So if you post a sign that says anything related to protecting your home, and some numbskull breaks in to rob you, and you shoot him, under the protection of the Castle Doctrine, you can be liable? For what? Warning the potential offender that there is a potential danger to him (or her) if they illegally enter the residence? Seems like if they did, you’d have more of a case against the offender. Not the other way around.
“Your honor, I clearly posted a warning sign outside my house as a deterrent to anyone who maybe wanted to break in. I was doing my best to stop this from happening and protect his well being. He chose to not heed the warning and put me in a position I never wanted to be in. Had he not chosen to enter a residence illegally, this would never have happened. I had no duty to retreat. I have the right to protect my home. And I didn’t have to post a warning. But I did.”
So if I go to the Zoo and there’s a sign at a lion cage that warns me of the dangers inside that cage, and I break out my bolt cutters, cut the fence, and go inside, I can sue the Zoo for what exactly? Being stupid? Them being truthful? Not providing an adequate warning? Not locking the cage well enough to protect an idiot with bolt cutters from getting inside?
I don’t have any stickers or signs. Don’t want them. But I’m glad I don’t live where you guys do. Our signs around here mean what they say. Best to believe them. And our DA’s and Judges aren’t going to punish someone who went so far as to warn a potential intruder about the danger inside a residence. I know, because I know the DA’s and Judges. The DA’s won’t waste the court’s time bringing a case like this unless there were extenuating circumstances. Criminals don’t get to be victims where I live. And I’m happy for it.