In the Sunday's edition of the Jefferson City News Tribune there is an article discussing legislation regarding people who use lethal force to defend their homes and cars. Both the House and Senate have passed a bill regarding this issue and the differences between the two will need to be worked out before it goes to the Governor for consideration. This bill has become known as the "castle doctrine" and has been proposed in the House by Rep. Kenny Jones of California, Mo (a former sheriff). Under the House version it is presumed that a person who has used lethal force in defending his home, car, tent, etc. held a "reasonable fear of imminent peril of death or great bodily harm" when the intruder "unlawfully and forcibly entered." The bill also gives this presumption when the person uses lethal force when defending another person against an intruder who was attempting to remove the other person against his or her will. The person using the lethal force is also presumed to have known or had reason to believe that an unlawful act was being committed at the time.
To those of us who own homes and want to defend ourselves and our loved ones while there, this "castle doctrine" bill sounds good. The prosecuting attorneys and some law enforcement officials do not like it, however. The article contains quotes from the Jefferson City prosecuting attorney who is finding the presumption in the bill "worrisome." He and others believe the current law provides adequate protection to homeowners under the self-defense laws. They gave examples of the bill going too far - a person enters a home announcing himself and pleading for help; a drunk neighbor stumbles into the wrong house; two teenagers outside a bowling alley getting into a fight inside of a car - all examples of perhaps an innocent incident ending in death. Rep. Jones disagrees with these examples and says the legislation is "tightly drafted."
The Senate bill, which passed last week, is similar to the House bill but it cleans up ambiguities in the current law. Basically it makes it clear that a person who is lawfully someplace has no "duty to retreat" if they feel there are in imminent physical injury or death.
To read more on this go to the article, What can you do to defend your castle?
Source: News Tribune, March 11, 2007, What can you do to defend your castle? by Kris Hilgedick
Comments