Fairmont vs. Mt. Notre Dame
Miami Valley styles
'Tis the Season Festival
Get latest headlines via RSS feeds
NewsVine
Del.icio.us
Digg
Facebook
Furl
Reddit
StumbleuponSelf-defense law will change Tuesday
> New law puts onus on prosecutors
> Will the new law make you feel safer?
Monday, September 08, 2008
For years, gun rights advocates have stressed to lawmakers the importance of protecting the home, sometimes with even deadly force.
Beginning Tuesday, Sept. 9, those defenders will get the benefit of the doubt. As part of several concealed carry law updates scheduled to take effect, Ohio will adopt a version of the Castle Doctrine, which states that a person using force against an intruder in the home or car is presumed to have acted in self-defense.
Gun rights advocates say the law is a long time coming, while prosecutors are concerned that the trying of such cases will be more difficult.
Currently, if a criminal case comes from such an incident, the person who used force must prove it was self-defense.
Under the Castle Doctrine — already in effect in several states and named for the centuries-old theory that a person must protect his or her property (or castle) — it will be the prosecutors' job to prove it wasn't self-defense, which all admit is a much more difficult task.
"Right now, if someone breaks into your house tonight and waves a knife at you and you shoot them, you have to prove their intent," said Jim Irvine, chairman of the Buckeye Firearms Association, a state gun rights advocacy group.
"They're saying, 'Was their intent to sell you knives, or to kill you? Well, prove it.' That's what is going to change," Irvine said.
Contact this reporter at (937) 225-7389 or knagel@DaytonDailyNews.com
Castle Doctrine
S.B. 184 states that the law, the Castle Doctrine, will "create a rebuttable presumption that a person acted in self-defense or defense of another when using defensive force that is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm to another if the person against whom the defensive force is used is in the process of entering or has entered, unlawfully and without privilege to do so, the residence or vehicle occupied by the person using the defensive force."
Comments
By SnowMan
September 9, 2008 9:38 AM | Link to this
Hey “dirtmusic” were Did you read in bill S.B. 184 THAT THIS WAS A BLACK OR WHITE BILL???OR maybe you just didn’t or couldn’t read it, which ever.Black, White, Blue, Green, Mexican, Rug Head or any above with, STRIPS..You come in My door un-invite,I don’t care if your saling guns knives or the Holy Bible I’ll bust a cap in you A*S..Do all you “DIRTBAGS” HEAR THAT????THOSE’S WHO WOULD POUND THEIR ARMS INTO PLOWS,WILL BECOME “SLAVES, TO THOSE WHO WOULDN’T”…The SnowMan….
By Dirtmusic
September 9, 2008 1:46 AM | Link to this
Sorry about the triple message… Did I stutter…
By Dirtmusic
September 9, 2008 1:42 AM | Link to this
Well Left of Left: Sounds like you are assuming all criminals are black… Sounds pretty racist to me…
By Dirtmusic
September 9, 2008 1:41 AM | Link to this
Well Left of Left: Sounds like you are assuming all criminals are black… Sounds pretty racist to me…
By Dirt
September 9, 2008 1:29 AM | Link to this
Well, Left of Left. I guess you are assuming all criminals are black… Sounds pretty racist to me…
By left of left
September 9, 2008 1:08 AM | Link to this
Well, all you gun totin’ varmints all oughta pack up all that hate and ignorance and take it to a country that really appreciates people randomly and irrationally firing weapons at anyone black they see, like for example the Sudan. They could really use folks like you who hide your racism and hatred behind the pretense of defending your homes and families. I have read the venom you have spewed about fellow American citizens who think differently from you, and I am ashamed you are Americans too
By lawabider
September 8, 2008 10:39 PM | Link to this
It’s disturbing that the change was needed. Self-reliance has been schooled out of us and it looks like the law was trying to reiterate that.
By USMC83
September 8, 2008 10:20 PM | Link to this
As a prior service Marine I am glad to finally see this state enact such a law. I would have protected myself or my family by any means necessary. As for ol tran and his wife, if you feel as though you need to steal what I have worked my tail off, go ahead. Just dont be too suprised to be staring down the barrel of my AR or my 45. It serves you right. Many people in this country get up off their lazy behinds and work for a living. Why dont you try it sometime, its liberating.
By Freedomlover
September 8, 2008 9:49 PM | Link to this
Is some sanity returning to this state? It’s long overdue that Ohioans have the “right” to protect their families with deadly force, if need be. Maybe this will send a strong message to the unemployed thugs roaming the streets of our ciites; ” you break in and your dead meat!”
