At what point are you justified 2 use force?

[PBramble]

How a statute is written won't keep a Prosecutor from trying to put you in prison. "Stand Your Ground" laws won't keep you from being prosecuted. "Castle Doctrine" laws won't keep you from being prosecuted. All the self defense laws ever written won't keep you from being prosecuted. People seem to think that a statute will protect them from prosecution, those people are very wrong. In states without a Grand Jury system the Prosecutor will make the decision whether or not to try you. In states with a Grand Jury system ONLY the Prosecutor presents his/her reason for prosecuting you, hence the term from New York State chief judge Sol Wachtler "a grand jury would 'indict a ham sandwich,' if that's what you wanted."

True. Even law enforcement is being indicted on charges during riot situations. These days it's not even a fair bet to be judged by 12.

 

[MacFromOK]

First and foremost, never think that a law will protect you from prosecution.

If your state has a Grand Jury system let this quote from New York State chief judge Sol Wachtler be your guide, “a grand jury would indict a ham sandwich, if that's what you wanted.”

A major reason why carry insurance (such as CCW Safe) is a good idea IMO.
___

 

[golddigger14s]

A major reason why carry insurance (such as CCW Safe) is a good idea IMO.
___

In some states like WA, you can't get that coverage. Some BS that an "illegal act" can't be insured.

 

[OKNewshawk]

In some states like WA, you can't get that coverage. Some BS that an "illegal act" can't be insured.

Self-defense is always a legal act, unless the government deliberately makes it illegal...like in (not so) Great Britain.

 

[DavidMcmillan]

You can be as legal "as the day is long" and still incur massive attorney fees proving it. Stay Smart!

 

[golddigger14s]

 

[AKguy1985]

Anyone want to weigh in on this?? I'm not a lawyer but the second he punched out her window it's game on

Redirect Notice

www.google.com

No comments???

 

[ricco]

No comments???

Depends on what you mean by "game on". If you mean driving away, you're probably good. If you mean using a less lethal weapon such as pepper spray you still might be good, maybe. If you mean using deadly force you will have to prove that your car window being broken was the beginning of an attack that would ultimately result in your death. Don't buy into the BS that the burden of proof is on the prosecution. When you are being attacked on the witness stand and the jury is hearing about what a cold heartless person you are you won't feel like the burden of proof is on the prosecution.

 

[918evo]

I don't think you need to prove the window break was part of an attack that may kill you. The law treats a vehicle similar to a home, so when forcible entry is made, you can respond with deadly force. Window broken=game on - you can shoot, drive over, or choose to be wise and drive away.

 

[ricco]

I don't think you need to prove the window break was part of an attack that may kill you. The law treats a vehicle similar to a home, so when forcible entry is made, you can respond with deadly force. Window broken=game on - you can shoot, drive over, or choose to be wise and drive away.

Breaking a window isn't forcible entry it's vandalism, entry is entry. If you are sitting in your home and someone breaks your window but does not physically enter there is no justification for a deadly force response. To be honest, the Prosecutor will decide if deadly force is justified even if there is entry, you could still be prosecuted Castle Doctrine notwithstanding. If you respond with deadly force you will have to prove that the window break was done as a part of a deadly force attack. The prosecutor get's the say if you were legally justified in your response, not a statute.