• NeuronautML@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    37
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    edit-2
    6 days ago

    This is why stand your ground laws can’t realistically exist in places that aren’t sparsely populated. Because someone will read “defend your property and life with force if necessary” as “act as a raging lunatic and attempt to shoot anyone who comes at the door because it’s legal to do so if you claim you were defending your property, even though there was no indication of actual imminent danger to property or people”.

    In my country we don’t have stand your ground laws. You can only defend yourself in case of an attack, but not drive away a thief. You’re supposed to run and call the police, but I keep wondering if a legal framework like the US where you weren’t legally punished for attacking a thief in your house wouldn’t be fairer but then there’s news like this.

    • Buelldozer@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      29
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      6 days ago

      This has absolutely nothing to do with “Stand Your Ground”. SYG only applies when you or someone else are in real and imminent danger of serious bodily harm or death, neither of which were true in this case. That’s why the guy was arrested and has been charged with a number of serious offenses. He’s going to end up in prison.

      Since you aren’t from the United States I should also tell you that SYG isn’t a National thing, its only legal in the States in that have passed laws allowing it.

      I keep wondering if a legal framework like the US where you weren’t legally punished by attacking a thief in your house wouldn’t be fairer but then there’s news like this.

      That’s called “Castle Doctrine” and like SYG it isn’t National. It only exists in the States that have passed a law to allow it.

      It CAN work but there’s at least a few States that have Castle Doctrine and a Duty to Retreat so you end up having to flee a home invader until or unless you have no other choice.

    • michaelmrose@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      6 days ago

      You are acting as if it were actually complicated. Requiring no duty to retreat makes perfect sense in your own home. The law most sane places says you have to be in a situation where a reasonable person would be in fear for life or bodily injury.

      Note “reasonable person” is a common legal standard. A reasonable person doesn’t think someone outside is automatically a threat. People who shiit then ask questions go to jail.