By Wordell
September 8, 2008 6:11 PM | Link to this
Kennesaw, Georgia: There was a murder at a motel on I-75 with a handgun after the “everybody armed” law came into effect in Kennesaw, Georgia. Two people from out of state (who, after the murder occured, we’re determined to be “gay”>>>butt blasters, fudge packers, rump runners, tail gunners, Hershey Highwaymen, sphincter specificators ect.) got into a hissy fit and decided to get a bit “hissier” than normal “hissyness”. The end result was not “gay”.
By BIG D
September 8, 2008 6:02 PM | Link to this
The whole thing is a nothing. doesn’t change a thing for me. At any time in my life I would have and will still kill the person breaking into my domain for bad reason…..law or no law. So be warned !!!! Big D PS: I’ll take the “after heat”
By Wordell
September 8, 2008 5:57 PM | Link to this
Jim Peterson: Correct, Sir…Kennesaw, Georgia!!! An armed society is a polite society. Home invasions/car jackings have been reduced to near zero (from previous percentages) when Georgia allowed us to shoot anyone entering our home, or vehicle, without our permission. End result: Peace/safety. “Hood” shootings have stayed the same due to belief in Jackson/Sharpton/Osama…(‘Scuse me my sub-saharan “friends”), Obama.
By Wordell
September 8, 2008 5:34 PM | Link to this
Dan Fugett: Dan, It’ll take much more energy than I care to expend, to “squash” your theory. Police forensics will take care of your “mixed thoughts”. Do you a believe in Rodney’s “Can’t we all just get along?” There are those out there who are just waiting, salivating, and know you’re there for the picking(!), to do you harm. What is wrong with defending yourself!!!??? Dan, can I come to Dayton to kick your a*s?…defile your child/wife/girlfriend? What are you going to do? Call Dr. Phil?
By bparks
September 8, 2008 5:01 PM | Link to this
A lot of you don’t seen to see that we law abidding citizens also have the right to protect ourselfs even when we are walking say like to our car in the parking lot of a mall. I can not wait to see what the editors of the Journal have to say in defense of the criminal elements that they seen to take up for. Also for Police depts. that think we law abidding citizens should not be allowed to protect ourselfs, now with these laws and red light cameras should we not cut your numbers in half.
By Wordell
September 8, 2008 4:48 PM | Link to this
By JoJo
September 8, 2008 4:31 PM | Link to this
It is about time!
By Lea
September 8, 2008 3:59 PM | Link to this
I’m not comfortable with the rifle in my closet, but if you break into my house, you’d better be prepared. I’ll be dialling 911 on my silent keypad while loading (which I can do pretty quietly too). When you finally do hear me you’d better hope the cops get there before I pull the trigger. Stay out of my home and I won’t shoot. Don’t give me any reason to protect myself and my kids, because I will. Ever crossed an angry stepmother? Don’t start with me. I don’t care whether or not you’re armed.
By Log Cabin John
September 8, 2008 3:51 PM | Link to this
I worked for nearly 60 years. Never stole from anyone. Someone genuinely needy can knock on my door — I’ll give him some gas, access to my phone, food or a few bucks. If he, or they, approach me or my family with guns or weapons of any kind, I know an attack is coming. Good folks don’t carry drawn weapons when they ask for assistance. Those who do know full well that old dudes like me will shoot them at the drop of a hat. It’s liberal thinking that changed sensible laws — not working people!
By Pat
September 8, 2008 3:42 PM | Link to this
It’s about time! Under our constitution, I really don’t see why this rule was ever revoked in the first place. I’m glad to see some the new laws that finally allow us to defend ourselves.
By TDP
September 8, 2008 3:03 PM | Link to this
It all “boils down to” if you attack my house, meaning if you come in “un-invited” through the doors or windows, you will be greeted with a physical force such as, that you will be required to be removed - feet first from my house.
By larry
September 8, 2008 2:24 PM | Link to this
i encourage intruders!
By Big Bore
September 8, 2008 1:53 PM | Link to this
Better to be judged by twelve than carried by six. I prefer the big bores for their initial knock down power. Remember to follow that first shot up with an insurance round to the criminals head because if you just wound them they will later come back and sue ya .
By Chris Cain
September 8, 2008 1:39 PM | Link to this
I believe that not matter what situation we deal with in life we should always try to use sound judgment.By being a law biding citizen does not mean we have to be the victim or the aggressor.
