HB 214 - Immunity for Use of Physical Force in Defense of Dwelling

dblas · Jan 17, 2014

It looks like Delegate Conaway is trying cover his bases and maybe provide actual castle doctrine.

HB 214 - Criminal Law - Self-Defense - Immunity for Use of Physical Force in Defense of Dwelling

Establishing that an occupant of a dwelling is justified in using any degree of physical force against another person when the other person has made an unlawful entry into the dwelling, and when the occupant has a reasonable belief that the other person has committed a crime in the dwelling in addition to the unlawful entry or is committing or intends to commit a crime against a person or property in addition to the unlawful entry; establishing that a person acting in accordance with the Act is immune from specified criminal prosecution.

dblas · Jan 17, 2014

That is how I see it as well....

Mr H · Jan 17, 2014

when the occupant has a reasonable belief that the other person has committed a crime in the dwelling in addition to the unlawful entry or is committing or intends to commit a crime against a person or property in addition to the unlawful entry

Looks like the bar is really set low on this one.

(B) (1) AN OCCUPANT OF A DWELLING IS JUSTIFIED IN USING ANY DEGREE OF PHYSICAL FORCE, INCLUDING DEADLY PHYSICAL FORCE, AGAINST ANOTHER PERSON WHEN:
(I) THE OTHER PERSON HAS MADE AN UNLAWFUL ENTRY INTO THE DWELLING; AND
(II) THE OCCUPANT HAS A REASONABLE BELIEF THAT THE OTHER PERSON:
1. A. HAS COMMITTED A CRIME IN THE DWELLING IN ADDITION TO THE UNLAWFUL ENTRY; OR
B. IS COMMITTING OR INTENDS TO COMMIT A CRIME AGAINST A PERSON OR PROPERTY IN ADDITION TO THE UNLAWFUL ENTRY; AND
2. MIGHT USE PHYSICAL FORCE, NO MATTER HOW SLIGHT, AGAINST AN OCCUPANT.

IMO, this has 'bargaining chip' written all over it

CrazySanMan · Jan 17, 2014

Interesting

TxAggie · Jan 17, 2014

But does using a firearm fall under "physical force." To me, a lawyer could easily twist that to mean that firearms are above physical force.

danb · Jan 17, 2014

interesting.
Can we make this a sticky?

LeadSled1 · Jan 17, 2014

This one will get canned, 67 will get voted in. He will say, "See, the people didn't want it". Then we will get BS polls about how 90% of Marylanders were against it etc.

Brooklyn · Jan 17, 2014

This weekens castle doctrine..

Under most CD unlawful entry is sufficent proof of criminal intent.. this may be other in Md but I doubt it.

Now you need more...

DANGER DANGER DANGER.

It not a gift.. its not a trade its an assault.. .

Mr H · Jan 17, 2014

It will be interesting to find out who's feeding Conaway, and whether they think it will help him (or if he's considered expendable)

Brooklyn · Jan 17, 2014

Mr H said:
It will be interesting to find out who's feeding Conaway, and whether they think it will help him (or if he's considered expendable)

Think court jester.. as for expendable... he is window dressing.

Is window dressing expendable? . sure... but they need window dressing . So what's likely... .more window dressing.

More on the flip side... but this bill needs to be tweeked or killed...

nedsurf · Jan 17, 2014

I'm sure most know this already. Conaway is definitely a player in the democratic party. His whole family is politically connected and relies on name recognition among the low information voter. Unfortunately, there is plenty of that in his district. Frank Conaway Sr. brandished a firearm he was carrying with a expired CCW license and allegedly chased a man down a public street with the gun.

Here is a good article on Jr.'s lifestyle.http://www2.citypaper.com/news/story.asp?id=12819

Jr. is most likely just the face of whatever the party is trying to do with these bills.

