Bit of a law question actually.

Am I correct when I ask that if a burglar, armed, enters your house or property without permission and intending to steal / harm, I understand that in all states you have the legal right to defend yourself using a firearm, and if needs be, use lethal force?.

In the UK it is different, we're only allowed to use "reasonable force in order to prevent harm to ourselves or to another" - and "reasonable force" is determined by a court and then a jury, not by the individual.

In the UK , say if I twatted a burgler around the head with an iron bar or stabbed him, I'd be immediately placed under arrest and placed into custody awaiting questioning or , if the CPS decided, prosecution for whatever charge.

Does it work like that in the USA?. - Say a burglar entered your home with a blade or a gun, he was shot and killed by the homeowner, would the homeowner be arrested and subsequently charged, then it would be for the court to decide, or would there be an investigation by the Police to establish his innocence?.

One of the more interesting aspects of civil rights that I like about the USA.

And please guys, keep the politics out of it!.

 

Edited March 3, 20242 yr by Butch

8 minutes ago, Butch said:

[...]

And please guys, keep the politics out of it!.

I hope you get your wish, but I consider it unlikely.

I once asked a local San Francisco cop about a guy that threatened me while I was taking photographs. He said, "you have a right to defend yourself if you feel threatened."

Theoretically, if someone breaks into your home you will feel threatened.

In reality, self defense laws vary from state to state...

. . .

Here's one law firm's take on it:

"... self-defense is a complicated area of the law. The use of lethal force is only valid in the face of imminent danger. However, certain situations do not guarantee protection by the law. Hiring an experienced criminal defense lawyer is the best action when you happen to shoot someone during an immediate threat."

. . .

WHEN CAN SELF-DEFENSE BE USED AS A LEGAL DEFENSE?

...self-defense is valid in some situations. But, this doesn’t mean you can use it as a legal defense all the time. There are specific criteria to consider when using this as a legal defense.

Self-defense can only be used as a legal defense when:

• You are facing an impending threat. As established in the previous section, you can use force when faced with a threat. Using lethal force to defend yourself is reasonable in an imminent threat.
   
• You possess a reasonable belief. You can argue that you used physical force to defend yourself against a dangerous situation. As long as there is a compelling reason to employ excessive force, you can use self-defense in your argument.
   
• You believe that the force was necessary. In some cases, the use of extreme force is necessary to defend yourself against specific threats. However, shooting a violator is not always reasonable, depending on the situation you are facing.
   
• You have no duty to retreat. California self-defense laws state that you don’t have to retreat to prove self-defense. As long as a threat is present and the use of lethal force is necessary, then you can use this in your argument.
   
• In cases where you are the initial aggressor. Suppose you initially started a fight, and the other person stabbed you with a knife. In that case, you can shoot the other person to defend yourself.

source: https://summitdefense.com/blog/can-you-shoot-someone-who-breaks-into-your-house/

Edited March 3, 20242 yr by lazarus
....

1 hour ago, Butch said:

Bit of a law question actually.

Am I correct when I ask that if a burglar, armed, enters your house or property without permission and intending to steal / harm, I understand that in all states you have the legal right to defend yourself using a firearm, and if needs be, use lethal force?.

In the UK it is different, we're only allowed to use "reasonable force in order to prevent harm to ourselves or to another" - and "reasonable force" is determined by a court and then a jury, not by the individual.

In the UK , say if I twatted a burgler around the head with an iron bar or stabbed him, I'd be immediately placed under arrest and placed into custody awaiting questioning or , if the CPS decided, prosecution for whatever charge.

Does it work like that in the USA?. - Say a burglar entered your home with a blade or a gun, he was shot and killed by the homeowner, would the homeowner be arrested and subsequently charged, then it would be for the court to decide, or would there be an investigation by the Police to establish his innocence?.

One of the more interesting aspects of civil rights that I like about the USA.

And please guys, keep the politics out of it!.

 

 

1 hour ago, Butch said:

Bit of a law question actually.

