Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Liberals all across this country HATE the Castle Doctrine. They've fought tooth and nail against it. That's part of the reason why I hate Liberalism. Because nothing sensible comes from a group of people who find protecting the intruder instead of the victims the right thing to do.
SCUM.
I think you got this completely wrong. I am a liberal and I fully embrace the Castle Doctrine. I wish there was a universal doctrine applicable to ALL states, though, so that it is very clear what you can and can not do under the law.
I want the state to grant me the right to defend myself, my family, my property and not make my a victim. Since I have the right to bear arms, I better also have the right to use them if the circumstances call for it.
You make outlandish generalizations before a liberal even posts in this thread, and then attack all of us, and we're the SCUM?
I have no problem with the Castle Doctrine. You fail.
You, being one liberal, fail completely by attacking the generalization. Attacks on the Castle Doctrine aren't coming from onesies and twosies. It's coming from a contingent of Liberals who hate the Second Amendment. Take a look at the headlines sometimes. Perhaps your own ideology will begin to disgust you too.
A Castle Doctrine (also known as a Castle Law or a Defense of Habitation Law) is an American legal doctrine that designates a person's abode (or, in some states, any place legally occupied, such as a car or place of work) as a place in which the person has certain protections and immunities and may in certain circumstances attack an intruder without becoming liable to prosecution.
This old man sounds like he wanted to emulate the Charles Bronson character in the Death Wish movies.
It also protects outside of your home, such as your car, or bike as in this case, as an extention of your home. He/she has no duty to retreat.
"when the actor reasonably fears imminent peril of death or serious bodily harm to himself or another".[
I thought the castle doctrine referred to someones home
Different jurisdictions grant various definitions. In some areas, it is just the home that you are allowed to protect. In other areas, you are allowed to "stand your ground" if you are threatened without having to retreat, regardless of where you are.
Different jurisdictions grant various definitions. In some areas, it is just the home that you are allowed to protect. In other areas, you are allowed to "stand your ground" if you are threatened without having to retreat, regardless of where you are.
Hope this guy doesn't get charged since if the story is true as told here, they had it coming. But I don't know if the Castle Doctrine really applies to bicycles. If you are IN a vehicle, some states will recognize that, but riding a bike might be a stretch. I have a feeling that the liberals will come out of the woodwork on this one.
Pennsylvania amended their Castle Doctrine last year to apply to standing your ground anywhere you have the right to be.
Liberals all across this country HATE the Castle Doctrine. They've fought tooth and nail against it. That's part of the reason why I hate Liberalism. Because nothing sensible comes from a group of people who find protecting the intruder instead of the victims the right thing to do.
SCUM.
Hmmmmmmmmmm, you have accused me of being a liberal in past threads, yet I support the Castle Doctrine wholeheartedly, and also own weapons.
Guess that little theory of yours has some serious flaws, maybe you should tweak it a bit.
[quote=Skinny Puppy;22717399]But is it called the "Castle Doctrine"?[/quote]
Quote:
Pennsylvania
On Tuesday, June 28, 2011, Pennsylvania (PA) Governor Tom Corbitt (R) signed a bill extending that state's traditional castle doctrine protections to assaults outside the home. The new legislation passed both houses with overwhelming support and expands the state’s castle doctrine and stand-your-ground protections to allow the right to use a gun or other deadly force in self-defense in situations outside a person’s home or business.[28] It applies when "deadly force is immediately necessary to protect [...] against death, serious bodily injury, kidnapping or sexual intercourse compelled by force or threat".[29]
It explicitly denies a duty to retreat and provides legislative protection from civil actions resulting from the use of deadly force in acts of self-defense. The PA General Assembly found that:
(1) It is proper for law-abiding people to protect themselves, their families and others from intruders and attackers without fear of prosecution or civil action for acting in defense of themselves and others. (2) The Castle Doctrine is a common law doctrine of ancient origins which declares that a home is a person's castle. (3) Section 21 of Article I of the Constitution of Pennsylvania guarantees that the "right of the citizens to bear arms in defense of themselves and the State shall not be questioned." (4) Persons residing in or visiting this Commonwealth have a right to expect to remain unmolested within their homes or vehicles. (5) No person should be required to surrender his or her personal safety to a criminal, nor should a person be required to needlessly retreat in the face of intrusion or attack outside the person's home or vehicle.[29]
While the findings specifically mention a defendant's home or vehicle, the amendments to state code enumerated by this legislation extend to any place that a person has a legal right to be, with a few notable exceptions (such as inside a prison).
In red is important, because it extends the doctrine beyond the home
A Castle Doctrine (also known as a Castle Law or a Defense of Habitation Law) is an American legal doctrine that designates a person's abode (or, in some states, any place legally occupied, such as a car or place of work) as a place in which the person has certain protections and immunities and may in certain circumstances attack an intruder without becoming liable to prosecution.
This old man sounds like he wanted to emulate the Charles Bronson character in the Death Wish movies.
A 65 year old man is riding his bike. A group of teens throw him to the ground and assault him. He defends himself and you equate that to Charles Bronson? Are you out of your friggin' mind?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
