No charges for resident who fatally shoots home invasion suspect
- Thread starter Mike
- Start date
The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast
Member Benefits:
No ad networks! Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership Discuss anti-gun legislation Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses Discover free outdoor shooting areas View up to date on firearm-related events Share photos & video with other members ...and so much more!
Member Benefits:
Thanks.
Enter a house and take one step towards an armed homeowner. Tell us how that works out for you. That's threat enough inside your home.
Blaster, no thanks, i am not trying to be an actor in the questions and answers here. I'm also not telling people my opinion of what to do in any given situation, that is up to the individual. I 'm telling them the law and its application to the questions and answers that have been given in this thread. Everyone makes their own decisions based on the circumstances and i have no interest in telling people how to act in their own homes. I've both prosecuted and defended deadly force cases in front of juries around Maryland that occurred in the home, around the curtilage of the home, and away from the home. What you decide to do in a any situation is up to you and i'm explaining the way it is interpreted and applied after the fact when someone who doesn't know you is judging the reasonableness of your actions based on Maryland law. As you have expressed, everyone has a different interpretation of "reasonable" which is what creates debate on the subject. The two examples i've used do not involve aggression towards the resident of the dwelling, obviously if someone is moving aggressively towards an armed homeowner, the situation has been changed. However, two prosecutions for murder resulted in Anne Arundel County last year (different state's attorney was in office then) for your example, an aggressuve unarmed intruder in an armed homeowners house. Again, what you do in any given situation is your choice.
- Feb 17, 2011
- 14,024
Yeah just shoot the "new" baker of the thin mints the GS sells, they taste like thinly coated chocolate mint chalk wafers. Looks like Keebler Grasshoppers are now #1 on my "Thin Mint" List.
The person coming into your home must have the intention to commit or already be committing a felony. When they're dead, the only story is your own.
This thread and the many like it were discussed in Andrews opening remarks to his legal class in self-defense. Check him out: http://lawofselfdefense.com
excellent:
excellent:
The thing is, in MD burglary of an occupied dwelling is a felony. Still, that only means that you have no duty to retreat, it does not mean that you are relieved from standards of reasonableness in your actions.
And yes, the baker of the thin-mints ought to be shot, or at least tarred and feathered.
VG-10
Active Member
Yeah but.......I loved that TV!
Brooklyn
I stand with John Locke.
Not quite.
Retreat is only required if safe and possible.. Castle doctrine does not wave the requirement to retreat..only the requirement to prove that it was not possible in compleate safety. If however the prosecution can show that could have retreated in complete safely..your going to have a problem under the reasonable man standard. This standard is allways enforce ..Castle doctrine or otherwise...and stand your ground laws do not change this..they waive the duty to prove safe retreat was not possible... They do not waive the duty to retreat if in fact it was safe and possible.. Since that is required under the reasonable man standard.
Moreover..it is not necessary for the threat to your life be real. Only that it be subjectively true and objectively reasonable... You are not required to know that a gun is s loaded for example ..you can presume so as such presumption is objectively reasonable..
nor must you determine if your attacker is buffing.
Ability opportunity and jeapordy,..all as viewed by a reasonable man,given what you knew at the time, and viewed subjectively given your training and experience..
However..false and misleading understandings of the law earned from internet post does not count... Even this one.
Ianal.. And this is not legal advice nor even legal education.
There is absolutely no duty to retreat in one's own home in Maryland. Braboy v. State, 130 Md. App. 220 (2000) (Court of Special Appeals), Redcross v. State, 121 Md. App. 320 (1998) (Court of Special Appeals), Crawford v. State, 231 Md. 354 (1963) (Court of Appeals).
Maestro Pistolero
Active Member
- Mar 20, 2012
- 876
Search for Massad Ayoob's advice on what to say and not say following a self defense shooting. Saying absolutely nothing, though generally good advice may cause more trouble than you think.
We either have the most clever legislators of any state or the worst morons of any state who couldn't write a "Dick, Jane and Spot" story without messing it up. The gun and self defense laws in MD are so vague that nobody can make a clear statement and not have it countermanded by some obscure, contradictory and Byzantine passage in another part of the MD laws. And that is what I think the State wants... a way to be arbitrary and capricious in who gets prosecuted in this State.
There is nothing vague. MD follows common law and the precedent cases have been quoted above. Until someone gets convicted and that conviction is upheld by the states highest court, this is the law to go by. Until things change in the MD legislature, we dont want them to touch this.