Am I correct when I ask that if a burglar, armed, enters your house or property without permission and intending to steal / harm, I understand that in all states you have the legal right to defend yourself using a firearm, and if needs be, use lethal force?.

In the UK it is different, we're only allowed to use "reasonable force in order to prevent harm to ourselves or to another" - and "reasonable force" is determined by a court and then a jury, not by the individual.

In the UK , say if I twatted a burgler around the head with an iron bar or stabbed him, I'd be immediately placed under arrest and placed into custody awaiting questioning or , if the CPS decided, prosecution for whatever charge.

Does it work like that in the USA?. - Say a burglar entered your home with a blade or a gun, he was shot and killed by the homeowner, would the homeowner be arrested and subsequently charged, then it would be for the court to decide, or would there be an investigation by the Police to establish his innocence?.

One of the more interesting aspects of civil rights that I like about the USA.

And please guys, keep the politics out of it!.

 

 

Reasonable force rule still applies. Once the threat ceases or flees that's it. You have to show you were  in imminent fear of for your life of being attacked directly. If you use too great of force you can be prosecuted.

This video is what prompted me to ask such a question guys, although not armed (to their best knowledge) breaking a door frame or such acts of force to enter suggests hostile intentions.

The family disagree, but I'd wonder on what grounds?.

 

Edited March 3, 20242 yr by Butch

Often times the law is referred to as the "stand-your-ground law", and as @lazarus posted the law varies from state to state.

A stand-your-ground law, sometimes called a "line in the sand" or "no duty to retreat" law, provides that people may use deadly force when they reasonably believe it to be necessary to defend against certain violent crimes (right of self-defense). Under such a law, people have no duty to retreat before using deadly force in self-defense, so long as they are in a place where they are lawfully present.^[1] The exact details vary by jurisdiction.
 

6 hours ago, Butch said:

Am I correct when I ask that if a burglar, armed, enters your house or property without permission and intending to steal / harm, I understand that in all states you have the legal right to defend yourself using a firearm, and if needs be, use lethal force?.

That's impossible to answer. There are 50 States and they are the ruling jurisdiction, not the Federal Government and each has its own laws that would govern the scenario you posted. 

Well Butch, having lived in San Jose, Calif most of my life, I would be hesitant to "jack" anybody who entered my home without feeling really threatened. Calif is the most "liberal" state in all of the USA. Some real idiots live there and the judicial system is a joke, especially when you get to a jury trial. They tend to side with the criminal in most cases with the " let's feel sorry for him" and give him another chance.

The only exception to this for me, would be if my kids when they were younger were there and I felt remotely they were in danger, this would not end well for the criminal. I kept my 9MM Glock on the table at night next to me every night. 

1 hour ago, Yessongs said:

Well Butch, having lived in San Jose, Calif most of my life, I would be hesitant to "jack" anybody who entered my home without feeling really threatened. Calif is the most "liberal" state in all of the USA. Some real idiots live there and the judicial system is a joke, especially when you get to a jury trial. They tend to side with the criminal in most cases with the " let's feel sorry for him" and give him another chance.

The only exception to this for me, would be if my kids when they were younger were there and I felt remotely they were in danger, this would not end well for the criminal. I kept my 9MM Glock on the table at night next to me every night. 

 

Handgun at bedside can be very dangerous.

Remington 870 propped in the corner much more preferred. Wait until they get through the door or window (completely inside). Then cut them in half. Threat ended, but will be a little bit messy.

7 hours ago, Glasseye said:

Then cut them in half. Threat ended, but will be a little bit messy.

Yep. Mafia hit men were called house painters.....

20 hours ago, Glasseye said:

 

Handgun at bedside can be very dangerous.

Remington 870 propped in the corner much more preferred. Wait until they get through the door or window (completely inside). Then cut them in half. Threat ended, but will be a little bit messy.

Never used a shotgun, only an M1, 30 Cal Carbine...my Glock was my choice at night time, rifles are too big and bulky to deal with. Took the Glock out every month for target practice....I really miss it, no need for it here and my Son now has it..........forever.