Poor Reporting from USCCA

[Craig_AR]

The USCCA First Line email on 4/4/2025 reports on a successful use of a firearm during a home invasion in Missouri. I am a bit concerned about the quality in the details of the report.

First, the report opens with, "Missouri is a so-called 'stand your ground' state." The event was a home invasion, so-called *stand your ground* laws are not in play. In a home invasion, the key law affecting an otherwise legal mandate to retreat if possible is the Castle Doctrine law, which is in effect in every state.

Second, and much more serious, is the (factual, but problematic) line, "Under Missouri law, a person breaking into a residence is presumed to be a deadly threat." That may be true, but home defenders should understand that tweak of law is not in place in most states. Even under Castle Doctrine inside your home, to mount a successful self defense claim you must be able to explain why you or a family member was in imminent threat of serious bodily harm. Shooting a stranger in your home solely due to presence there will not survive the legal process.

Further, even in Missouri, or any other state that legally presumes invasion is a deadly threat, inability to show a reasonable fear of deadly force is going to make your defense in the subsequent civil trial a big challenge.

 

[jmorris]

The USCCA First Line email on 4/4/2025 reports on a successful use of a firearm during a home invasion in Missouri. I am a bit concerned about the quality in the details of the report.

First, the report opens with, "Missouri is a so-called 'stand your ground' state." The event was a home invasion, so-called *stand your ground* laws are not in play. In a home invasion, the key law affecting an otherwise legal mandate to retreat if possible is the Castle Doctrine law, which is in effect in every state.

States that generally do not have a "stand your ground" or "castle doctrine" law, meaning they have a duty to retreat if possible before using deadly force, include Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Nebraska, New Jersey, New York, and Rhode Island.

 

[westernrover]

Is there any state that requires a person to retreat if it is not safe to do so? that is, if they cannot retreat without risk of death or great bodily harm?

 

[Craig_AR]

Is there any state that requires a person to retreat if it is not safe to do so?

No, states without a stand your ground law or without atatute or case law honoring the castle doctrine, which have a duty to retreat requirement to justify use of force in self defense or defense of others, do explicitly say you have a duty to withdraw or retreat if it is safe to do so. Be sure to read the relevant information for the state you are in or may be traveling into on handgunlaw.us.

 

[s4s4u]

Is there any state that requires a person to retreat if it is not safe to do so? that is, if they cannot retreat without risk of death or great bodily harm?

Currently, in MN, a person must not have had a reasonable possibility to retreat to avoid the danger before using force in self-defense.

Keyword "reasonable", and who decides what is and isn't. In MN, you will be persecuted.

 

[Shawn Dodson]

I've looked for a "castle doctrine" in Washington state law (the RCWs) and have not found one.

However, our self-defense statute does not stipulate any duty to retreat. Because of this, case law allows one to the defend the ground they stand on.

 

[Jim Watson]

Times change.
A noted gunfighting coach once wrote - about 50 years ago - that a nighttime intruder was all yours.

 

[jmorris]

Texas law gives more wiggle room than any other State I know of, after dark.

https://txpenalcode.com/sec-9-42/

(2) when and to the degree he reasonably believes the deadly force is immediately necessary:

(A) to prevent the other’s imminent commission of arson, burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, theft during the nighttime, or criminal mischief during the nighttime; or

(B) to prevent the other who is fleeing immediately after committing burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, or theft during the nighttime from escaping with the property; and

 

[JTHunter]

If I can ask a question about my situation, I'm curious on what you think. I live (unfortunately) in ILL-ANNOY, do not have a CCP (too many posted places with "force of law"), I'm an arthritic "senior", my bedroom has only the one door, and the bottom sills of the 2 windows are about 48" above the floor. I have little chance (or ability) of climbing out, especially quickly.
What are your suggestions in the event of an intruder?

 

[Craig_AR]

1. Non-lethal peppperball gun, like Byrna.
2. Pepper (OC) spray; stream not fogger. (Cops use foggers for crowds; you want a targetign stream.)

I have never held or trained with a Byrna or similar, but i have trained with OC spray (POM), and carry one every day. The ads for Byrna look interesting, and I tihnk one could be helpful when a firearm is not feasible. Howeer, I would only use it for home defense. It looks like a gun so use in public as seen by third parties and cops arriving could become deadly for you.
Would like to hear from anyoine who actually ahs Byrna experience.

