Castle Doctrine Coming To NC?

[dcdub]

I had read last time we tried to pass a Castle Doctrine that there was a certain representative named Deborah Ross who was holding up the process? Is she still in office/posing a threat to this bill going anywhere or are we past that point?

 

[Storz]

From WRAL.com

http://www.wral.com/news/state/story/9153041/

By GARY D. ROBERTSON, Associated Press

RALEIGH, N.C. — Some North Carolina lawmakers want to make it clear that people who feel threatened for their lives in their home, car or job by someone breaking in can use deadly force against the intruder.

A Senate judiciary panel voted unanimously Tuesday for a change in criminal law that would presume the person firing a weapon at an intruder believed he or others in a locked building were justified in the shooting. The law now only provides the ability for a homeowner to use deadly force, but the person may have to prove to police he was faced with a reasonable fear of death or bodily injury.

The bill would increase the options people have in protecting themselves.

The bill now goes to the full Senate.

 

[Gouranga]

had read last time we tried to pass a Castle Doctrine that there was a certain representative named Deborah Ross who was holding up the process? Is she still in office/posing a threat to this bill going anywhere or are we past that point?

With the dems out of power they no longer chair the committees and they can no longer block it from going to the floor for a vote. Had it been voted on any other time it was brought up it would have passed soundly but the NC Dems (mainly Ross and 1 other) blocked it in committee because they knew it would pass and they had the chair.

 

[Beach Nut]

I've been following the progress of this bill with interest. There is an
even better alternative that was proposed in the State House (#74
I believe) that would have extended the Castle Doctrine to your vehicle
and would have made the person bringing suit in a civil action pay all
the costs involved for that action. Senate Bill #34 is a good start
however and I hope our governor has enough sense to sign it. Now
if we can enact a 50% law for carry in places that serve alcohol, we'll
be getting somewhere.

 

[ForumSurfer]

Now
if we can enact a 50% law for carry in places that serve alcohol, we'll
be getting somewhere.

http://www.ncleg.net/gascripts/BillLookUp/BillLookUp.pl?BillID=H111&Session=2011#history

SECTION 1. G.S. 14-269.3(b) is amended by adding a new subdivision to read:
7 "(5) A person on the premises of an establishment that is a restaurant under
8 G.S. 18B-1000(2) or G.S. 18B-1000(6), provided the person has a valid
9 concealed handgun permit under Article 54B of Chapter 14 of the General
10 Statutes."

There's also a section for statewide uniformity included...which means places like "The People's Republic of Cary" can't just pass a town ordinance countermanding it.

 

[Storz]

^^ How can the average Joe (ie us) support this?

 

[ForumSurfer]

How can the average Joe (ie us) support this?

1. (optional)The NRA helped get us to this point. Joining or donating helps. I don't agree with them on many things, but they actually make a difference within the government.
2. Follow the links in previous posts to the actual bills. You will see links of all of the politicians that support the bill. Write them.
3. Follow the RSS feeds on the links so you can track the bill's progress.
4. Repeat step 2.
5. Foward the links/rss feeds to your friends and family members and urge them to repeat steps 1 thru 5.

YMMV

 

[Storz]

Thanks

 

[Gouranga]

Join GRNC. They have multiple people on the state floor everyday pushing for our NC laws. Including a stronger version of CD than the NRA asked for.

Don't get me wrong I love the NRA, but GRNC really is focused on us.

BTW from GRNC:
GRNC Alert 2-22-11:

SENATE COMMITTEE PASSES STRONG CASTLE DOCTRINE



ACT NOW: BILL HEADS TO FLOOR TOMORROW!



Under guidance from Grass Roots North Carolina, the Senate Judiciary II Committee today passed SB 34: “Castle Doctrine” in a stronger version which could ultimately create the most comprehensive such law in the country.



Thanks to the efforts of Sen. Buck Newton (R-, GRNC ****) and Andrew Brock (R-Davie/Rowan, ****), an amendment was made to the bill to incorporate most of the desirable features of HB 74, plus an added protection against crime in the workplace.



