Your Thoughts, Castle Doctrine

Status
Not open for further replies.
I regularly leave my front door open and my screen up on my screen door when I’m home and it’s nice outside. I don’t want to be locked in my house when I’m home. There’s a difference between feeling safe in your home, and feeling trapped. All those security measures would make me feel trapped. I don’t fear the outside world. Even the bad things it may contain.

A month or so ago I lost a very dear friend to cancer. A week later his wife had their two children at her parents house to ride out some bad storms we were having. Lightning struck the house and it caught fire. Grandpa grabbed oldest daughter. Grandma grabbed youngest daughter. Grandpa barely made it. Grandma and youngest daughter didn’t. Had grandpa had to break a window with that film on it to get out, he wouldn’t have made it. Had he had to mess with the locks on the front door while holding his granddaughter, he may not have made it.

If the doors and security film you posted are what you need to feel safe and secure in your house, that’s fine. It’s just not what I need to feel the same way.
When I was a little girl nobody locked their doors in California either. And people left the car in the driveway with the key in the ignition. That was then, this is now. The last couple years before I left I was always armed in my house, it's insane there, never mind BGs, crazies walk the streets, one might decide to dive through your window at any moment. (I did not have the security film there because it was a 1942 house with old style windows with actual individual panes of glass, my handyman pointed out that the wood dividers (which probably have an official name I don't know) could easily be broken.)

Believe me, if someone were to break in I would not hesitate to do whatever would be necessary to defend myself, but I'd prefer not to get to that point. I'm much calmer here, but I still keep my doors locked.
 
I live in a low crime area. But we have drugs and we have crime. I don't consider myself living in fear because I lock my cars and my house and I have an alarm system. I also keep the means to protect myself and my family close to hand. I'm an Eagle Scout and I live by the motto of "Be Prepared".
 
Believe me, if someone were to break in I would not hesitate to do whatever would be necessary to defend myself, but I'd prefer not to get to that point. I'm much calmer here, but I still keep my doors locked.
And I sincerely hope you are never put in that position. Locking doors is never a bad idea, or more correctly, is always a good idea. My point in all this is if a warning sign ever becomes nothing more than an open invitation in the eyes of the courts, all bets are off. If a “Gun Free Zone” means the same thing as a “Castle Doctrine” sign, then we’re done for.
 
Last edited:
My daughter who lives in Milwaukee had a guy just walk in to her house when the door was unintentionally left unlocked. A big dog and a baseball bat solved that problem.

Don`t advertise to the bad guys.
 
In Mosaic law, if a burglar breaks into a home under cover of darkness, i.e. his intentions are unclear, they are assumed to be violent, and if the homeowner strikes and kills them there is no blood on the homeowner's hands. However, if "the sun has risen on" the burglar, i.e. his intentions are clearly non-violent, and yet the homeowner strikes and kills him, there is blood on the homeowner's hands. From what I've read, most states' Castle Doctrine follows along these lines to varying degrees.

Sometimes the difference between Castle and non-Castle states is blurry, sometimes not. In most cases you cannot pursue an invader who is retreating, or employ deadly force upon a retreating criminal unless they are shooting at you. In other states, such as my own, no deadly force whatsoever can be applied unless you, or a minor under your charge, are unable to retreat AND are actively under threat of imminent severe bodily harm or death. You can't brandish, you can't warn, you can't chase them out, not even if you can see the evil in their eyes and know they're about to strike; they must be actively pursuing you with deadly intent. See how the need to discern the moment of decision in these cases causes even more undue stress and can cause someone to hesitate due to fear of the law, and possibly die because of that hesitation. This is why I believe Castle Doctrine, in any of its interpretations, is desirable.
 
