Is there a " Duty To Retreat" ?

[JimCZPRet]

Duty to Retreat

The first change in the formerly Democrate controlled NC Legislator in 112 years has passed several favorable gun laws effective DEC 1st, 2011. The Castle doctrine expands ones "duty" from the home to any location if threatened to use sufficient force, without concern of lawsuits or prosecutiion.
Unfortunately the Senate failed to act on the House bill permitting CCW (concealed) licensees to enter restaurants serving beer/alcohol to purchase meals and NOT concume alcohol. So we are still behind neighboring states in that respect. Just a pain to leave the range, and remember to lock my pistol in the car before entering the corner eatery!
Stay safe.

JimCZPret

 

[bmcgilvray]

Not at my house.

 

[Rule3]

In some States there is a big difference in the Castle Doctrine and Stand your Ground.

As I and others mentioned, the Stand your Ground In Florida is anywhere. Home, car, parking lot etc. Other States, The Castle is just that, your Home. So you may be OK in your home and not have to run like a rat and hide in a closet, outside in a public area may be entirely different.

 

[Florida Guy]

It's good to have the law with no Duty To Retreat here.
I hope I never have to take advantage of it.

 

[SmokewagonSD]

No duty to retreat here in South Dakota

 

[indiandave]

Pennsylvania just passed their castle doctrine law. I think it goes into effect around the end of the month. About time!

 

[g_conway]

California

California basicly says you have the right to self defense.
The right to carry a loaded firearm to protect:
Your home, or property at your home (vehicles etc.)
iminent threat to your life or THE LIVES OF OTHERS.

The law says you DO NOT have to retreat in these situations.

ANY other situation, CA. says retreat.

Gerry

 

[Fishslayer]

In California, we are only allowed to shoot if the intruder is a legal resident.

And armed... and completely inside the house.... and we can't run out a back door...

We're supposed to call 911, let the BG take our stuff, and give the cops info for their report when they get there.

If we're lucky they won't shoot our dogs...

And don't let the BG see your weapon. You could wind up in court for "brandishing a weapon."

 

[redlevel]

Georgia has had a Stand Your Ground/Shoot First/License To Murder law since 2006. Applies to home, vehicle, business, and the ground you are standing on. There are also state preemptions that deny counties and municipalities the ability to undercut the state law with local ordinances. Counties and municipalities may have ordinances restricting discharge of firearms, except in self defense.

I have heard it said that Georgia is one of the few states left where "he needed killin" is still a viable defense.

I thank God every day for allowing me to be born in Georgia, and for giving me the good sense to not leave.

 

[dcxplant]

In OK, legally no, and I wouldn't leave my house or car.

However, when outside and I spot an apparent setup in progress, I can and have maneuvered to get some cover and narrow the approach, which has discouraged the situation being pressed. In other words, the best outcome for me is avoidance if the situation permits. One pair of JDs that appeared to be stalking me were later arrested for assault of another person.

Great situational awareness!

It pays to be a sheepdog and not a sheep, leo or not. Keep yours eyes and ears peeled. No need to walk around paranoid, just keep your awareness bubble expanded, and in certain places, anticipate the threat and if possible see and avoid.

 

[CAJUNLAWYER]

You had every right to be in that crosswalk-the light was green and that car should NOT have run over you and killed you. You had no obligation to jump back-you had every right to stand your ground. The car driver was absolutely WRONG in running you over and killing you. You're family is going to get a LOT of money from his insurance carrier.

As far as that retreat thing-I'm gonna do everything I can do to get away from the intruder and when it boils down to either he dies or I die-I will shoot. That's what self defense is.


Sorry.

 

[cmort666]

As far as that retreat thing-I'm gonna do everything I can do to get away from the intruder and when it boils down to either he dies or I die-I will shoot.

I was a lousy runner as a 21 year old Infantry 2Lt. I'm not one millisecond faster at 53. You've got to be in pretty lousy shape if I can outrun you.

Of course one of the REALLY valuable pieces of information I acquired in the Army was, "You can't outrun a bullet."

 

[NCW Ray]

In California, we are only allowed to shoot if the intruder is a legal resident.

You'd have better odds at winning the lottery!

