Army, ret.

    All opinions expressed are my own and are not official statements of my employer.

  16. #16
    MacLean's Avatar
    MacLean is offline O/R Gun mod
    Verified LEO
    Super Moderator
    Join Date
    09-05-07
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    11,806
    Rep Power
    4604045
    To each their own. The burglary rate drops every time a burglar gets shot.

    Please note, this doesn't change police use of force, merely that of the citizen who should not live in fear.
    I'm your huckleberry...

    Quemadmoeum gladis nemeinum occidit, occidentus telum est!

    You can be the weapon, and the gun in your hand is a tool - or the gun is a weapon and you are the tool.


    I was looking for a saint who was a devil of a lover,
    but every girl I found was either one way or the other...



  17. #17
    Jks9199 is offline The Reason People Hate Cops & Causer of War
    Verified LEO
    Join Date
    04-16-06
    Location
    Northern VA
    Posts
    4,128
    Rep Power
    6583115
    Quote Originally Posted by MacLean View Post
    To each their own. The burglary rate drops every time a burglar gets shot.

    Please note, this doesn't change police use of force, merely that of the citizen who should not live in fear.
    Oh, I agree with the Castle Doctrine, as a legal principle. If they break into my house, when I'm in there, I'm going to assume that they mean me harm. (And I know Virginia law allows me to do so -- and I think every state should permit it.) Same thing if they force their way into my car while I'm driving it. But, if I look out the window, and see someone breaking into my empty car (in Virginia, the line for felony versus misdemeanor larceny is $200; most stolen autos are felonies) -- nope. Not worth killing someone over.
    Voting against incumbents until we get a Congress that does its job.

    TASER: almost as good as alcohol for teaching white boys to dance

    "Don't suffer from PTSD -- Go out and cause it!"
    -- Col. David Grossman, US Army, ret.

    All opinions expressed are my own and are not official statements of my employer.

  18. #18
    Standard Dave's Avatar
    Standard Dave is offline Constable
    Join Date
    04-08-06
    Location
    East Midlands (UK)
    Posts
    1,615
    Rep Power
    2100373
    My understanding of this kind of thing is thats it's political bullshit.

    Will it prevent the owner, tenant, occupant from being arrested or investigated that appears to be what people object to, the number of people actually charged and going to trial for these kind of incidents is very small.
    "all that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing" Edmund Burke.
    "the world is a dangerous place place to live; not because of the people who are evil, but because of the people who do not do anything about it" Albert Einstein

  19. #19
    MacLean's Avatar
    MacLean is offline O/R Gun mod
    Verified LEO
    Super Moderator
    Join Date
    09-05-07
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    11,806
    Rep Power
    4604045
    Quote Originally Posted by Jks9199 View Post
    Oh, I agree with the Castle Doctrine, as a legal principle. If they break into my house, when I'm in there, I'm going to assume that they mean me harm. (And I know Virginia law allows me to do so -- and I think every state should permit it.) Same thing if they force their way into my car while I'm driving it. But, if I look out the window, and see someone breaking into my empty car (in Virginia, the line for felony versus misdemeanor larceny is $200; most stolen autos are felonies) -- nope. Not worth killing someone over.
    If you aren't at the car, the felony isn't being committed upon your person.

    I think we agree.
    I'm your huckleberry...

    Quemadmoeum gladis nemeinum occidit, occidentus telum est!

    You can be the weapon, and the gun in your hand is a tool - or the gun is a weapon and you are the tool.


    I was looking for a saint who was a devil of a lover,
    but every girl I found was either one way or the other...



  20. #20
    MacLean's Avatar
    MacLean is offline O/R Gun mod
    Verified LEO
    Super Moderator
    Join Date
    09-05-07
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    11,806
    Rep Power
    4604045
    Quote Originally Posted by Standard Dave View Post
    My understanding of this kind of thing is thats it's political bullshit.

    Will it prevent the owner, tenant, occupant from being arrested or investigated that appears to be what people object to, the number of people actually charged and going to trial for these kind of incidents is very small.
    The presumption of innocence exists even without the "castle doctrine."

    That term is really a political term for returning to what the common law always held.

    Washington doesn't say "castle doctrine" anywhere in the law, and our law has held that lethal force in self defense is a protected right - even responsibility - before the term "castle doctrine" was popular.
    I'm your huckleberry...

    Quemadmoeum gladis nemeinum occidit, occidentus telum est!

    You can be the weapon, and the gun in your hand is a tool - or the gun is a weapon and you are the tool.


    I was looking for a saint who was a devil of a lover,
    but every girl I found was either one way or the other...



 

 

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

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