In Mosaic law, if a burglar breaks into a home under cover of darkness, i.e. his intentions are unclear, they are assumed to be violent, and if the homeowner strikes and kills them there is no blood on the homeowner's hands. However, if "the sun has risen on" the burglar, i.e. his intentions are clearly non-violent, and yet the homeowner strikes and kills him, there is blood on the homeowner's hands. From what I've read, most states' Castle Doctrine follows along these lines to varying degrees.

Sometimes the difference between Castle and non-Castle states is blurry, sometimes not. In most cases you cannot pursue an invader who is retreating, or employ deadly force upon a retreating criminal unless they are shooting at you. In other states, such as my own, no deadly force whatsoever can be applied unless you, or a minor under your charge, are unable to retreat AND are actively under threat of imminent severe bodily harm or death. You can't brandish, you can't warn, you can't chase them out, not even if you can see the evil in their eyes and know they're about to strike; they must be actively pursuing you with deadly intent. See how the need to discern the moment of decision in these cases causes even more undue stress and can cause someone to hesitate due to fear of the law, and possibly die because of that hesitation. This is why I believe Castle Doctrine, in any of its interpretations, is desirable.
Duty to retreat is horrible, I hope folks in states where it's still the law are working hard to get rid of it.

The only state I'm aware of that distinguishes between a break-in in the night vs in the day is Texas, IIRC (Texas folks here please chime in to correct if necessary) it is legal there to use deadly force against someone stealing your property in the night and even on such a person who is fleeing with your property. I would be very interested to hear whether any other states' laws differentiate between daytime and nighttime break-ins.
 
I am seeing these signs with more frequency.

What are your thoughts on posting such a sign?
I consider it an advertisement of firearms being inside the home, so wait for people to leave before robbing.

Also, it demonstrates an attitude a prosecutor could bring into play if you kill or wound someone in your home.

I think any sign other than a "No Trespassing" sign is a bad idea.
 
That is epic. Who misspells hog?
-Who would say "You got a purty mouth"?

I say Let them guess... ,

-Or I might get creative.

How about, "Please do not molest the alligators on the premises, They are a Federal Protected Species."

Or, "The property owner can not be held responsible for injuries caused by wild hog attacks."
 
Well, I do own a banjo. I suspect that if I sat on my porch shirtless and picked it, I'd have few callers of any stripe, whether business, social, or criminal. Might be a strategy.
Back where I was originally from, there was a "Hillbilly Mafia". Sounds like you would be their type of preferred legal rep with that persona.
 
That's Hogg as in Boss Hogg not Hog as in pig or a swine. As a kid I used to love watching Dukes of Hazzard. Sadly today thanks to correctness folks such show could not be made or shown.
 
I never understood these types of Castle Doctrine signs. Frankly, I just chalk them up as false bravado. My take on the Castle Doctrine is that in the heat of the moment, my mind will not be thinking legally. I'm not saying I'm going to be a stone cold killer. Quite the opposite. If there is a break-in, my first thought is my family. Where are they, how do I get them to safety, what can I put in front of them to keep them from harm (a door, our dog, myself, etc). If I am armed and they are content to just take my stuff, that's fine. I don't own a single thing that is so rare, so un-insurable, so priceless that is worth taking a life over. I don't want blood on my hands over my 4 year old xbox and my $500 TV. I don't think I would handle it well. I don't think most would handle it well. I think you are most likely a sociopath if you can detach yourself from violent trauma with a shrug.

Now, if they were breaking in with purpose of doing harm to my family, I would shoot them. If a home invader is not deterred by strong language coming from a beefy guy brandishing a gun, then he probably won't stop until some holes are poked in him. The last thing going through my mind would be potential legal ramifications.
 
If I am armed and they are content to just take my stuff, that's fine. I don't own a single thing that is so rare, so un-insurable, so priceless that is worth taking a life over. I don't want blood on my hands over my 4 year old xbox and my $500 TV.
If someone breaches the portcullis of your castle it's hard to know why he's doing so until it is too late. Also, they might not be coming in just to steal your console and tv without knocking you in the head in the process, him not knowing how you will respond to the orc in the living room.
 