By Blanco
September 8, 2008 1:07 PM | Link to this
I just don’t think that the Trans get it. “We’re not rich, we gots no jobs”…..Give me a break!! Get a job!! You could start saving money by getting rid of the internet. Luxiory not necessity. It sounds like you came to this country by choice. If thats the case, obey the laws and carry your own weight. What would they’ve done to you in the country you came from? Maybe take your hands, or even worse? So quit crying about a citizen protecting what he/she has worked hard for.
By Jack
September 8, 2008 1:05 PM | Link to this
To the idiot thief and his equally idiot wife,
The people you steal from did not get their property by stealing it from others, they got it by working for it. The same goes for if they are rich I’m sorry you don’t have jobs. If you want a job take a look at your yourself and your principles, compare it to everyone else. Do you see why you are unemployable?
PS Quit getting high in front of your kids!
By Scott T.
September 8, 2008 1:05 PM | Link to this
On Wednesday, September 11 at 11AM, I will have yellow Mini-Cooper convertible (with the top open) parked in the middle of the K-mart shopping center on Indian Ripple across from The Greene. On the front seat will be a white purse. . . .
By Wendy Weinbaum
September 8, 2008 1:05 PM | Link to this
As a Jewess in the US, may I remind everyone that criminals are stopped by FIREARMS, not by talk? And that America wasn’t won with a registered gun? That is why all REAL Americans put our 2nd Amendment FIRST!
By preacher,franklin ohio
September 8, 2008 1:03 PM | Link to this
put faith and trust in god not self defense, geter done for jesus god bless you all love inchirst preacher.
By BO BO
September 8, 2008 12:50 PM | Link to this
I have a permit to carry a weapon and I do. I pray that I NEVER have to use it but If I Pull it out I will use it in a deadly way!!! Live with in the laws and we have no problems .
By TuanTranBellbrook
September 8, 2008 12:48 PM | Link to this
Ok I think I going to get gun now to protect self.
By Jim Petersen
September 8, 2008 12:22 PM | Link to this
Quote:By TuanTranBellbrook
September 8, 2008 11:36 AM | Link to this
I don’t break in people’s car or home to hurt someone, I just wanted that nice radio or purse lying in your car seat and never intend to hurt anyone, But to get shot and kill for that is injustice. Even criminals like me need a day in court (if I get caught). Don’t kill me unless I intend to hurt or kill you or your love ones. is that fair? Unquote: WHY SHOULD I WORK MY BUTT OFF to provide you with DRUGS or anything?
By Jim Petersen
September 8, 2008 12:16 PM | Link to this
If my memory serves me correctly, it wasn’t too many years back that a small town in Georgia enacted a ruling that all homeowners shall own at least one form of defense for the protection of his home against unlawful entry by perpetrators who enter with the intent to steal or harm the residents. The town was Kennesaw? Results proved that the crime rate practically disappeared and there were no accidental deaths in that same time frame. Jim Petersen
By Jim Petersen
September 8, 2008 12:16 PM | Link to this
If my memory serves me correctly, it wasn’t too many years back that a small town in Georgia enacted a ruling that all homeowners shall own at least one form of defense for the protection of his home against unlawful entry by perpetrators who enter with the intent to steal or harm the residents. The town was Kennesaw? Results proved that the crime rate practically disappeared and there were no accidental deaths in that same time frame. Jim Petersen
By foo bar
September 8, 2008 12:07 PM | Link to this
If overzealous prosecutors trying to create notches in the prosecutorial belts had shown proper discretion in not prosecuting clear self-defense cases in the past, this law would have never been necessary. They caused the problem, now they can deal with the solution.
By April
September 8, 2008 11:58 AM | Link to this
To whoever formatted the question here…it has nothing to do with being “safe” it’s more about justice being properly made in a courtroom. You could before this shoot a criminal that was intruding in your house. Now you don’t have to prove the criminal had ill will, the criminal (or prosecutor) would have to prove they DIDN’T intend ill will. So safety has nothing to do with it. It’s more about the peace of mind…granted it’s still something no one would want to do.
By Nick
September 8, 2008 11:53 AM | Link to this
I feel the need to respond to TuanTranBellbrook. I think it is absolutely fair if you get hurt or shot trying to steal from someone else, when you steal from someone else. If that happens it is no one’s fault but your own. You choose the action you choose the result. It is as simple as that. If more people got shot while engaging in activities such as this, there wouldn’t be as many idiots who feel entitled to another’s possessions because they are too lazy to work.
