question archive In 1987, Florida became a "shall issue" concealed carry state, which opened a floodgate of states who adopted similar laws

In 1987, Florida became a "shall issue" concealed carry state, which opened a floodgate of states who adopted similar laws

Subject:LawPrice:3.86 Bought7

In 1987, Florida became a "shall issue" concealed carry state, which opened a floodgate of states who adopted similar laws. Currently, all 50 states allow some form of concealed carry. This has brought attention to many theories of self-defense and defense of others.

 

  1. Define the Castle Doctrine and Stand Your Ground laws.
  2. Discuss the concept of self-defense as it appears in the Bible.
  3. Can one reconcile saving his/her own life at the expense of another's life from a biblical standpoint?
  4. Compare the Bible's teachings on self-defense and murder.
  5. Provide at least 1 "scholarly" reference and 1 scripture in support of the question

 

pur-new-sol

Purchase A New Answer

Custom new solution created by our subject matter experts

GET A QUOTE

Answer Preview

1.

The castle doctrine and "stand-your-ground"

  • laws provide legal defenses to persons who have been charged with various use of force crimes against persons, such as murder, manslaughter, aggravated assault, and illegal discharge or brandishing of weapons, as well as attempts to commit such crimes.

 

Stand Your Ground

  • No duty to retreat from the situation before resorting to deadly force; not limited to your home, place of work, etc. 
  • Sometimes called "line in the sand" or "no duty to retreat" law.

 

Stand your ground provides that people may use deadly force

  • when they reasonably believe it to be necessary to defend against a threat of death, serious bodily harm, kidnapping, rape, or (in some jurisdictions) robbery or some other serious crimes (right of self-defense).
  • Under such a law, people have no duty to retreat before using deadly force in self-defense, so long as they are in a place where they are lawfully present.
  • Stand-your-ground laws cannot be invoked by someone who is the initial aggressor, or who is otherwise engaged in criminal activity. 

 

35 states are stand-your-ground states, 27 by statutes providing

  • "that there is no duty to retreat an attacker in any place in which one is lawfully present": Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Michigan, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nevada, New Hampshire, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, West Virginia, and Wyoming; Puerto Rico is also stand-your-ground.

 

Of these, at least ten include "may stand his or her ground" language (Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, and South Carolina.) Pennsylvania limits the no-duty-to-retreat principle to situations where the defender is resisting attack with a deadly weapon.

 

Castle Doctrine

  • No duty to retreat before using deadly force if you are in yourhome or yard (some states include place of work and occupied vehicles).

 

The common law principle of "castle doctrine" says that

  • Individuals have the right to use reasonable force, including deadly force, to protect themselves against an intruder in their home.
  • This principle has been codified and expanded by state legislatures.

 

Depending on the location, a person may have a duty to retreat to avoid violence if one can reasonably do so.

 

Castle doctrines lessen the duty to retreat when an individual is assaulted within one's own home.

 

Deadly force may either be justified, the burdens of production and proof for charges impeded, or an affirmative defense against criminal homicideapplicable, in cases "when the actor reasonably fears imminent peril of death or serious bodily harm to him or herself or another".

 

The castle doctrine

  • Is not a defined law that can be invoked, but a set of principles which may be incorporated in some form in many jurisdictions.
  • Castle doctrines may not provide civil immunity, such as from wrongful deathsuits, which have a much lower burden of proof.

 

Justifiable homicide, in self-defense which happens to occur inside one's home is distinct, as a matter of law, from castle doctrine because the mere occurrence of trespassing and occasionally a subjective requirement of fear is sufficient to invoke the castle doctrine, the burden of proof of fact is much less challenging than that of justifying a homicide in self-defense.

 

With justifiable homicide in self-defense, one generally must objectively prove to a trier of fact, against all reasonable doubt, the intentin the intruder's mind to commit violence or a felony.

 

Other states with strong Castle Doctrine and stand-your-ground laws include:

  •  Alabama, Arizona, Georgia,Indiana, Kentucky, Louisiana, Montana, Nevada, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Tennessee, Utah, and Washington.

 

Where castle doctrine may apply ?

  • It applies when you face a threat of violence in other locations, such as on a public street. In general, stand your ground laws say that you may lawfully use force to defend yourself and others without first attempting to retreat from the danger.

 

2. The morality of self-defense

  • is not only presumed, the act of self-defense is permitted and even mandated by key Biblical figures.
  • This principle flows of course from a moral law that reveres human life. It should be protected, not merely avenged.

 

Nehemiah

  • when he was rebuilding Jerusalem in the face of hatred (not in wartime, but when tribal neighbors were seeking to carry out vigilante attacks on Jews) instructed his people: "Do not be afraid of them.
  • Remember the Lord, who is great and awesome, and fight for your brothers, your sons, your daughters, your wives, and your homes." (Nehemiah 4:14).