In my area I'd have to put the signs up in Spanish so that the threat-types could read them. A few of of the local wanna-be gangsters thought that they could run off the crazy old Anglo that had moved into their territory.
Word got around that I'm an old Medicine Man and that my sister is La Bruja, who can talk with the birds and animals and find out what they know.
This has worked much better than any sign.
 
Last edited:
I do have the little blue ADT signs all around my perimeter.

I'm sure someone might think that advertising one has an alarm system is also advertising to potential thieves there's something in the home worth stealing...

But as one deputy told me after one aborted break-in of my abode: "Guess the moron thought you just got those signs off of Craig's List."

Is what we're talking about here trying to determine whether any type of signage is really a deterrent, whether (1) it might actually encourage bad people or (2) entail legal consequences should the homeowner/resident have to use deadly force?

If some think (1), I'm not in agreement. Bad people gonna do bad stuff regardless. If (2), that's been pretty much de-bunked so long as the circumstances of the use of lethal force fit within the parameters of one's state laws.

I'm all for signs as long as they're really clever or funny. Screw this PC crap that folks in so many states (including my own) have to live with these days.
 
If someone breaches the portcullis of your castle it's hard to know why he's doing so until it is too late. Also, they might not be coming in just to steal your console and tv without knocking you in the head in the process, him not knowing how you will respond to the orc in the living room.
Yeah, what was the 79-year-old guy in the recent thread gonna do to the thug who invaded his home? That didn't stop BG from beating him to a pulp.
 
In my area I'd have to put the signs up in Spanish so that the threat-types could read them. A few of of the local wanna-be gangsters thought that they could run off the crazy old Anglo that had moved into their territory.
Word got around that I'm an old Medicine Man and that my sister is La Bruja, who can talk with the birds and animals and find out what they know.
This has worked much better than any sign.
Very good.

BTW a lot of illegals can't read Spanish either. Ask me how I know...
 
Shoot him in a vital area with several effective bullets.
Too bad other users can't read the mind of the person posting!!! My point was that a BG will likely beat up the homeowner even with no logical reason to do so.

Check out the video, the thread is at https://www.thehighroad.org/index.php?threads/situational-awareness-or-don’t-sit-on-your-porch.850663/ in ST&T. 79-year-old kept saying "Get outta here" with nothing to back it up, alternating with "You're hurting me!", which, duh, was BG's intention, so BG just kept on keeping on.
 
If someone breaches the portcullis of your castle it's hard to know why he's doing so until it is too late. Also, they might not be coming in just to steal your console and tv without knocking you in the head in the process, him not knowing how you will respond to the orc in the living room.

You're interpreting this in a more binary fashion than I am. I'm not saying I would give the invader a questionnaire as to if he was after stuff or blood. If I'm sitting on the couch with the family and my door is kicked in, yes I am reacting with violence.

If i am upstairs, family fortified, and have a clear line of sight of the only way up or down, no I will not be using my Castle Doctrine rights to confront an unknown threat over a couple of thousand dollars worth of stuff that is fully insured.

My point is that many who post CD or aggro-centric "I will shoot you if you come in here" signs are a bit flippant about being totally OK just shooting someone over stuff. I DO NOT feel Duty to Flee as a viable strategy. I am totally OK with someone, anyone, using violent deadly force to protect themselves or their family if someone breaks in. I do not feel bad for a crook who only came in to steal a TV and ended up getting a face full of 00 if the homeowner thought he was a threat.

My point is less about when is it OK to lean on the Castle Doctrine or how one gauges a situation and more about the callous "iffin you come in here, imma shoot you!" mentality of people who feel it is justifiable to equate a totally insured $300 walmart flatscreen as one would have treated a horse in the 1800s. By all means, if someone is in your house, feel free to shoot them. It's your legal right. I just think that some advertising that they will do so are glossing over a major point.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top