By NgaTranBellbrook
September 8, 2008 11:42 AM | Link to this
I agree with TuanTranBellbrook, cause he is my husband. we sometime have tough times and no jobs and no money, we steals to feed our self and don’t get rich like you rich folks. can you all just give a little without kill us? under God’s eye, we are all his children, whether good or bad, we deserve to live no matter what’ve done.
By DeLone Jones Jr
September 8, 2008 11:37 AM | Link to this
The new law will not make me feel safer. I puts the law back where it belongs which is innocent until proven guilty. The victim should not feel like a criminal for protecting their family or their own life. Ohio has a long way to go to give it’s citizens back the proper rights they should have to protect themselves. The police can not and will not do it for us. We must take some responsobility.
By Brenda
September 8, 2008 11:36 AM | Link to this
Is it not time to take care of our own instead of the poor little drug addicts who atty’s defend. If anyone is in my home that I did not invite, I will not ask before I shoot, I will however call 911 to let the police come and began the procedure of defending the quilty.
By TuanTranBellbrook
September 8, 2008 11:36 AM | Link to this
I don’t break in people’s car or home to hurt someone, I just wanted that nice radio or purse lying in your car seat and never intend to hurt anyone, But to get shot and kill for that is injustice. Even criminals like me need a day in court (if I get caught). Don’t kill me unless I intend to hurt or kill you or your love ones. is that fair?
By joe
September 8, 2008 11:35 AM | Link to this
I along with the majority here would have no hesitation protecting my family. If you are breaking into my house I will “feel threatend” and I will shoot first. HE WHO HESITATES IS LOST - “Swift and resolute action leads to success; self-doubt is a prelude to disaster. The proverb goes back to ‘Cato’ (1713) by English essayist and poet Joseph Addison. First attested in the United States in ‘The Autocrat of the Breakfast Table” (1858) by Oliver Wendell Holmes.” From “Random House Dictionary of Popular Proverbs and Sayings” by Gregory Y. Titelman (Random House, New York, 1996).
By jms
September 8, 2008 11:14 AM | Link to this
In the concept, “innocent until proven guilty”, the burden of proof rests on the accuser, not the accused. The Castle Doctrine more closely adheres to that concept than does the law as presently practiced (which will change as the Castle Doctrine takes effect).
By Tom
September 8, 2008 11:11 AM | Link to this
Heaven forbid any unwelcome person, young or old enters our home without permission. “Lock and Load”
By Tom
September 8, 2008 11:11 AM | Link to this
Heaven forbid any unwelcome person, young or old enters our home without permission. “Lock and Load”
By wolf
September 8, 2008 10:30 AM | Link to this
ble to protect thems an family
By sentinel
September 8, 2008 10:24 AM | Link to this
J. Lamar…Have you not been paying attention? Criminals have already become more hostile. This criminal hugging trend in our coutry isn’t working. If they think you will feel sorry for them because they had it rough growing up, they think it’s funny and laugh. They play this game to get people to feel bad for them, get lenience and take advantage of that the next time. If you give them a little room, you better bet that they will be expecting more in the future.
By Big G.
September 8, 2008 10:06 AM | Link to this
God said to obey the laws of the land. Works for me!!! Our police force amounts to nothing more than cowards with a good paying job. I can police my own, thank you. And if it just so happens that I have to drop some low-life in the process, then so be it!
By Hooray
September 8, 2008 10:04 AM | Link to this
The first post (Dan F.) on this string says that people are not good natured at their core.
Perhaps he should move. The few out there that are bad are the ones this law will help weed out.
It is hilarious to conceive that people are now going to commit murder and stage a scene.
I’m not aware of this being a problem in any state with a Castle Doctrine. Just because the homeowner is presumed innocent doesn’t mean there won’t be an investigation.
Get a grip!
By San
September 8, 2008 9:52 AM | Link to this
I’m a firearms instructor, and it’s about time that the victim doesn’t have to explain the action of criminals. When someone has his/her mind made up that their going to harm you or take what you’ve worked for, you have to understand that you must do what’s needed to WIN!!! Those who have never had anything happen to them or a loved one would never understand. Remember, BAD THINGS happen to GOOD PEOPLE.
By Jim
September 8, 2008 9:49 AM | Link to this
Since when did law breakers only get small caliber guns? This change was late arriving. Dan, why do you talk when it makes you look ridiculous. We need laws to stop crime, not support it, finally we can stop it ourselves as the police and government refuse to be more than report takers.