 

It has always been clear that human life is precious so precious, in fact, that throughout time God has mandated the ultimate penalty for unlawful killing.

 

Among God's first words to Noah after the Flood subsided was this declaration of the importance of human life and the price paid for spilling human blood: "Whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed, for God made man in his own image." (Genesis 9:6)

 

This statement is not made to a nation-state or to a police force but instead to a small band of people who are rebuilding human society from the ground up.

 

While obviously not specifically addressing self-defense, by establishing that fundamental principle the Biblical commands and examples that follow demonstrate how God expects us to protect life in the real world.

 

In the Hebrew Bible, Exodus 21:12 states that "whoever strikes a man so that he dies shall be put to death." In Matthew's Gospel, Jesus, however, rejects the notion of retribution when he says "if anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also."

 

Can one reconcile saving his/her own life at the expense of another's life from a.The Bible regarding self-defense and murder are a little contradictory in my view.

 

Exodus 22:2-4

  • "If the thief is found breaking in, and he is struck so that he dies, there shall be no guilt for his bloodshed. If the sun has risen on him, there shall be guilt for his bloodshed.

 

He should make full restitution; if he has nothing, then he shall be sold for his theft. If the theft is certainly found alive in his hand, whether it is an ox or donkey or sheep, he shall restore double."

 

This portion deals with the consequences of thievery. First mentioned is the thief who is caught in the very act of breaking into someone's home (or business). 

 

Verse 2 with verse 3, we realize that verse 2 is speaking of a thief that breaks in during the night, under cover of the darkness. If someone, while defending his property, should happen to kill the thief, there has no crime been committed so there would be "no guilt for his bloodshed." 

 

In the Bible, there are different words used for a thief and a robber. The word 'thief' means 'a stealer.' The word 'robber' means 'a tyrant, destroyer, ravenous.' A thief would present no physical danger while a robber would be a threat. 

 

In the darkness of night, a homeowner could not tell if the thief was a threat. He could not tell if he had a weapon or not, so if he killed the thief, thinking that he was a robber, there would be no prosecution.

 

Self-defense" is not even listed as a possibility!

  • God illustrates "accidental death" as occurring when there is no intent to kill or to harm. It is accidental when there is no awareness that an action will result in the death of another. 
  • Deuteronomy 19:5 provides a clear example of such an accident: ".as when a man goes to the woods with his neighbor to cut timber, and his hand swings a stroke with the ax to cut down the tree, and the head slips from the handle and strikes his neighbor so that he dies."

 

However, when there is intent to kill or injure, God's law defines it as murder regardless of what the other person was threatening to do, about to do, or in the process of doing: "He who strikes a man so that he dies shall surely be put to death" (Exodus 21:12).

 

If a man fires a gun with the foreknowledge that it has the potential to kill another man, it is murder. The "self-defense" category is something afforded by the law of the land, not by the law of God.

 

4. Western culture no longer takes seriously many of the Ten Commandments. The third and fourth commandments are certainly neglected.

 

There is also a good argument that our society does not care much about the prohibitions against adultery (seventh commandment), theft (eighth commandment), slander (ninth commandment), or covetousness (tenth commandment) either.

 

However, apart from abortion and euthanasia, there is no movement to legalize murder.

 

In the modern West, people still want to hold that killing an innocent human being is wrong.

 

As we look at the sixth commandment, notice first that the ESV uses the word "murder," not "kill."

  • That is because the Hebrew language has several words that mean "kill," and the one that appears in the Hebrew text of today's passage appears most often in the context of the deliberate taking of innocent life.

 

Not every kind of killing is murder, which means that not all acts of killing are against God's law. 

 

Exodus 22:2-3

 

for examples

  • does not prescribe the death penalty if a person kills someone in self-defense when the person has no other recourse to protect his life and property.
  • This indicates that killing in a legitimate act of self-defense is not murder and not forbidden by the sixth commandment.
  • The concern in the commandment against murder is to protect innocent life, and in the case of self-defense, the innocent party is the one who must defend himself.

 

Over the centuries, Christians thinkers have seen a broader application of passages such as Exodus 22:2-3 to warfare, teaching that there are just wars in which Christians may participate and that states may wage war without violating the sixth commandment.

 

Generally speaking, just war theory says that states may defend themselves against unlawful aggression in order to protect their people and territories.

 

Sadly, nations do not always follow these guidelines, and tragically, the scourge of abortion on demand means that many countries do not take seriously the command not to allow the killing of innocent human beings.

Christians are obliged, insofar as they are able, to hold the state to account for not fulfilling its responsibility to protect life (Rom. 13:1-7).