Not really. I don't have to be afraid of someone with a knife to know that it could kill me. I know I can use deadly force. Threats only kill those who are afraid? If I'm not afraid, he will magically stop in his tracks?Wait until they are in the house.
And no matter what you "were in imminent fear of your life"
First things first is that you are going to be arrested regardless. So hire a lawyer. but if they are physically inside your home you should have reasonable proof they intended harm. But you also cannot shoot someone who is retreating, shooting someone in the back is pretty indefensible.
Not really. I don't have to be afraid of someone with a knife to know that it could kill me. I know I can use deadly force. Threats only kill those who are afraid? If I'm not afraid, he will magically stop in his tracks?
And it's not fear for your life. It's the threat of death or serious bodily injury
That's imminent threat to life or serious bodily injury.A scenario my kids brought up while watching the riots:
What if someone is outside your house and preparing to throw a molotov cocktail at the home. What now?
That's imminent threat to life or serious bodily injury.
A scenario my kids brought up while watching the riots:
What if someone is outside your house and preparing to throw a molotov cocktail at the home. What now?
That's a ridiculous fvcking fake statement. No one would say that.Notice the quotes
Even if you are calm and collected you were in imminent fear of your life
It's a statement you can't go wrong with
It plays much better in court than having to explain things when the prosecutor reads your statement to the jury saying "I was not scared. I had secured a dark hide position with good sight lines to where I anticipated the enemy would walk. When I saw the intruder I calmly held my breath for a stable sight picture and gently squeezed my trigger until a round discharged. At that point I kept my weapon aimed on the bloody corpse while I called the police to come pick up the body"
That statement opens you up to questions like "Since you were calm and hidden and paying careful attention could you see if the poor misguided youth carrying a weapon?"
I prefer the "I was in imminent fear if my life. It was dark. I thought this intruder was going to murder my whole family. My lawyer's number if 410-555-5555 for further questions"
Just because the law says you can use deadly force inside your home doesn't mean the communists in this fascist state won't try to hang you for it anyway. Don't give them rope
The Castle Doctrine eliminated the duty to retreat.I am 100% sure Maryland will say you had a duty to run out the back door
What if they flanked your house and we're setting fire to both exits?
(I am still 100% sure Maryland will try to f--- you. But now I think you could make a solid argument in court)
It's just like a knife threat. You don't have to wait and see what happens. And screw Mosby. LolYes, but they are outside the home. Can you imagine Marilyn Mosby agreeing it was a clean shoot?
It's just like a knife threat. You don't have to wait and see what happens. And screw Mosby. Lol
First of all, you don't use lethal force to prevent them from coming in. Maryland believes if you do, you put yourself in the situation to use deadly force which otherwise may have been prevented.
No shooting someone through your door while they're on the porch, etc... You approaching someone rooting through your shed and they come at you with an axe, and you shoot them, is s justified shoot usually, but Maryland will say you put yourself in that situation.
Don't let machismo lead you out there, because you will be charged.
Many self defense cowboys here will say otherwise. They let their emotions dictate their actions.
MD has the Castle Doctrine. You're justified to use lethal force without having to retreat to avoid using that force. However, you still need to satisfy the 3 pillars of self defense,
Means, opportunity, and intent from the threat.
I'm not typing all that out from my cell phone.
Good luck.
That's a ridiculous fvcking fake statement. No one would say that.
My point is that "fear" is not a requirement to satisfy justification.
The Castle Doctrine eliminated the duty to retreat.