GRNC Legislative Action Team members were heavily involved in improving the language of the bill, drafting and reviewing sections, and providing information to sponsors and committee members.



Speaking on behalf of the bill were Sens. Berger, Clary, Daniel, Newton, and Tucker. Raising questions about the bill were Sens. Dannelly and McKissick. Sen. Berger initially offered an amendment to remove workplaces, but later withdrew the amendment and voted for the bill. SB 34 passed unanimously.



Improvements made to SB 34 include:



· Presumption of reasonable fear of imminent death or great bodily injury when an attacker makes an unlawful and forcible entry not only of a home, but also a motor vehicle and a workplace. Beyond including the carjacking protection long-sought by GRNC, this may be the first law in the country to include the workplace among protected areas.



· “No duty to retreat” before using deadly force in anyplace the victim has a lawful right to be.



· Protection against malicious prosecution: Police may not arrest a victim forced to use deadly force unless they have probable cause to believe the use of force was unjustified.

 

[ForumSurfer]

Don't get me wrong I love the NRA, but GRNC really is focused on us.

Joining both isn't an expensive venture, it is about the same price (yearly) as 250 rounds of 9mm.

 

[Gouranga]

Absolutely!!! Forum Surfer. Well Said.

 

[DK24]

DK24, have you ever taken the NC CCH class?

No I have not taken the NC CCH, I’m kind of exempt. Not to boaster, I have well over twenty years of LEO experience, a ton of in-service training along with a BA in Criminal Justice.

if the person is stealing from you, but not attacking you, legally you can not use lethal force.

Nor would I want to use lethal force to protect against a larceny. The law does allow me to use the least amount of reasonable force necessary to protect it. Which means I can draw down on the offender and hold them until the police arrive. I cannot use deadly force until I reasonable believe that a third party or I am in danger of serious bodily injury or worse.

If he does not pull a weapon or attempt to attack you, you must let him leave according to the law

No you do not have to let them leave as previously mentioned. You can use reasonable force (non lethal) to protect property and to detain a person who has or intends to commit a felony.

In NC the law says that you have to be afraid of loss of life, serious bodily injury, or sexual assault

“For most people”, if someone has or is breaking into your house (especially after the hours of darkness) its reasonable to believe that person
intends to do you serious bodily injury or worse. The part about the offender “intends to commit a felony in the home or residence” covers more than just sexual assault, with the exception of a property crime like larceny/burglary.

Despite all the media hype North Carolina does have the “Castle Doctrine” and when combined with the current contributory negligence system it works quite well. The same may not be so true if they pass the comparative fault law, which most definitely would put an undue burden on homeowners and CCW.

I fully support the revised “Castle Doctrine” bill, even though it seems a little wordy.

 

[Gouranga]

Nor would I want to use lethal force to protect against a larceny. The law does allow me to use the least amount of reasonable force necessary to protect it. Which means I can draw down on the offender and hold them until the police arrive. I cannot use deadly force until I reasonable believe that a third party or I am in danger of serious bodily injury or worse.

Now it is my understanding from my CCW instructor and a couple cop buddies i know that NC law does NOT give you the right to detain anyone for anything. Once you pull your weapon and point it at the BG, you are using lethal force. So say, someone was in Durham, and pointed their weapon at someone trying to steal from their outbuilding then forcibly held them at gun point with no lethal threat, you could be charged.

 

[kansersurvivor]

I agree with Gourang's statements...and was taught the same in my CCW class.

 

[DK24]

Now it is my understanding from my CCW instructor and a couple cop buddies i know that NC law does NOT give you the right to detain anyone for anything.

False! They need to read the law.