 

[westernrover]

The USCCA First Line email on 4/4/2025 reports on a successful use of a firearm during a home invasion in Missouri. I am a bit concerned about the quality in the details of the report.

First, the report opens with, "Missouri is a so-called 'stand your ground' state." The event was a home invasion, so-called *stand your ground* laws are not in play. In a home invasion, the key law affecting an otherwise legal mandate to retreat if possible is the Castle Doctrine law, which is in effect in every state.

Second, and much more serious, is the (factual, but problematic) line, "Under Missouri law, a person breaking into a residence is presumed to be a deadly threat." That may be true, but home defenders should understand that tweak of law is not in place in most states. Even under Castle Doctrine inside your home, to mount a successful self defense claim you must be able to explain why you or a family member was in imminent threat of serious bodily harm. Shooting a stranger in your home solely due to presence there will not survive the legal process.

Further, even in Missouri, or any other state that legally presumes invasion is a deadly threat, inability to show a reasonable fear of deadly force is going to make your defense in the subsequent civil trial a big challenge.

Good analysis. This kind of weak reporting of misinformation and mangled oversimplifications is less probable to come from the ACLDN. It's the difference between an insurance sales pitch and sound legal education.

 

[westernrover]

If I can ask a question about my situation, I'm curious on what you think. I live (unfortunately) in ILL-ANNOY, do not have a CCP (too many posted places with "force of law"), I'm an arthritic "senior", my bedroom has only the one door, and the bottom sills of the 2 windows are about 48" above the floor. I have little chance (or ability) of climbing out, especially quickly.
What are your suggestions in the event of an intruder?

A good dog can be a very valuable asset as part of home defense. There are watchdogs, guard dogs, and personal protection dogs. Any dog is going to involve a substantial commitment and the more capable the dog, the greater the commitment is for care and training. Maybe you already have a dog or you've had a dog in the past and have some idea already, and if not, you might still have an idea whether it's something you'd consider or not.

Pepper spray is effective, and I can also recommend it. I keep POM. The 14 gram/0.5 oz size is ideal to keep in your pocket or on a keychain. For the car and inside the house, I keep the bigger 3 oz. size.

If you're not disabled or frail and have strength and gross motor skills, a spear is the best melee weapon to secure a doorway and repel boarders. Pole arms are vastly superior in that role to any knife, machete, dagger, sword, tomahawk, axe, club, mace, or hammer. The spear is the simplest pole arm, but the others are also good: the bill hook, halberd, pike, tiger fork or trident. Be sure that it's an appropriate length to be effective for the room size.

 

[Jim Watson]

If I can ask a question about my situation, I'm curious on what you think. I live (unfortunately) in ILL-ANNOY, do not have a CCP (too many posted places with "force of law"), I'm an arthritic "senior", my bedroom has only the one door, and the bottom sills of the 2 windows are about 48" above the floor. I have little chance (or ability) of climbing out, especially quickly.
What are your suggestions in the event of an intruder?

If I may ask a question about your question, does Illinois require you to retreat from home invasion, effectively banning self defense like England?
I would get that CCP even if only to show good intentions and arm myself with something traditional like a revolver or shotgun. I would not attempt to "clear" the house but would (DO!) fort up and be prepared to shoot an intruder into my final space. Will that get you prosecuted?

Pepper spray? A SPEAR? Good grief.

 

[Gbro]

Testing a quote
Well I couldn't quote JMorris post #2, where he made a statement about states without SYG and CD.
Minnesota does have a CD called MN Statute 609.065
SYG was vetoed by former Gov. Dayton but our CD, although considered weak, but does not have in it our requirement to retreat when in our place of Abode like we must outside our place of Abode.
Gregor, CGVS

 

[JTHunter]

A good dog can be a very valuable asset as part of home defense. There are watchdogs, guard dogs, and personal protection dogs. Any dog is going to involve a substantial commitment and the more capable the dog, the greater the commitment is for care and training. Maybe you already have a dog or you've had a dog in the past and have some idea already, and if not, you might still have an idea whether it's something you'd consider or not.