 

[redlevel]

You had every right to be in that crosswalk-the light was green and that car should NOT have run over you and killed you. You had no obligation to jump back-you had every right to stand your ground. The car driver was absolutely WRONG in running you over and killing you. You're family is going to get a LOT of money from his insurance carrier.

As far as that retreat thing-I'm gonna do everything I can do to get away from the intruder and when it boils down to either he dies or I die-I will shoot. That's what self defense is.


Sorry.

I don't think your analogy works too well. There's a big difference in your crosswalk scenario and someone kicking in my door. I would be at a much greater disadvantage if the law requires me to retreat until my back is to the wall rather than to confront the intruder at the earliest convenience. Your advice might be good on a lot of forums, but I don't think too many of us consider the "no duty to retreat" component of the law as a license to go out hunting a confrontation. Outside my home, I will take advantage of every means of avoidance of a confrontation.

 

[gizamo]

Caj,

Tough day in traffic court?....

 

[cmort666]

I don't think your analogy works too well. There's a big difference in your crosswalk scenario and someone kicking in my door. I would be at a much greater disadvantage if the law requires me to retreat until my back is to the wall rather than to confront the intruder at the earliest convenience. Your advice might be good on a lot of forums, but I don't think too many of us consider the "no duty to retreat" component of the law as a license to go out hunting a confrontation. Outside my home, I will take advantage of every means of avoidance of a confrontation.

If I tried to flee from my current home, the BEST CASE scenario is a broken leg from the fall. In my previous homes, death from a broken neck or back was FAR more likely.

Regardless of the law, I'm not jumping out of a fifth floor window to protect an assailant from the consequences of his own bad choices.

 

[BuckeyeChuck]

In Ohio, you have the duty to retreat IF you're outside of your home or automobile. Contrary to the misconceptions of some, that does NOT mean that you have ANY duty to turn your back on a dangerous assailant and try to run away. You merely need to ATTEMPT to withdraw from a confrontation, if you can do so in PERFECT SAFETY. If your assailant attempts to prevent your retreat, shame on him.

We have immunity from suit for a successful defense. If the shoot is ruled justified, sue all you want. You'll never collect a dime. I imagine it's hard to get a lawyer to file a frivolous suit on a contingent basis if he knows he's never going to get paid.

Laws, Acts, and Legislation

“Castle Doctrine” Bill Passes Ohio Senate, Beware Criminals, No Civil Lawsuits for You | ePluribus Media

In Ohio, civil immunity only applies to defensible shootings within the context of castle doctrine. Protection is offered if you shoot somebody under the following circustances:

(1) You're in your residence or car, or the car of an immediate family member. I cannot speak educatedly about how the courts have interpreted "residence". Is it just my home? Is it my tent at a campground? Is it my sister's house when I'm over for dinner? However it is defined, you have no duty to retreat from your residence, your car, or the car of an immediate family member in which you are occupant.

(2) The shooting was justified self-defense, meaning that you or a person in your residence or car was under credible threat of bodily harm or death. ORC does not allow deadly use of force to protect property.

(3) The person who was shot was not legally in the residence or car.

(4) The person who was shot was engaged in an act that could be prosecuted as a felony, or as a misdemeanor of violence.

As I read it, if you're not in your residence or car, Ohio Revised Code does not provide immunity from civil liability, even if the use of deadly forced was deemed justified. This lack of immunity outside of castle doctrine is a major reason why Ohio's laws are still unfriendly to concealed carry licensees. It is also a reason why I mentally prepare to retreat if at all possible. Outside of the natural desire not to shoot somebody, I wish to avoid the court proceedings and their devastating consequences if at all possible.

As far as I am aware, no additional changes to Ohio Revised Code have been signed into law that provide blanket civil immunity for justified shootings. If it has been changed, I would appreciate being pointed to the pertinent sections of ORC.

 

[cmort666]

In Ohio, civil immunity only applies to defensible shootings within the context of castle doctrine.

I believe that that is not correct. I will check and get back to you.

 

[Social Outcast]

No retreat in Arizona.

 

[daveh75]

In California, we are only allowed to shoot if the intruder is a legal resident.

Sip....almost lost my bourbon on that one....wife is hispanic so when she asked me what happened...well she got that look and said she didn't want to know....