GS 15A?404. Detention of offenders by private persons.
(a) No Arrest; Detention Permitted. – No private person may arrest another person except as provided in G.S. 15A?405. A private person may detain another person as provided in this section.
(b) When Detention Permitted. – A private person may detain another person when he has probable cause to believe that the person detained has committed in his presence:
(1) A felony,
(2) A breach of the peace,
(3) A crime involving physical injury to another person, or
(4) A crime involving theft or destruction of property.
(c) Manner of Detention. – The detention must be in a reasonable manner considering the offense involved and the circumstances of the detention.
(d) Period of Detention. – The detention may be no longer than the time required for the earliest of the following:
(1) The determination that no offense has been committed.
(2) Surrender of the person detained to a law?enforcement officer as provided in subsection (e).
(e) Surrender to Officer. – A private person who detains another must immediately notify a law?enforcement officer and must, unless he releases the person earlier as required by subsection (d), surrender the person detained to the law?enforcement officer. (1973, c. 1286, s. 1.)


Backun v. U.S, 112 F.2d 635
State v. Mobley, 240 N.C. 476, 83 S.E.2d 100
State v. Blackwelder, 182 N.C. 899, 109 S.E. 644 (1921)
Neal v. Joyner, 89 N.C. 287 (1883)
State v. Bryant, 65 N.C. 327 (1871)
State v. Tappe, 139 N.C. App. 33, 533 S.E.2d 262 (2000)
Harmon v. Buchanan, 164 F.Supp. 2d 649 (2001)
State v. Gilreath, 118 N.C. App. 200, 454 S.E.2d (1995)
Karadi v. Jenkins, 7 Fed. Appx. 185 (2001)
State v. Tripp, 9 N.C. App. 518, 176 S.E.2d 892 (1970)
People v. Reisner, 295 N.Y.S. 813, 162 Misc. 470
Huffaker v. Bucks Co. District Attorney’s Office, 758 F.Supp. 287 (1973)
State v. Weddell, 118 Nev. 206, 43 P.3d 987 (2002)

Once you pull your weapon and point it at the BG, you are using lethal force.

Wrong! You are threatening the possible use of lethal force, its not actually lethal until you pull the trigger or hit them over the head. Keep in mined the use of force continuum. If the use of force is authorized, it’s reasonable to meet force with equal force plus one step further. The totality of circumstances dictates the level of force used. In other words if the situation calls for lethal force you don’t have to start off with soft hand, you can automatically jump to lethal force.

So say, someone was in Durham, and pointed their weapon at someone trying to steal from their outbuilding then forcibly held them at gun point of with no lethal threat, you could be charged.

I don’t like “Monday Night Quarterbacking”.

However, under NC Common Law “Castle Doctrine” “ Self Defense Bar” GS 14?51.1. GS 15A?404 and 258 NC 44. Along with a few others I failed to mention, you could definitely use reasonable, non-deadly force to protect property and to detain them.

Pointing a gun is not lethal force, pulling the trigger or hitting them over the head is.

I hope this helps

 

[kansersurvivor]

DK24 - where does one find the actual law so we can read for ourselves?

Could you be held for "going to the terror of the public" for pulling a firearm to detain a BG?

 

[MikeNice]

After looking through the state provided manual that comes with the CCH class it appears that DK24 is correct. What I don't understand is how pointing a gun can be assault with a deadly weapon, but pointing a gun to stop an escape is okay?

If you can not use lethal force to detain a person, wouldn't threatening them with a gun actually make you an instigator? The argument could be made that you escelated the situation and the other person acted out of fear. If the argument is made that you provoked an escelation of the situation your right to self defense by lethal force is gone.

It all gets rather sticky. That is why the new law is needed. You break in to a house, you can be shot. No need to go through all the mental gymnastics.

Now if we could get the restrictions lifted on carrying in places that sale alcohol for consumption and places that charge admittance. Then we would be really making big strides. Throw out the restrictions on banks and state parks and I might be satisfied.

 

[Gouranga]

NC residents. CD is in trouble.

Today House Majority Leader Skip Stam and Rep. Martin tried to ambush and STOP HB74 on the floor. If these guys are in your district, contact them immediately and let them know how you feel about their actions.

