I Hate Sheltered College Kids :This One Is A Moron

[AK-74me]

Where does it say in Maryland you're required to run away? If you are threatened, then you are not required to retreat. You, in your home, are allowed to meet force with force.

Correct, I am sure Novus will be along shortly to outline MD's Castle Doctrine laws.

 

[bcp]

So it's ironic when people miss the point that a right that is supposed to protect us from government is being taken away...by government.

Fear the government that fears your gun.

 

[smcop]

I'm sure we agree on alot.

I think the only thing where we probably don't see eye to eye on is the special treatment of cops. (My percieved I am sure you'll retort.....)

At least when we disagree..it's respect based!

 

[RadioPatrol]

Correct, I am sure Novus will be along shortly to outline MD's Castle Doctrine laws.

I have always heard you had to retreat in MD ....

this is dangerous talk:
http://www.ridersforjustice.com/Articles/FirstGun.pdf

In some states, politicians (almost always Democrats) believe that only the lives of "special people" — usually the politicians themselves, friends of these politicians, celebrities, or people who carry money/valuables — are worth defending with guns. They have issued unconstitutional edicts making it a crime for their constituents (people like you and me) to carry guns to defend against vicious criminals (who carry any gun they want, any time they want). Yet almost all of these politicians are protected by armed guards at work and at home, usually 24 hours a day — just like COA says in its national pro-gun radio and print ads (www.citizensofamerica.org).
I say to hell with them and their edicts. These politicians are immoral, unethical, hypocritical, elitist, and control-obsessed. They clearly don't care about your life, or the lives of your family members. I would describe them as evil. No politician will ever prevent me from carrying a gun to protect myself, my family, or my neighbor with a gun. I carry a gun whenever I feel the need to do so, which is frequently.
You must decide if and when you carry a gun. You may decide, as many people have, that you should carry it every day. The bottom line: It's your life (and/or your spouse/children's lives). You have the right to defend these lives. And you have the right — not just morally, but Constitutionally — to carry the most effective and convenient tool to effect this defense — a handgun.

While I agree with it .....

 

[Kyle]

The "retreat" requirement has been encounted in the courtroom many, many times in MD over the last several decades, where an armed citizen dispatched some low-life in their home and found themselves up on charges.

These stories have appeared in the Post, Times, Sun and other local papers.

 

[Vince]

If you feel threatened and feel the need to imploy "deadly force" (i.e. a gun)... You had better feel your life is in danger and treat it as such then shoot to kill, not shoot to wound.

To do anything else opens you up to a much greater chance of successful litigation and possible criminal charges.

It's called deadly force for a reason.

This also depends on where you live. In MD you're required to run away first if you can, even in your own home, to avoid confrontation. In VA I'm fairly certain you're not required to anything so absurd.

In TX, as I understand it... If the SOB is in your house it's your option to removed him by any caliber or number of rounds you deem nessesary.

God Bless Texas

I love Texas. But if the state of Md thinks I'm going to run away if confronted in my own home.............

 

[RadioPatrol]

I love Texas. But if the state of Md thinks I'm going to run away if confronted in my own home.............

Weapon 3 feet away ........

 

[Vince]

The "retreat" requirement has been encounted in the courtroom many, many times in MD over the last several decades, where an armed citizen dispatched some low-life in their home and found themselves up on charges.

These stories have appeared in the Post, Times, Sun and other local papers.

I've read stories like this also, but the laws in Maryland are made to protect the criminal. That's a fact, and the mentality of the politicians and bleeding heart liberals that are in abundance in this state. I'm tired of protecting the criminal and will do everything to protect my family, including shooting someone in my home who doesn't belong there.

 

[RadioPatrol]

I've read stories like this also, but the laws in Maryland are made to protect the criminal. That's a fact, and the mentality of the politicians and bleeding heart liberals that are in abundance in this state. I'm tired of protecting the criminal and will do everything to protect my family, including shooting someone in my home who doesn't belong there.

If you break into my house your wrong and forfeit all rights for breaking and entering providing yourself a criminal ...

.... I am sure SMCOP will be along shortly to tell me how wrong I am .......... oh but SMCOP has a right to, just because SMCOP is well a COP

 

[Ken King]

Here is an excerpt from SB870 concerning the “castle doctrine” -

Current Law: Self-defense is a common law doctrine that has been addressed by Maryland courts on numerous occasions. In order to succeed on a claim of self-defense, the accused must have: (1) not been the aggressor or provoked the conflict; (2) had reasonable grounds to believe that he was in apparent imminent or immediate danger of losing his own life or incurring serious bodily harm from his assailant or potential assailant; (3) actually believed at the time that he faced this type of danger; and (4) not used more force that the situation demanded. See Marquardt v. State, 164 Md. App. 95, 140 (2005). See also Sydnor v. State, 365 Md. 205, 216, A.2d 669, 675 (2001). Included in the doctrine of self-defense is a duty to retreat, that is, a duty by the individual claiming self-defense to retreat and escape the danger if it was in his power to do so and was consistent with maintaining his safety. See Sydnor, 365 Md. at 216, 776 A.2d at 675. Use of deadly force traditionally has not been permissible in defense of property alone.

Traditionally, under the common law, the right to the use of deadly force in self-defense did not apply until the claimant “retreated to the wall.”

 

[RadioPatrol]

(1) not been the aggressor or provoked the conflict;

so what if I provoked the fight .... that gives someone the right to follow me into my house,

if say we were arguing out in the street ....

and I am retreating .....

 

[Ken King]

so what if I provoked the fight .... that gives someone the right to follow me into my house,

if say we were arguing out in the street ....

and I am retreating .....

That is what the sponsor of the legislature said. I guess that means if you started it and the other person followed you in to your house you couldn't claim self-defense. Remember we are talking about the state of Maryland.

 

[Novus Collectus]

Correct, I am sure Novus will be along shortly to outline MD's Castle Doctrine laws.

The hightest MD court precedence is that one may confront an attack upon one's dwelling and use deadly force if necessary.

Citations available upon request.

 

[Novus Collectus]

While I agree what he's saying is foolish and naieve...

Somehow I don't think it would be legal to kill someone simply because they were mugging you... or if it would be, it would depend on the circumstances of the mugging. Most muggers won't take a weapon with them because to be caught mugging someone with a weapon becomes assault with a deadly weapon and the sentence becomes much higher.

In MD the use of deadly force without seeking a safe retreat first is allowed in public when making a citizens arrest then attacked, and when being actively robbed.

 

[Novus Collectus]

If you feel threatened and feel the need to imploy "deadly force" (i.e. a gun)... You had better feel your life is in danger and treat it as such then shoot to kill, not shoot to wound.

To do anything else opens you up to a much greater chance of successful litigation and possible criminal charges.

It's called deadly force for a reason.

This also depends on where you live. In MD you're required to run away first if you can, even in your own home, to avoid confrontation. In VA I'm fairly certain you're not required to anything so absurd.

In TX, as I understand it... If the SOB is in your house it's your option to removed him by any caliber or number of rounds you deem nessesary.

God Bless Texas

As I stated in a previous post, one is not required to seek a safe retreat before deadly force self defense in at least four situations that I am aware of.
One need not seek an avenue of retreat when there is an attack upon their dwelling.
One need not seek an avenue of retreat when attacked and the avenue of retreat is not known to be safe.
One is allowed to confront (and therefore not required to retreat of course) when conducting a citizen's arrest.
One is not required to seek or consider retreat when actively being robbed or mugged.