Pepper spray is effective, and I can also recommend it. I keep POM. The 14 gram/0.5 oz size is ideal to keep in your pocket or on a keychain. For the car and inside the house, I keep the bigger 3 oz. size.

If you're not disabled or frail and have strength and gross motor skills, a spear is the best melee weapon to secure a doorway and repel boarders. Pole arms are vastly superior in that role to any knife, machete, dagger, sword, tomahawk, axe, club, mace, or hammer. The spear is the simplest pole arm, but the others are also good: the bill hook, halberd, pike, tiger fork or trident. Be sure that it's an appropriate length to be effective for the room size.

I used to have dogs but have been "dogless" since 2010. That last one had me "spoiled" for any other dog and by the time I started to reconsider, I was spending too much time away from my home helping an "aging parent" (mid-80s +). Then MY mobility took a big hit 3 years ago and I walk with a cane, all bent over like an old coolie carrying a heavy load.
I would LOVE to have a dog but I can no longer give it the care it deserves. I have peripheral neuropathy in my right hand (my strong hand) and I'm losing my ability to grip and control things.

If I may ask a question about your question, does Illinois require you to retreat from home invasion, effectively banning self defense like England?
I would get that CCP even if only to show good intentions and arm myself with something traditional like a revolver or shotgun. I would not attempt to "clear" the house but would (DO!) fort up and be prepared to shoot an intruder into my final space. Will that get you prosecuted?

Pepper spray? A SPEAR? Good grief.

In the bedroom is both a wood & glass gun cabinet and a rack on the wall. On that rack are my .357 in its holster, a 12 ga. SxS w/double triggers, and an AK with a 40 rounder. I am NOT defenseless even if unable to get out.
AFAIK, ILL-ANNOY does not require "withdrawal" but I'm not certain of that.

 

[purerockfury]

I'm a guy with disabilities renting a room (in a state i am sort of stuck living in) from somebody and when/if i get a gun i won't use it or need it as a castle defense thing i will use it as a "i don't want to die again, yet" thing.

 

[shunka]

With all due respect….
I really must question anyone who advises using pepperballs or OC spray or any teargas-like tool INDOORS,
especially in smaller rooms like bedrooms.

1) the resulting aerosol of the agent(s) in such an enclosed space are almost cetrainly going
to affect the user, especailly anyone who is aged/infirm. The eye and respiratory attacks on such folks
will almost certainly incapacitate THEM , whilst having a questionable effect on the attacker, many of whom
are already high on something.

2) There are far too many reports of even police-grade mace failing to stop perpetrators .

further
3) even civilian grade tasers have been reported to be only 50% or so effective .

”less than lethal” is a laudable goal that has not yet been reliably achieved except by some
extraordinarily talented professionals.

before anyone gets their knickers in a knot over my post, please understand that I am a practicing
Christian with a fundamental Buddhist philosophy.

Jesus said “ When I sent you out without money belt and bag and sandals, you did not lack anything, did you?' They said, 'No, nothing.' And He said to them, 'But NOW, whoever has a money belt is to take it along, likewise also a bag, and whoever has no sword is to sell his coat and buy one" Luke 22:35

And even the Dali Lama, the Boddhisatva of Compassion has publicly stated
” If someone is shooting at you with their gun, it is perfectly acceptable for you to shoot back“

 

[Craig_AR]

With all due respect….
I really must question anyone who advises using pepperballs or OC spray or any teargas-like tool INDOORS,
especially in smaller rooms like bedrooms.

Not unreasonable concerns, however, there are people who cannot bring themselves to use lethal force, and they should have options, also.
There is a huge difference between among OC stream, spray, and fog. Police use fog for crowds, definitely an outdoor solution, since would affect an entire room in a home; spray has a wide range and could affect anyone near the target; stream is quite thin and generally affects only the one it hits. If you have never had formal OC training, please do so.
Moving to pepperballs, there are several different balls available. For indoor use at home, the kinetic-only might be a good choice. (By the way, note that that linked company says less-lethal, not non-lethal.)
As for electric solutions, have to quote John Corriea, "They are 100% effective 50% of the time." Still, the tool is quite literally better than nothing.
Go back to the target market for all of these tools, folks who for whatever reason think they could never take a life. Maybe getting one or more of these tools and at least reading the manual if not being trained, will put them into a self-defense frame of mind.

