February 19, 2007

I Support The Castle Doctrine

You should not have to retreat from an intruder in your own home – or from anyone threatening your safety anywhere else – if you are following the law. The very notion of the “duty to retreat” constitutes an affront to the notion that law-abiding individuals should not have to cower before criminals or face legal jeopardy themselves.

Aficionados of Hollywood Westerns know all about the legal code that says "shoot first, ask questions later". But now, Republican legislators in Texas - spiritual home of the six-shooter and a John Wayne-style frontier spirit - wants to enshrine the principle into law.

Sponsors of a new bill in the state legislature call it the Castle Doctrine - the idea that anyone invading your home or threatening your safety deserves everything they have coming to them. Critics are already calling it the "shoot thy neighbour" law and questioning whether Texas, of all places, really needs to give its citizens further encouragement to take matters of crime and punishment into their own hands.

"I believe Texans who are attacked in their homes, their businesses, their vehicles or anywhere else have a right to defend themselves from attack without fear of being prosecuted and face possible civil suits alleging wrongful injury or death," Texas Senator Jeff Wentworth of San Antonio - home to The Alamo - said recently in support of the bill.

"You've got to assume a criminal's not there to buy girl scout cookies; you could be harmed," the bill's other sponsor, Texas Representative Joe Driver told The Los Angeles Times. "You should be able to meet force with force without getting in trouble."

Opponents claim that such legislation is unnecessary because in practice such cases are not prosecuted – but if that is the case, there is nothing wrong with enshrining the practice into law, is there? And as for their fears of “Wild West-style violence”, I cannot help but recall that was their objection to concealed-carry, too, and that their predictions were so far from the mark as to render their arguments in this case incredible.

Posted by: Greg at 11:58 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 356 words, total size 2 kb.

1 Interesting...I thought in Texas you were allowed to shoot at someone who was in possession of your property, even as he was running away.

That may be a bit of an oversimplification, but I remember it coming up way back when I lived in S. TX and someone was shot while running and presenting no further threat.

Posted by: Dana at Mon Feb 19 17:29:44 2007 (MVWex)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Comments are disabled. Post is locked.
6kb generated in CPU 0.0046, elapsed 0.0117 seconds.
21 queries taking 0.0086 seconds, 30 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
[/posts]