Survival and Emergency Preparedness

Often discussed, not often understood.

The change was the elimination of "duty to retreat".

https://www.adamsluka.com/stand-your-gr ... his-l.html
Before the 'Stand Your Ground' law was enacted, an individual could only use deadly force to defend him- or herself against the commission of a forcible felony, or imminent (immediate) deadly force or great bodily harm. If a person was in immediate danger due to the use by another individual of unlawful non-deadly force, that person could only use non-deadly force in defending him- or herself.

If an individual was in any location other than the home or workplace, that individual had a "duty to retreat" prior to the use of deadly force. However, if an individual was in his or her home, he had no duty to retreat before using deadly force provided that he/she had a reasonable belief that the use of deadly force was necessary to defend him/herself against another person committing a forcible felony, or defend against deadly force/great bodily harm. This right to use deadly force while in one's home is known as the "Castle Doctrine."

And the duty to retreat extended only to a situation that would not put you or another in further harm. For example a parent pumping gas with a child in the car. If approached by a bad guy he had no duty to retreat leaving the child unattended and could stand his/her ground.

That limitation has been completely removed and you can reasonable stand your ground in any situation. This is a good legal protection. It doesn't mean that you can't chose to make a tactical retreat if you feel it's advantageous.

Several years ago a couple that we know retired from NY (Syracuse). He said that up there, if someone broke into your home you'd have to retreat to the bedroom. If they entered the bedroom you had to retreat to the closet. If they tried to enter the closet then and only then could you use force. That of course is completely Draconian and favors the criminal at the expense of the law abiding citizen.

I favor the stand your ground law because if favors the law abiding citizen at the expense of the criminal.

I stood my ground against a Buffo toad this weekend. .S&W 22A w/ Ratshot for the win!

While I believe very few laws should be federal, Castle Doctrine, IMO, is a good candidate.
Enter another person's residence uninvited only at risk to your life.

"Reasonable" is a useless word. That said - it does at least allow the Jury to decide. Which is roughly flipping a coin....

David wrote: ↑Fri Jun 25, 2021 11:29 am And the duty to retreat extended only to a situation that would not put you or another in further harm. For example a parent pumping gas with a child in the car. If approached by a bad guy he had no duty to retreat leaving the child unattended and could stand his/her ground.

That limitation has been completely removed and you can reasonable stand your ground in any situation. This is a good legal protection. It doesn't mean that you can't chose to make a tactical retreat if you feel it's advantageous.

Several years ago a couple that we know retired from NY (Syracuse). He said that up there, if someone broke into your home you'd have to retreat to the bedroom. If they entered the bedroom you had to retreat to the closet. If they tried to enter the closet then and only then could you use force. That of course is completely Draconian and favors the criminal at the expense of the law abiding citizen.

I favor the stand your ground law because if favors the law abiding citizen at the expense of the criminal.

This is a GREAT example of something to ask yourself why/how does this make any sense.

I would hope you would eventually come to the conclusion that "The government feels it is more important for you to be dependent on them than safe, and a person intent on harming you has more rights to do that than you do to defend yourself"

Simple response.
1. I understand that if I have an encounter with a person (traffic accident, mugging, someone consumed with road rage) and anyone is injured, my conduct is subject to review by third persons (policeman, insurance adjuster, prosecutor).

2. I try to always maintain situational awareness.

3. A discussion about "stand your ground laws" is a matter of words. I try to avoid hurting other people, both physically and emotionally. and to mind my own business. Ever so often on Glocktalk, some one brings up a topic like "when can I legally shoot someone". In potentially deadly encounters, there is no time to reflect upon such matters. And, whatever your decision, you will be open to second guessing.

firm believer in the old saying " walk softly and carry a big stick "
Don't go looking for trouble but is it comes to me and is a serious threat, that's when the stick comes out. If coming to my family, it comes out quicker esp if you breaking into my home where I have no need to retreat.
( and NO, in NY you dont have to run to the bedroom and then closet )

New York Self Defense: The Castle Doctrine

New York is not a stand your ground state, but the state does follow a similar doctrine called the "castle doctrine," which allows individuals to use deadly force to defend their homes against intruders. The key distinction between stand your ground and the castle doctrine is that the castle doctrine designates this justification for people in their homes. The rationale is that your home is "your castle" or safe refuge, and that you should not have to run away from your home when defending it against invaders.

Michigan follows the castle doctrine as well but also you are not required to retreat outside the home as well.