Brooklyn · Jan 17, 2014

nedsurf said:
I'm sure most know this already. Conaway is definitely a player in the democratic party. His whole family is politically connected and relies on name recognition among the low information voter. Unfortunately, there is plenty of that in his district. Frank Conaway Sr. brandished a firearm he was carrying with a expired CCW license and allegedly chased a man down a public street with the gun.

Here is a good article on Jr.'s lifestyle.http://www2.citypaper.com/news/story.asp?id=12819

Jr. is most likely just the face of whatever the party is trying to do with these bills.

The face ....yes.

The brain... no.

The bills are not well crafted.

???

nedsurf · Jan 17, 2014

agreed

cz27jim · Jan 17, 2014

I'd be happier if it said immunity from criminal AND CIVIL prosecution.

Mr H · Jan 17, 2014

cz27jim said:
I'd be happier if it said immunity from criminal AND CIVIL prosecution.

We already have Civil Immunity.

MSI saw to that a few years ago (2010)

DaemonAssassin · Jan 17, 2014

Mr H said:
We already have Civil Immunity.

MSI saw to that a few years ago (2010)

Is MSI working on criminal immunity now?

Mr H · Jan 17, 2014

DaemonAssassin said:
Is MSI working on criminal immunity now?

We look at it all, and fight for what will work best.

beretta_maven · Jan 17, 2014

Brooklyn said:
This weekens castle doctrine..

Under most CD unlawful entry is sufficent proof of criminal intent.. this may be other in Md but I doubt it.

Now you need more...

DANGER DANGER DANGER.

It not a gift.. its not a trade its an assault.. .

I agree...

Sundancer · Jan 18, 2014

Brooklyn said:
This weekens castle doctrine..

Under most CD unlawful entry is sufficent proof of criminal intent.. this may be other in Md but I doubt it.

Now you need more...

DANGER DANGER DANGER.

It not a gift.. its not a trade its an assault.. .

Totally agree - looks like three if not more tests someone has to meet -

Test 1

(I) THE OTHER PERSON HAS MADE AN UNLAWFUL ENTRY INTO THE DWELLING; AND

Test 2
(II) THE OCCUPANT HAS A REASONABLE BELIEF THAT THE OTHER PERSON:
1. A. HAS COMMITTED A CRIME IN THE DWELLING IN ADDITION TO THE UNLAWFUL ENTRY; OR
B. IS COMMITTING OR INTENDS TO COMMIT A CRIME AGAINST A PERSON OR PROPERTY IN ADDITION TO THE UNLAWFUL ENTRY; AND

Test 3
2. MIGHT USE PHYSICAL FORCE, NO MATTER HOW SLIGHT, AGAINST AN OCCUPANT.

So potential rapist/strangler comes into your house gets identified and stands there frozen waiting to figure out does he kill you - now what he hell do you do - you know have to worry that all three tests did not get met? Under this statute you'd have to prove he was there doing more than B&E? This is TERRIBLE TERRIBLE TERRIBLE

Sundancer · Jan 18, 2014

nedsurf said:
Frank Conaway Sr. brandished a firearm he was carrying with a expired CCW license and allegedly chased a man down a public street with the gun.

Here is a good article on Jr.'s lifestyle.http://www2.citypaper.com/news/story.asp?id=12819

Never knew this - so folks who can't probably possess a FA in MD legally possibly because of his personal record and who associates with felons/potential felons gets to push forth laws criminalizing the honest citizen for protecting themselves. What a POS.

HB 214 - Immunity for Use of Physical Force in Defense of Dwelling

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast

Member Benefits:

Past President, MSI

Past President, MSI

Banana'd

2013'er

Ultimate Member

dont be a dumbass

Ultimate Member

I stand with John Locke.

Banana'd

I stand with John Locke.

Ultimate Member

I stand with John Locke.

Ultimate Member

I *am* a curio and relic!

Banana'd

Why should we Free BSD?

Banana'd

Free Thinking Member

Active Member

Active Member

Users who are viewing this thread

Log in

Forum statistics

I am a curio and relic!