Craig

 

[Kleanbore]

In a home invasion, the key law affecting an otherwise legal mandate to retreat if possible is the Castle Doctrine law, which is in effect in every state.

True. There are variations among jurisdictions.

Even under Castle Doctrine inside your home, to mount a successful self defense claim you must be able to explain why you or a family member was in imminent threat of serious bodily harm. Shooting a stranger in your home solely due to presence there will not survive the legal process.

True. However, many people incorrectly conflate caste doctrine with laws that pertain to use of deadly force within the domicile.

Is there any state that requires a person to retreat if it is not safe to do so? that is, if they cannot retreat without risk of death or great bodily harm?

No.

I've looked for a "castle doctrine" in Washington state law (the RCWs) and have not found one.

It is found in case law--old case law.

 

[Shawn Dodson]

It is found in case law--old case law.

Thanks, but "old case law" doesn't help.

Got a citation?

I haven't found ANY references or citations myself, and no informed Washington state gun/self-defense law attorney has ever mentioned it.

We do have "stand your ground" in WA state because, according to criminal case law, the RCW doesn't require a person who's about to be harmed to retreat.

 

[Craig_AR]

"Redmond finally argues that the trial court erred in refusing to give his proposed "no duty to retreat" jury instruction. 10 [*9] HN8 Jury instructions are sufficient if, when read as a whole, they state the law correctly and allow the parties to argue their theories of the case. 11 In Washington, persons lawfully present in a particular area have the right to stand their ground and defend themselves against unlawful force; there is no duty to retreat from the unlawful force of others. 12 In self-defense cases, where a jury may conclude that retreat from an assault is a reasonable alternative to the use of force, and that therefore the use of force in self-defense is unreasonable, a "no duty to retreat" instruction should be given. 13 On the other hand, such an instruction is not required where neither party raises retreat or where the evidence does not otherwise suggest that retreat was a reasonable alternative to the use of force. 14"
{emphasis added)

State v. Redmond, No. 48215-7-I, 2002 Wash. App. LEXIS 1506, at *8-9 (Ct. App. July 1, 2002)


And from the Supreme Court of Washington,
"The law is well settled that there is no duty to retreat when a person is assaulted in a place where he or she has a right to be.1 State v. Studd, 137 Wash.2d 533, 549, 973 P.2d 1049 (1999)."

State v. Redmond, 150 Wash. 2d 489, 493, 78 P.3d 1001, 1003 (2003)

 

[Kleanbore]

Thanks, but "old case law" doesn't help.

Got a citation?

I'm afraid not. @Craig_AR mentions 1 State v. Studd, 137 Wash.2d 533, 549, 973 P.2d 1049 (1999), but the court has stated that the law is "well settled".

We do have "stand your ground" in WA state because, according to criminal case law, the RCW doesn't require a person who's about to be harmed to retreat.

That would not hold. Washington adopted the English Common Law upon statehood in 1889, and the duty to retreat therefore existed at the time. It could only be obviated by (1) later case law or (2) the enactment of state codes eliminating the duty to retreat.

That has been true for 49 states.

 

[Tcruse]

USCCA is probably one source that you should read and take note, however, it should not be your only or primary source of information.
Last year took a class from local range that used the USCCA "training plan" and was held with a USCCA official representative in the classroom. This class represented the idea that 1) any self-defense use of a firearm would be with in 3 yards and 2) aiming or use of sights was not necessary. While I think that their representation of a self-defense instance may happen frequently, there are a lot of notable exceptions reported.

 

[Kleanbore]

This class represented the idea that 1) any self-defense use of a firearm would be with in 3 yards and

I have to question your recollection. I do not believe that any trainer, or anyone else for that matter, would make such a statement.

 

[Craig_AR]

This class represented the idea that 1) any self-defense use of a firearm would be with in 3 yards and 2) aiming or use of sights was not necessary.

DANG! As an instructor educated by multiple top level instructors and programs, I would never make such a misleading statement. Anyone claiming to be an instructor who makes that claim clearly has never even heard of the Tueller Drill. I am curious if the person who gave that advice was certified as an instructor by USCCA or anyone else.

Craig