Post by Woody Williams on Jul 7, 2006 18:34:49 GMT -5
New 'castle doctrine' law in Ky. allows the use of deadly force
By Stephenie Steitzer
Post staff reporter
A new law that kicks in next week gives Kentuckians the right to use deadly force without fear of being prosecuted or sued if an intruder breaks into their home or occupied vehicle.
That measure, dubbed the "castle doctrine" by its sponsors, is one of two bills passed during the 2006 regular session of the General Assembly that attempts to expand gun rights in Kentucky.
The other exempts concealed carry permits from the state open records law, bars law enforcement officers from seizing weapons during disasters and allows employees to keep firearms in their vehicles on the premises of their employers. It was sponsored by Rep. Carolyn Belcher, D-Owingsville.
Both measures take effect July 12.
"I believe that all these measures passed by the General Assembly that strengthen the right of law-abiding gun owners are entirely in line with the Second Amendment intentions of the founding fathers," said state Sen. Damon Thayer, R-Georgetown, who co-sponsored the castle doctrine bill with state Sen. Dick Roeding, R-Lakeside Park.
The two bills met with little resistance from the legislature, although both have encountered some opposition from outside groups.
Under current law, individuals must retreat before using force in the face of an attack, attempted home invasion or carjacking.
The new law states that "a person who is not engaged in illegal activity and who is attacked in any other place where he or she has a right to be has no duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground and meet force with force."
That includes deadly force, the law notes, if the person "reasonably" believes that necessary to prevent death or serious bodily harm, or the commission of a felony involving the use of force.
Kentucky joins 19 other states with similar laws, including Indiana, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures. Ohio does not have such a law.
Opponents of the castle doctrine say it isn't necessary because in most cases in which an individual shoots an attacker, it already is justified under current self-defense laws. And foes of the law point out that grand juries seldom indict when such cases are brought to them.
The new law would prevent individuals from being prosecuted or sued as long as they used force based on their belief that there was a threat.
"The creators of this law want you to believe the jury system we've had for centuries won't work," said Rene Thompson, a gun-control advocate from Covington. "They don't want you to trust the police who have been trained to investigate a situation, and they don't believe in the prosecutors."
The Kentucky Academy of Trial Attorneys did not fight the bill because it had overwhelming support by legislators in both parties, said Meresa Fawns, the organization's executive director.
But the group does not like the legislation.
"Anytime you take away a right to trial by jury we have concerns," she said.
Prosecutors have mixed opinions about the new law.
Boone Commonwealth Attorney Linda Tally Smith said she feared the new law could be abused by people who would claim self-defense in situations where there wasn't a real threat.
She said she is reminded of a case in Boone County last summer involving two men who had had an earlier dispute.
James McMahon, 20, of Warsaw, was shot in the leg as he knocked on the door of the Walton home of Anthony "Scott" Cooper, 27, Smith said.
As McMahon knocked, Cooper called police and told them he was going to shoot McMahon, Smith said.
She said Cooper was convicted last month of first-degree assault.
Smith said she is afraid that the new law would deem Cooper justified in shooting McMahon.
"It's designed to create a situation where people can feel more protected in their homes, but unfortunately it is just opening the door for abuses," she said.
But Campbell Commonwealth Attorney Jack Porter said he didn't believe the new law would have a significant impact on the legal system.
"As a prosecutor, I'm not concerned people are going to take the law into their own hands," he said.
Porter said he could recall only one instance in his 16 years in the prosecutor's office in which a homeowner shot and killed an intruder. A grand jury declined to press charges in that case.
Smith said a Grant County grand jury last year also declined to charge an elderly Williamstown man who fatally shot an intruder.
Advocates of the castle doctrine say that although existing law generally safeguards individuals who act in self-defense from prosecution or civil suits, the measure is to provide them with peace of mind.
Thayer said homeowners should not have to stop and ask an intruder whether he or she plans to inflict harm or simply steal a DVD player before using force to defend themselves.
"If someone was robbing your house, you couldn't use a weapon to protect yourself without fear of prosecution," he said of current law.
With all the various interpretations of the new law, Covington attorney Phil Taliaferro said he suspects the statute would eventually be challenged.