 

[ForumSurfer]

Today House Majority Leader Skip Stam and Rep. Martin tried to ambush and STOP HB74 on the floor. If these guys are in your district, contact them immediately and let them know how you feel about their actions.

http://www.ncga.state.nc.us/gascripts/members/viewMember.pl?sChamber=H&nUserID=309

Office: 2301 Legislative Building Phone: 919-733-2962 Email: [email protected] Legislative Mailing Address: NC House of Representatives
16 W. Jones Street, Room 2301
Raleigh, NC 27601-1096 Terms in House: 6 (0 in Senate) District: 37 Counties Represented: Wake Occupation: Attorney Address: P. O. Box 1600, Apex, NC 27502 Phone: 919-362-8873 Military Experience: US Marine Corps, 1968-70 No Gifts List*: Yes

http://www.ncga.state.nc.us/gascripts/members/viewMember.pl?sChamber=House&nUserID=487

Office: 1219 Legislative Building Phone: 919-733-5758 Email: [email protected] Legislative Mailing Address: NC House of Representatives
16 W. Jones Street, Room 1219
Raleigh, NC 27601-1096 Terms in House: 4 (0 in Senate) District: 34 Counties Represented: Wake Occupation: Attorney Address: 16 W. Jones Street, Room 1219, Raleigh, NC 27601-1096 Phone: 919-733-5758 Military Experience: US Army Reserves, 1991- Present; Active Duty 2002-04 No Gifts List*: Yes

There's your Wake co rep's in action!

 

[DK24]

DK24 - where does one find the actual law so we can read for ourselves?

http://www.ncleg.net/gascripts/Statutes/Statutes.asp

Could you be held for "going to the terror of the public" for pulling a firearm to detain a BG?

Yes it could be considered going to the terror of the public (if you were in the public) and several other charges, this is out of scope of the original thread and kind of taking things out of context. Better topic for a new thread if I can find the time to go into it. Mainly we were talking about the current and proposed “Castle Doctrine” along with what the law allows and prohibits.

If you "unlawfully" point a gun at someone here is the common charge:

GS 14‑34. Assaulting by pointing gun.

If any person shall point any gun or pistol at any person, either in fun or otherwise, whether such gun or pistol be loaded or not loaded, he shall be guilty of a Class A1 misdemeanor. (1889, c. 527; Rev., s. 3622; C.S., s. 4216; 1969, c. 618, s. 2 1/2; 1993, c. 539, s. 17; 1994, Ex. Sess., c. 24, s. 14(c); 1995, c. 507, s. 19.5(d).)

What I don't understand is how pointing a gun can be assault with a deadly weapon, but pointing a gun to stop an escape is okay?

This is taken out of context. Pointing a gun is not the same as the use of deadly force, shooting it or hitting someone over the head is. No body said anything about pointing a gun to stop an escape.

If someone breaks into your house and you reasonably believe that the intruder may kill or inflict serious bodily harm to you or others in the home you are authorized to use deady force ie: pull the trigger or hit them over the head with a blunt object, or simply confront the subject and threaten them with the possible use of deadly force and hold them til the police arrive ie: point a loaded gun at them or hold a very big stick.

If you don't believe the intruder may kill or inflict serious bodily harm to you or others in the home, then don't shoot them or hit them over the head with a blunt object. You could still buff them by pointing a loaded gun or holding a big stick.....just don't pull the trigger or wackem.

Do you really need a statute to tell you when you are in fear of serious bodily injury or death? I pretty much know when I'm affraid of it, I think most people would if they were placed in harms way.....its based on the human element not the cold facts of the law.

You will never see a statue that says your in fear of serious bodily injury or death everytime some one breaks into you house, it just wont happen.


I do hope the revised law passes, its late been a long day. Maybe we can do a shoot don't shoot thread/use of force if I can find the time. I love the law and believe everyone should have knowledge of it.

 

[MikeNice]

It doesn't suprise me that the Wake County reps pulled this. I'm actually more suprised it wasn't the reps for Chapel Hill, Durham, or Asheville.

Mckissick is a joke and any stance he takes on guns should be laughed at. I know things about that guy I won't repeat in public. I'll leave it at this, if he wasn't politically conected he wouldn't be eligible to own a gun.

Chapel Hill's mayor is actually a member of MAIG and I believe Durham's mayor is as well.

There are more than a few people we have to watch out for as this moves forward.

