Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

SecularMotion

(7,981 posts)
Thu Apr 4, 2013, 04:14 PM Apr 2013

'Stand Your Ground' on Shaky Ground?

Early lopsided votes on various amendments suggested Democrats in the majority of the New Hampshire House would muscle through a bill to repeal the state's "stand your ground" law, which Republicans enacted last session. Boy, was the conventional wisdom off target on this one.

After a heated two-hour debate Wednesday, the bill narrowly passed: 189 to 184.

The bill now goes to the state Senate. Regardless of the outcome, critics promised it would be a 2014 campaign issue.

http://londonderry.patch.com/articles/stand-your-ground-on-shaky-ground-1b5f1476
4 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
'Stand Your Ground' on Shaky Ground? (Original Post) SecularMotion Apr 2013 OP
I fail to see how DTR is progressive or liberal gejohnston Apr 2013 #1
I've always had mixed feelings on SYG bossy22 Apr 2013 #2
those are actually two different things gejohnston Apr 2013 #3
I'm well aware of the differences between SYG and Castle Doctrine bossy22 Apr 2013 #4

gejohnston

(17,502 posts)
1. I fail to see how DTR is progressive or liberal
Thu Apr 4, 2013, 04:29 PM
Apr 2013

since it is based on medieval UK common law. It also demands someone defending someone who defends themselves to prove their innocence of a crime (justifiable homicide is not a crime.)
http://www.unionleader.com/article/20110918/OPINION01/709189979

bossy22

(3,547 posts)
2. I've always had mixed feelings on SYG
Thu Apr 4, 2013, 05:06 PM
Apr 2013

On one hand I don't think someone should be forced to retreat in public if they are not the doing anything illegal but on the other hand I could see how such a law could lead to a deadly escalation.

That being said I fully support it when it comes to your home. I think that no one should be forced to retreat form their home. It's just when it comes to public areas I'm not 100% sold on. Perhaps a compromise might be in order. SYG in your home, car, and business?

gejohnston

(17,502 posts)
3. those are actually two different things
Thu Apr 4, 2013, 05:40 PM
Apr 2013

SYG is generally public places while home etc. involve the Castle Doctrine. In 2008 a Castle Doctrine and SYG was introduced in the Wyoming leg. The SYG was stripped and only CD was voted on and passed. Unlike NH, from what I could find, WY doesn't have DTR either, in fact it has no statute either way. Since SYG entered US common law during the Progressive era, I'm going to guess that Wyoming has a SYG similar to CA and WA. Of course, I have no desire to find out first hand.

ARTICLE 6 - JUSTIFICATION

6-2-601.� Applicability of article.

The common law shall govern in all cases not governed by this article.

6-2-602.� Use of force in self defense.

(a)� A person is presumed to have held a reasonable fear of imminent peril of death or serious bodily injury to himself or another when using defensive force that is intended or likely to cause death or serious bodily injury to another if:

(i)� The intruder against whom the defensive force was used was in the process of unlawfully and forcefully entering, or had unlawfully and forcibly entered, another's home or habitation or, if that intruder had removed or was attempting to remove another against his will from his home or habitation; and

(ii)� The person who uses defensive force knew or had reason to believe that an unlawful and forcible entry or unlawful and forcible act was occurring.

(b)� The presumption set forth in subsection (a) of this section does not apply if:

(i)� The person against whom the defensive force is used has a right to be in or is a lawful resident of the home or habitation, such as an owner, lessee or titleholder, and there is not an injunction for protection from domestic violence or a written pretrial supervision order of no contact against that person;

(ii)� The person sought to be removed is a child or grandchild, or is otherwise in the lawful custody or under the lawful guardianship of, the person against whom the defensive force is used; or

(iii)� The person against whom the defensive force is used is a peace officer who enters or attempts to enter another's home or habitation in the performance of his official duties.

(c)� A person who unlawfully and by force enters or attempts to enter another's home or habitation is presumed to be doing so with the intent to commit an unlawful act involving force or violence.

(d)� As used in this section:

(i)� "Habitation" means any structure which is designed or adapted for overnight accommodation, including, but not limited to, buildings, modular units, trailers, campers and tents;

(ii)� "Home" means any occupied residential dwelling place.

bossy22

(3,547 posts)
4. I'm well aware of the differences between SYG and Castle Doctrine
Thu Apr 4, 2013, 05:46 PM
Apr 2013

Just for simplification I lumped them together since they do have an underlying theme. So to clarify, I'm fully supportive of the castle doctrine, less supportive (but not necessarily against) SYG

Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Gun Control & RKBA»'Stand Your Ground' on Sh...