"I suspect that the Kentucky Supreme Court will have to decide whether or not the statute passes Constitutional muster," he said.
news.cincypost.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060706/NEWS01/607060345
By Stephenie Steitzer
Post staff reporter
A new law that kicks in next week gives Kentuckians the right to use deadly force without fear of being prosecuted or sued if an intruder breaks into their home or occupied vehicle.
That measure, dubbed the "castle doctrine" by its sponsors, is one of two bills passed during the 2006 regular session of the General Assembly that attempts to expand gun rights in Kentucky.
The other exempts concealed carry permits from the state open records law, bars law enforcement officers from seizing weapons during disasters and allows employees to keep firearms in their vehicles on the premises of their employers. It was sponsored by Rep. Carolyn Belcher, D-Owingsville.
Both measures take effect July 12.
"I believe that all these measures passed by the General Assembly that strengthen the right of law-abiding gun owners are entirely in line with the Second Amendment intentions of the founding fathers," said state Sen. Damon Thayer, R-Georgetown, who co-sponsored the castle doctrine bill with state Sen. Dick Roeding, R-Lakeside Park.
The two bills met with little resistance from the legislature, although both have encountered some opposition from outside groups.
Under current law, individuals must retreat before using force in the face of an attack, attempted home invasion or carjacking.
The new law states that "a person who is not engaged in illegal activity and who is attacked in any other place where he or she has a right to be has no duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground and meet force with force."
That includes deadly force, the law notes, if the person "reasonably" believes that necessary to prevent death or serious bodily harm, or the commission of a felony involving the use of force.
Kentucky joins 19 other states with similar laws, including Indiana, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures. Ohio does not have such a law.
Opponents of the castle doctrine say it isn't necessary because in most cases in which an individual shoots an attacker, it already is justified under current self-defense laws. And foes of the law point out that grand juries seldom indict when such cases are brought to them.
The new law would prevent individuals from being prosecuted or sued as long as they used force based on their belief that there was a threat.
"The creators of this law want you to believe the jury system we've had for centuries won't work," said Rene Thompson, a gun-control advocate from Covington. "They don't want you to trust the police who have been trained to investigate a situation, and they don't believe in the prosecutors."
The Kentucky Academy of Trial Attorneys did not fight the bill because it had overwhelming support by legislators in both parties, said Meresa Fawns, the organization's executive director.
But the group does not like the legislation.
"Anytime you take away a right to trial by jury we have concerns," she said.
Prosecutors have mixed opinions about the new law.
Boone Commonwealth Attorney Linda Tally Smith said she feared the new law could be abused by people who would claim self-defense in situations where there wasn't a real threat.
She said she is reminded of a case in Boone County last summer involving two men who had had an earlier dispute.
James McMahon, 20, of Warsaw, was shot in the leg as he knocked on the door of the Walton home of Anthony "Scott" Cooper, 27, Smith said.
As McMahon knocked, Cooper called police and told them he was going to shoot McMahon, Smith said.
She said Cooper was convicted last month of first-degree assault.
Smith said she is afraid that the new law would deem Cooper justified in shooting McMahon.
"It's designed to create a situation where people can feel more protected in their homes, but unfortunately it is just opening the door for abuses," she said.
But Campbell Commonwealth Attorney Jack Porter said he didn't believe the new law would have a significant impact on the legal system.
"As a prosecutor, I'm not concerned people are going to take the law into their own hands," he said.
Porter said he could recall only one instance in his 16 years in the prosecutor's office in which a homeowner shot and killed an intruder. A grand jury declined to press charges in that case.
Smith said a Grant County grand jury last year also declined to charge an elderly Williamstown man who fatally shot an intruder.
Advocates of the castle doctrine say that although existing law generally safeguards individuals who act in self-defense from prosecution or civil suits, the measure is to provide them with peace of mind.
Thayer said homeowners should not have to stop and ask an intruder whether he or she plans to inflict harm or simply steal a DVD player before using force to defend themselves.
"If someone was robbing your house, you couldn't use a weapon to protect yourself without fear of prosecution," he said of current law.
With all the various interpretations of the new law, Covington attorney Phil Taliaferro said he suspects the statute would eventually be challenged.
"I suspect that the Kentucky Supreme Court will have to decide whether or not the statute passes Constitutional muster," he said.
news.cincypost.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060706/NEWS01/607060345
Another reaffirmation of our Constitutional protections is always welcomed by me , with the incresingly violent nature of criminals this is a good thing for the would be victim to have on their side .