I suggest everybody contact their state guys and light a fire under them. It is time to let them know we are tired of the legal double talk that provides for uncertainty. It is time to let them know we are tired of the criminal's safety coming before our own.

I think SB74 is the much better bill. I urge other members to read it and pass along their support.

 

[dcdub]

So Dk24, say you come downstairs at night and a BG has your tv in his hands. You draw down, tell him you're detaining him until the police arrive. He proceeds to walk out the front door with your property in tow, then what?

 

[MikeNice]

This is taken out of context. Pointing a gun is not the same as the use of deadly force, shooting it or hitting someone over the head is. No body said anything about pointing a gun to stop an escape.

I'm not saying pointing a gun is deadly force. However, in CCH classes they teach that pointing a gun at a person is assault with a deadly weapon. They also teach that there is no such thing as citizen's arrest and very limited power to detain. Most classes actually teach that detaining is illegal. Trying to prevent the escape of a criminal will get you arrested is what is normally taught.

That is why I'm confused about being able to detain a person or stop a criminal from exiting a scene. It appears that under certain circumstances you can detain a criminal. However, when and how seem to be in question.

My secondary point is that pointing a gun could be seen as escelating the situation. An attorney could argue that your bluff instigated any confrontation after that point. By law the instigator loses his right to use lethal force. So, where would you stand if you tried to bluff a criminal to detain them?

I know when my fear level reaches the point that I need to shoot. Legislation doesn't decide that. Legislation stops me from getting shot because I'm wondering if a person of "ordinary firmness" agrees that I had the right. It stops me from worrying whether or not some jerk DA is going to paint me as the bad guy when a predator was in my house. (Nifong left a lot of people scared of DAs.)

To me anybody willing to walk past two parked cars, two sets of motion detecting lights, and enter my house by force is a threat. If the external deterents didn't stop them, in my opinion, they must not care if they destroy the internal deterents. In other words my life must be worthless to them. I don't see giving them the chance to attack me or my family first. The new law would back me up on that. The current law makes it questionable. It also makes it possible for an over zealous DA, predator, or next of kin to bankrupt me in court.

I know you support the new law. I just felt like venting in case anyone is reading this from outside of NC.

 

[DK24]

So Dk24, say you come downstairs at night and a BG has your tv in his hands. You draw down, tell him you're detaining him until the police arrive. He proceeds to walk out the front door with your property in tow, then what?

If I have my gun out it’s because I’m in fear of serious bodily injury or death to a third party or myself, if he walks out the door I am no longer in fear, the threat is gone.

Based on my training, experience and physical condition and on the presumption I am capable of detaining him by using the least amount of reasonable force (non deadly) as authorized by law. I personally would attempt to detain him. I don’t want this BG coming back to my house or breaking into someone else’s. Who’s to say if I let this BG go he doesn’t walk outside and retrieve a weapon? I have a right to protect my property and to detain with reasonable non-lethal force. If during this lawful detention he escalates the use of force and I become in fear of serious bodily injury or death then I would act accordingly.

I’m the homeowner, I’m authorized under law, and he is the BG who has broken criminal law not to mention has a boatload of contributory negligence.

B&E&L of occupied dwelling is a serious crime, especially after the hours of darkness (burglary). Based on my training and experience, these offenders often carry weapons and resort to violence when confronted by homeowners and police. It’s not unusual for them to break into the same dwelling multiple times and have multiple accomplices. IMO, for me, not taking action could prove to be more dangerous than using my abilities along with the tools provided by the law. I’m not willing to put myself or loved ones at risk for the sake of fear.




Mike, I’m running short on time I’ll get back to you later

 

[DK24]

we have no right to detain anyone at gunpoint.

Sorry about the misunderstanding, what I am trying to say.

Extra short version:

(In the context of your home) You are authorized to detain under GS15a. If you are in fear of serious bodily injury or death to a third party or yourself you are authorized to use deadly force, once that threat has been removed then you are no longer in jeopardy.

Detaining someone at gunpoint without the fear of serious bodily injury or death to a third party or yourself would be considered unreasonable.