- Joined
- Apr 11, 2011
- Messages
- 13,350
- Reaction score
- 6,591
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Independent
Re: Homeowner in Renisha McBride's killing to face murder charges
SELF-DEFENSE ACT (EXCERPT)
Act 309 of 2006
780.972 Use of deadly force by individual not engaged in commission of crime; conditions.
Sec. 2.
(1) An individual who has not or is not engaged in the commission of a crime at the time he or she uses deadly force may use deadly force against another individual anywhere he or she has the legal right to be with no duty to retreat if either of the following applies:
(a) The individual honestly and reasonably believes that the use of deadly force is necessary to prevent the imminent death of or imminent great bodily harm to himself or herself or to another individual.
(b) The individual honestly and reasonably believes that the use of deadly force is necessary to prevent the imminent sexual assault of himself or herself or of another individual.
(2) An individual who has not or is not engaged in the commission of a crime at the time he or she uses force other than deadly force may use force other than deadly force against another individual anywhere he or she has the legal right to be with no duty to retreat if he or she honestly and reasonably believes that the use of that force is necessary to defend himself or herself or another individual from the imminent unlawful use of force by another individual.
There is no statute, prescedent or anything that would justify shooting someone in the face for banging on a door. You are not in danger from someone on another side of a door.
Since I am on my phone, please excise my para phrasing. But, I believe it reads something like, 'if the person is within their own dwelling, and perceives threat to self, or others within, then force is justified.'
Now, it can certainly be your opinion that he didn't face a threat, or that he shouldn't have shot her, but that is, without being there at the moment, and or, knowing all the facts, merely speculation and opinion. The burden of proof is on the state.
SELF-DEFENSE ACT (EXCERPT)
Act 309 of 2006
780.972 Use of deadly force by individual not engaged in commission of crime; conditions.
Sec. 2.
(1) An individual who has not or is not engaged in the commission of a crime at the time he or she uses deadly force may use deadly force against another individual anywhere he or she has the legal right to be with no duty to retreat if either of the following applies:
(a) The individual honestly and reasonably believes that the use of deadly force is necessary to prevent the imminent death of or imminent great bodily harm to himself or herself or to another individual.
(b) The individual honestly and reasonably believes that the use of deadly force is necessary to prevent the imminent sexual assault of himself or herself or of another individual.
(2) An individual who has not or is not engaged in the commission of a crime at the time he or she uses force other than deadly force may use force other than deadly force against another individual anywhere he or she has the legal right to be with no duty to retreat if he or she honestly and reasonably believes that the use of that force is necessary to defend himself or herself or another individual from the imminent unlawful use of force by another individual.
There is no statute, prescedent or anything that would justify shooting someone in the face for banging on a door. You are not in danger from someone on another side of a door.