By shootfirstlol
September 8, 2008 9:41 AM | Link to this
Great law, but regardless if you invaded my home my semi automatic Remington 12 gauge would give you a warm welcome and one that you would never forget! When it comes to my house and wife and children I would do anything to protect their lives, up to and including deadly force!
By J Lamar Daniel
September 8, 2008 9:25 AM | Link to this
What I think is going to happen is the fact that if a criminal knows he can be shot for invading your home or car, they will have more tendencies to get higher caliber guns and not be concerned about taking the owners life. This is not a law that will eliminate house/car invaders but more likely to make them more hostile than before.
By bob
September 8, 2008 9:20 AM | Link to this
Now the system cant make all that money from taking someone to trail that was only protected themselves. You think they will have to find another way to re-coop that lost revenue?
By smoke & mirrors
September 8, 2008 9:19 AM | Link to this
Criminals should understand that their chosen profession has a high risk of death..be afraid..be very afraid!!
By smoke & mirrors
September 8, 2008 9:18 AM | Link to this
Criminals should understand that their chosen profession has a high risk of death..be afraid..be very afraid!!
By Dave
September 8, 2008 9:16 AM | Link to this
The new law makes me feel safer, not from criminals, but rather from prosecuters. I have no more or less reservations about defending my family, home or person than under the previous laws. It is something that I will do regardless.
But now, I feel safer that any actions I find necessary to protect myself or my family will be less likely to cost me my freedom.
By Mike
September 8, 2008 9:13 AM | Link to this
I never gave a second thought as to what the law said, if you roll into my house forcibly you’re gonna get shot, period. I’d never hesitate to protect the lives of my wife and children.
By E Boone
September 8, 2008 9:11 AM | Link to this
Safer? From prosecution for acting in the defense of others or myself, possibly. The real question would seem, “Does it make home invaders and others similarly inclined feel less safe?”
By Frank
September 8, 2008 8:53 AM | Link to this
I wouldn’t think twice about shooting someone who broke into my home. Although I wonder if this law will deter any home invaders. Or if many even know that its going into effect?
By Tom
September 8, 2008 8:49 AM | Link to this
Yes! Now I think I’ll stick a copy of my Concealed Carry Permit on my front door!!
By John O
September 8, 2008 8:47 AM | Link to this
On Dan Fugett’s thoughts. You have given me a good idea to Just invite a Criminal To lunch and do what the police are not allowed to. “Thin Them Out” the legal way. Thanks Dan
By Rick Millward
September 8, 2008 8:41 AM | Link to this
It’s about time prosecutors, police were put in check. I’ve suffered a few times from being attacked and being charged with assault in the past & I knew then there wasn’t any self defense for people. The police would tell you they’re supposed to protect you rather than you protecting yourself. Where’s the police when you need them? I wouldn’t put my life on the line waiting for them to come.
By John O
September 8, 2008 8:40 AM | Link to this
This law will not change anything as far as the safty of the citizens because criminals will think no different as they do now. The only good thing I see about the change in the law is that this is just one of the many “Rights” that protect the criminal from the citizen that the criminal will lose. Good start but a long way to go.
By Dan Bever
September 8, 2008 8:35 AM | Link to this
Yes it makes me feel alot safer because I should have the right to protect myself and family in our own home. For to long the laws have been to protect the criminals thank God someone finally is getting smart. I am a senior citizen and can’t move around like these young punks do so therefore I can’t protect myself like I should be able to.
By Leslie
September 8, 2008 8:33 AM | Link to this
It’s about time! I remember when that was they way in Ohio. You could protect your home and yourself, but somewhere down the line it got changed to protect the criminal. Glad to see Ohio is finally waking up and realizing that we are in America and we have the right to defend our home.
By aharddaysnight
September 8, 2008 8:29 AM | Link to this
Yes it will make me fel better. Maybe criminals will think twice if they know there is a chance of getting killed in a robbery. Not only that but no one has the right to enter your home without your permission.
By Dan Fugett
September 8, 2008 8:29 AM | Link to this
Mixed thoughts.
For those people really just protecting their homes, it puts the burden on the state to prove a different motive. That is great if we were good people in our core nature.
But we arent.
So now those people with bad motives, all they have to do is shoot someone and stick a knife in their hand. Murder becomes a no brainer if it is done “in the castle” - all behavior in a person’s “castle” is tacitly approved.
Why did this way of thinking changed from medieval times??