Of Arms and the Law

Navigation
About Me
Contact Me
Archives
XML Feed
Home


Law Review Articles
Firearm Owner's Protection Act
Armed Citizens, Citizen Armies
2nd Amendment & Historiography
The Lecture Notes of St. George Tucker
Original Popular Understanding of the 14th Amendment
Originalism and its Tools


2nd Amendment Discussions

1982 Senate Judiciary Comm. Report
2004 Dept of Justice Report
US v. Emerson (5th Cir. 2001)

Click here to join the NRA (or renew your membership) online! Special discount: annual membership $25 (reg. $35) for a great magazine and benefits.

Recommended Websites
Ammo.com, deals on ammunition
Scopesfield: rifle scope guide
Ohioans for Concealed Carry
Clean Up ATF (heartburn for headquarters)
Concealed Carry Today
Knives Infinity, blades of all types
Buckeye Firearms Association
NFA Owners' Association
Leatherman Multi-tools And Knives
The Nuge Board
Dave Kopel
Steve Halbrook
Gunblog community
Dave Hardy
Bardwell's NFA Page
2nd Amendment Documentary
Clayton Cramer
Constitutional Classics
Law Reviews
NRA news online
Sporting Outdoors blog
Blogroll
Instapundit
Upland Feathers
Instapunk
Volokh Conspiracy
Alphecca
Gun Rights
Gun Trust Lawyer NFA blog
The Big Bore Chronicles
Good for the Country
Knife Rights.org
Geeks with Guns
Hugh Hewitt
How Appealing
Moorewatch
Moorelies
The Price of Liberty
Search
Email Subscription
Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

 

Credits
Powered by Movable Type 6.8.3
Site Design by Sekimori

« Going a bit slow today | Main | New head of ATFE »

Now, this is the media that I'm used to

Posted by David Hardy · 31 August 2006 03:26 PM

A Columbus OH paper responds to bills intended to expand self defense rights with a headline: "State lawmakers hope to pass a 'shoot first' bill" More below.

The article tells us: " It’s unclear whether Ohio’s proposed law would have helped alleged Worthington shooter Allen Davis." Looking up the guy's case shows that he fired warning shots to drive off some harmless teenage trespassers, then when they drove in the course of departing shot into their car and seriously injured one. OK, sounds like attempted murder/agg. assault material to me. But where would "castle doctrine" or "no retreat" have any effect on those? They hadn't entered his house, and he had no reason to fear they might inflict deadly harm upon him. He's guilty with or without the law.

A prosecutor says “You could have a neighbor who thinks he has an informal privilege to enter your home. He takes one step inside, and you blow him away,” Murphy said. “Under the bill, you’re immune from murder charges." If it's like the other Castle Doctrine bills, the requirement is that the intruder enter forcefully and illegally, so the neighbor would have believe he has an informal privilege to open your door with a battering ram or crowbar. Which is a bit much, even for neighbors you trust.

A supporter explains, "If there’s a home invasion, what are my obligations? Do I have to run to my safe room and cower behind the door?” (Actually, I might add, not, under current Ohio law. this 2005 case indicates Ohio does require retreat for use of deadly (but not nondeadly) force, but the requirement only applies outside of one's house.

Clue to reporter: "basically there has to be eminent harm or death to the homeowner" -- that's imminent, not eminent.

· media

2 Comments

Dewage | September 1, 2006 8:35 AM

Pulling up the article shows a booking photo with the caption: "Self-defense would trump the duty to retreat: It’s unclear whether Ohio’s proposed law would have helped alleged Worthington shooter Allen Davis"

Umm, if it's unclear, why is it an example? For crying out loud, that's what PhotoShop is for!

Bill | September 1, 2006 12:17 PM

I sent an e-mail to the author of the article and got a response from a woman asking if I wanted it to be treated as a letter to the editor and published. Although I had originally intended it for the author, I said yes, go ahead and make it a letter to the editor if you'll actually publish it. We shall see...