Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
Latest activity
Classifieds
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Log in
Register
What's New?
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More Options
Advertise with us
Contact Us
Close Menu
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
Competition, Tactics & Training
Self Defense & Handgun Carry
Protecting Others With CCW License
Search titles only
By:
Reply to Thread
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="blutch" data-source="post: 1021424" data-attributes="member: 8352"><p>This one is very interesting to me:</p><p></p><p>The Court of Criminal Appeals has consistently interpreted this provision of section 733(1) as extending the right to use deadly force in defense of one's habitation only where the person defending has reason to fear that one who entered unlawfully, a trespasser, intended to perpetrate a felony therein, or to inflict harm upon him or some other person. The position espoused by the court with respect to defense of one's domicile may be summarized as follows:</p><p></p><p>A person may resist a trespass on real property in his possession, where such trespass does not amount to a felony, and may eject the trespasser therefrom by the use of any reasonable force short of taking or endangering human life; but if he is unable to prevent a trespass, where no felony is attempted, by any means short of taking or endangering human life, he must suffer the trespass and seek redress at the hands of the law rather than commit homicide.</p><p></p><p>I interpret this to mean someone can come on your property, but if they are not committing a felony you cannot shoot them. I suppose if they break in to gain access that is a felony, but if you are on your property and they just walk in you can't shoot them until they threaten bodily harm in some way?</p><p></p><p>This sure is murky stuff.</p><p></p><p>B</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="blutch, post: 1021424, member: 8352"] This one is very interesting to me: The Court of Criminal Appeals has consistently interpreted this provision of section 733(1) as extending the right to use deadly force in defense of one's habitation only where the person defending has reason to fear that one who entered unlawfully, a trespasser, intended to perpetrate a felony therein, or to inflict harm upon him or some other person. The position espoused by the court with respect to defense of one's domicile may be summarized as follows: A person may resist a trespass on real property in his possession, where such trespass does not amount to a felony, and may eject the trespasser therefrom by the use of any reasonable force short of taking or endangering human life; but if he is unable to prevent a trespass, where no felony is attempted, by any means short of taking or endangering human life, he must suffer the trespass and seek redress at the hands of the law rather than commit homicide. I interpret this to mean someone can come on your property, but if they are not committing a felony you cannot shoot them. I suppose if they break in to gain access that is a felony, but if you are on your property and they just walk in you can't shoot them until they threaten bodily harm in some way? This sure is murky stuff. B [/QUOTE]
Insert Quotes…
Verification
Post Reply
Forums
Competition, Tactics & Training
Self Defense & Handgun Carry
Protecting Others With CCW License
Search titles only
By:
Top
Bottom