testtest

Castle Laws By State

I think this link

Castle Doctrine States 2024

worldpopulationreview.com worldpopulationreview.com

is a little more helpful, as it lists which states have which laws in place.

It is also very important for new gun owners to know the difference between "castle doctrine", "stand your ground", and "duty to retreat".

Castle Doctrine means at your domicile. On your property, in your house. Some states, as mentioned, have different definitions of "your house", but in no case does Castle Doctrine apply to things like your car, or a public space where you happen to be when something goes wrong.

Stand Your Ground is the law that applies to cars, or public spaces like sidewalks, restaurants, or stores. In other words...any place that is NOT your personal domicile property (not your house, not your yard).

Duty to Retreat is exactly that - you have no legal right to defend yourself with deadly force in these locations, your only duty is to retreat to safety. If you use deadly force in one of these locales, you will have a VERY difficult time proving you were in the right if you end up taking a life - and the courts will be against you from the outset.
 
Peglegjoe said:
I think this link

Castle Doctrine States 2024

worldpopulationreview.com worldpopulationreview.com

is a little more helpful, as it lists which states have which laws in place.

It is also very important for new gun owners to know the difference between "castle doctrine", "stand your ground", and "duty to retreat".

Castle Doctrine means at your domicile. On your property, in your house. Some states, as mentioned, have different definitions of "your house", but in no case does Castle Doctrine apply to things like your car, or a public space where you happen to be when something goes wrong.

Stand Your Ground is the law that applies to cars, or public spaces like sidewalks, restaurants, or stores. In other words...any place that is NOT your personal domicile property (not your house, not your yard).

Duty to Retreat is exactly that - you have no legal right to defend yourself with deadly force in these locations, your only duty is to retreat to safety. If you use deadly force in one of these locales, you will have a VERY difficult time proving you were in the right if you end up taking a life - and the courts will be against you from the outset.
Click to expand...

Not necessarily on duty to retreat.

MN has it (outside your home)...but the DTR is negated if retreating would put yourself or others in danger.

Other states may have it worded differently, but it’s usually not an automatic requirement.
 
In addition to the use of force in defense of person and occupied structure, Montana permits defense of other property...

Montana Code Annotated 2019

TITLE 45. CRIMES

CHAPTER 3. JUSTIFIABLE USE OF FORCE

Part 1. When Force Justified

Use Of Force In Defense Of Person

45-3-102. Use of force in defense of person. A person is justified in the use of force or threat to use force against another when and to the extent that the person reasonably believes that the conduct is necessary for self-defense or the defense of another against the other person's imminent use of unlawful force. However, the person is justified in the use of force likely to cause death or serious bodily harm only if the person reasonably believes that the force is necessary to prevent imminent death or serious bodily harm to the person or another or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.

Use Of Force In Defense Of Occupied Structure

45-3-103. Use of force in defense of occupied structure. (1) A person is justified in the use of force or threat to use force against another when and to the extent that the person reasonably believes that the use of force is necessary to prevent or terminate the other person's unlawful entry into or attack upon an occupied structure.

(2) A person justified in the use of force pursuant to subsection (1) is justified in the use of force likely to cause death or serious bodily harm only if:
(a) the entry is made or attempted and the person reasonably believes that the force is necessary to prevent an assault upon the person or another then in the occupied structure; or
(b) the person reasonably believes that the force is necessary to prevent the commission of a forcible felony in the occupied structure.

Use Of Force In Defense Of Other Property

45-3-104. Use of force in defense of other property. A person is justified in the use of force or threat to use force against another when and to the extent that the person reasonably believes that the conduct is necessary to prevent or terminate the other person's trespass on or other tortious or criminal interference with either real property, other than an occupied structure, or personal property lawfully in the person's possession or in the possession of another who is a member of the person's immediate family or household or of a person whose property the person has a legal duty to protect. However, the person is justified in the use of force likely to cause death or serious bodily harm only if the person reasonably believes that the force is necessary to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top