I just moved to Missouri and live alone. I heard about a law dealing with someone breaking into your home. The person told me that if I was alone and someone broke into my house and threatened to kill/harm me that if there was an escape path (like a window or a door that I could get to) that was the first choice to take before trying to kill the person that broke in. I guess if I shot at the person that broke in and killed that person I could get sued by that persons family. And if I only injured the person that broke in, that person could sue me. How is this fair, if that person was the one that broke into my home and threatened me? What is the chance that I would be able to open the window and jump out before the person either shot me or stopped me? Maybe this is completely wrong, but I am not sure where to check this at. Please any information will be appreciated!
2007-08-09 04:50:51 · 12 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Law Enforcement & Police
IF they attempt to harm you, you are allowed to defend yourself. BUT if you are in a position where you are reasonably safe and you keep attacking the intruder you are liable for assault, criminally and civilly.
IE a man has a knife and lunges at you in your kitchen, you pick up a frying pan and hit him on the head and knock him out, leave and call the police, you are prolly gonna be OK, but after he is knocked out you continue to beat him you may be charged. But it also depends on how good your story is lol.
But even in situations where the intruder is clearly in the wrong, he may still try to sue you. Doesn't mean he will win, but he can try.
2007-08-09 05:37:53 · answer #1 · answered by Kevy 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Some states operate under the "castle doctrine", which means you have a right to hold your ground if you're in an area where you're legally entitled to be and engaged in lawful activity (such as being in your own home). Other states operate under the "Duty to Retreat" principle, which means if you have a reasonable avenue of escape available then you should try to run away before using deadly force against a person threatening you. I don't think it's fair for the law to require a person to flee from his own home, but it's probably wise to do so if you can, no matter what state you're in. You can undoubtedly save yourself a lot of legal crap by showing that you really didn't want to use deadly force against the intruder except as a *very* last resort. In the long run, whatever property the intruder damages or steals would be chump change compared to the possibility of you losing the confrontation with him, or compared to your defense lawyer's fees even if you win. As for how you know whether you have enough time to escape through your window, that's easy. You do that the instant you hear somebody breaking in downstairs or down the hall. If he's already in your bedroom, though, it would be unreasonable for anybody to expect you to try to turn your back on him and run.
I believe the best way to deal with any intruder is to make yourself a difficult target and prevent him from picking your home in the first place, before worrying about what you're going to do once he's already right on top of you. Get a big noisy dog (preferably one with a deep growl) and an alarm system, secure your doors and windows with good locks, use motion sensor-activated exterior lighting, trim your bushes near your doors and windows so nobody can hide there (or plant spikey thorn bushes that an intruder can't crawl through), etc. One of my favorite techniques is to put a huge dog dish on the porch with the name "Warlord" labeled on it along with a big rubber bone (pretty effective even if you don't get a dog) and leave a pair of battered size-16 work boots out there as well - nobody's going to want to mess with the rottweiler and the hulking construction worker living inside. And you can always ask the local cops to do a free security check of your home to get more tips.
.
2007-08-09 15:07:04 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
There's still a few states out there that have that mentality. Been awhile since I've lived in Missouri or Kansas, so I can't say for sure if that's true. Best bet is to talk to a local officer there to find out exactly what you're rights are.
But I agree, I think it's BS that if someone breaks into my house, I'm expected to try to escape first. And I do remember when I went to a police academy in MO, one instructer telling us a story about a guy that shot someone breaking in, the guy survived and did sue the homeowner and win...that's just wrong....That's why you shoot to kill in that situation, not worth it to have a survivor.....Start complaining to your congressmen/women to change that if that is their current law.
2007-08-09 12:02:19 · answer #3 · answered by tikitiki 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Missouri until recently had the so called "duty to escape law", they changed the law to "you have no duty to try to escape, but you must be in fear of you life" in other words if someone breaks in and eats a meal or steals your television, but makes no attempt to hurt or violate you, then you have no recourse but to call 9-1-1.
Now to the liability aspect, if you hurt or kill someone even if they had broke in or even if they hurt you, you still can be sued in civil court by the individual or their family, look at the former Cardinal Josh Hancock, he was totally in the wrong and his family tried to sue everybody involved, but dropped their suit after they were counter-sued.
Best bet as stated already, better to be "Judged by 12 than Carried by 6" and remember you can always counter-sue the family in civil court. better the "Family" than the perpetrator, if you understand what I am saying ;-)
2007-08-09 12:24:49 · answer #4 · answered by Dave G 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
A quick look tells me that Missouri has passed a ''castle doctrine law''...
that's a start.
Whether or not you kill the offender, someone can take you to civil court. Remember- OJ was found not guilty in criminal court, but the families sued him in civil court successfully.
2007-08-09 19:57:25 · answer #5 · answered by sirbobby98121 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
You should never have to leave your home, but in today's world, its seems no one wants you to defend yourself. I would do what you feel you have to do in a situation like that and let the chips fall where they may. There is a old saying and it rings so true. " I'd rather be judged by 12 than carried by 8". Do what you need to do to stop the attack or keep someone from harming you, in your home or not.
2007-08-09 12:00:52 · answer #6 · answered by SGT. D 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
"Castle defense" laws vary from state to state...it would be good for you to know just where you stand. In Kansas, we have the absolute right to defend our homes using deadly force, if necessary. In Massachusetts, they tell me, you are expected to flee your home rather than defend it, so I could not live there...in Texas, you can use deadly force to defend any property, I think...if I was gonna live there, I'd be finding out. K ;o)
2007-08-09 12:00:32 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
thats not fair, nor true. if you hurt him, you could counter sue because he entered your house and tried to harm you.
im curious to see what other answers you get, so im giving you a star.
good luck! my inbox is always open, if you go through my profile that is. so contact me if you ever need advice.
2007-08-09 11:55:09 · answer #8 · answered by Sabrina Devareoux 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If this is true it is bs. Find out for certain and start a campaign to revoke this hohah if so. Call your state representative's office.
2007-08-09 12:14:18 · answer #9 · answered by Princessa Macha Venial 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Well, I don't have any info for your question, but I am with you all the way on this one. I live in texas,
r u familiar with our law on that?
2007-08-12 11:33:03 · answer #10 · answered by lorraine197807 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