The "Castle Doctrine" & "Stand Your Ground" Provisions of Self Defense

Snidely Whiplash
The Castle Doctrine is sticky concept. It is different things in different states. In general the Castle Doctrine allows for one to defend with deadly force from any assault within their present legal habitation. It is assumed one has the right, as Wikipedia puts it, to defend themselves because "one enjoys protection from illegal trespassing and violent attack." The degree to which the Castle Doctrine applies to venues other than one's own home depends on the state, but in some states this type provision may include one's work or in their auto...again, depending on the state.

To make this more simple to discuss I will use my home state as the examples. Virginia is a "stand your ground" state. That means one can defend their person with deadly force anywhere in the Commonwealth. If one is in 7-11 and some dude tries to rob the place one could legally intercede with deadly force. That IS NOT to say one would or should but that legally they could. If one is stopped at a traffic light and someone tries to carjack them they do not have to mash the pedal to the floor to escape...one can legally use deadly force to defend oneself where they stand.

In states without "stand your ground" provisions, to varying degrees one must attempt to retreat from the threat before resorting to using deadly force. In some states this even applies to one's abode, meaning if an intruder crashes your front door while you are on your back stoop, you must retreat and NOT defend your home. Again, not so in the Commonwealth. Technically here if one were on their deck in the back of the house and heard their front door crash down they could enter their home and apply lethal force to the intruders and would NOT need to ascertain if the intruders were armed or not. The law assumes one has the right to defend their adobe, and if someone breaks down the door they likely aren't the milkman or their cousin Vinny.

It's assumed any person in one's home uninvited and having used force or breaking and entering ("breaking" meaning break the seal on the door or window) is an unlawful intruder, thus already having committed a felony by breaking in, deadly force is justified within the walls of one's home. There is no duty under the Castle Doctrine to ascertain WHY the intruder is there...it's assumed any person there uninvited is there for untoward purposes, thus this is where the law frees homeowner's and renter's to defend their abode without further legal obligation as to the purpose of the intruder.

Stand Your Ground is an entirely different provision and many states do not have this protection. "Stand Your Ground" basically means any person legally and lawfully going about their business is free to defend themselves with no provision that they must try to remove themselves from the physical proximity of a threat. Where it gets sticky is in states without stand your ground protections.

In those states to one varying degree or another one must attempt to extricate themselves from the physical proximity of the threat before they can apply deadly force in self defense. Such concepts even extend to within the abode of one being assaulted in states where their is no accepted form of the Castle Doctrine. That means even in your house, if there is a way to retreat from the threat one must first do so before lethal force may be applied.

In my opinion a lack of Castle Doctrine laws are a recipe for persons to become victims of violence beyond the mere breaking into one's home. Imagine having to attempt to ascertain the intentions of an intruder before one can defend themselves from the probable assault. That's valuable time wasted trying to determine what is going on, as opposed to simply reacting to the sound of your door being broken down.

Something is wrong with our society when even one's home is not sacrosanct territory. Intruders have no "rights" once they cross the threshold of my doorway, and personally I would not care what the laws were in my state - crash down my door and someone's getting shot...end of discussion.

On a personal note, in 1989 someone tried to break into my home in NC. I had an apartment in the basement of my Mom's house when I was a single parent to my 4 year old daughter. I was at school, the kid in preschool, and my mom was home alone. She was in the kitchen directly over the private back entrance to my apartment and saw three teenage men walking through the back yard. She heard them knocking loudly on the door to my apartment. She ignored them and became concerned as to why they'd go to the back instead of the front door if they were legit visitors.

The next thing she heard was the sound of them trying to break down the steel door that was my private entrance. Because the door was steel, and set in a steel frame, the intruders were unable to get in but they damn sure tried. Mom called me at my job and I rushed home. Imagine the things that went through my mind knowing that if they'd have tried that an hour or two later I would have been home. Now imagine the scene if I was their when these three clowns tried to crash down my door with me in my apartment. Carnage, bloodshed and death.

In closing, I do not take such things lightly. I was all too close to experiencing it in real life...perhaps one hour, 90 minutes at most from having such a terrible responsibility laid at my feet. I'm glad I was not their when it happened, and I can guarantee you the three punks are even more glad than I, they just don't know it. BTW the three men were caught and arrested that very afternoon. Lucky for them. I hope they learned the valuable lesson.

Published by Snidely Whiplash

Nuthin' of note.  View profile

5 Comments

Post a Comment
  • Linda StCyr2/5/2011

    I agree with Donald. I live in PA and there is hot debate over the Castle Doctrine. As the saying goes, "I'd rather be tried by 12, than carried by six." And you know what, that bastard who tries to break in isn't going to get past my old man but if he does, he'll have contend with me. I might be a hippy at heart but I love my gun and know how to use it and here's a shocker, my kids know how to use the gun too. ".”The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun.”~Wayne LaPierre

  • Agnes Farside2/2/2011

    Laws are so messed up these days..they just don't make sense. Like Rahm E. getting to run for mayor. Why even have laws when no one or very few obey them.

  • Anthony Ventre2/2/2011

    Good article and thorough. Until Castle applied 2 PA, everyone was practicing shooting while walking backwards up the stairs...

  • Donald Pennington2/2/2011

    Whether I'm in a state which allows self-defense or not, I'd rather be tried by 12, than carried by six. I only need one juror to sympathize. Even if that's not possible, at least I'd go to prison knowing there's one less jackwagon walking around. And, for the airheads who read this later - I don't own a gun. I'm surrounded by weapons everywhere I go.

  • leroy coffie2/1/2011

    A law that protects the wrongdoers is not a good law. I remember I was on a delivery one night, a man tried to rob me, I am pretty non-violent, but can take care of myself. I put him on the ground numerous times, but he kept getting up. Finally, he had enough and ran away. If he had a gun and I had a gun, I would have had to protect myself. Found out later, he just got out of prison and hurt a lady who went into a coma. He was captured, I had the police at my door at 3am where I pointed out the man, I had to talk to the prosecutors, he went to trial and he went back to prison.
    I can't imagine the use of laws that protect the criminals and not innocent people, great article

Displaying Comments

To comment, please sign in to your Yahoo! account, or sign up for a new account.