Self Defense in the Home – What Are Your Rights Under the Law? Defense Attorney Marc J. Victor
Self Defense in the Home – What Are Your Rights Under the Law? Criminal Defense Attorney Marc J. Victor and John Correia of Active Self Protection discuss what are your rights to self-defense in your home?
Thumbing through the phone book or surfing the internet for legal help is not the best way to select an attorney. Don’t trust your legal problem to an attorney you know nothing about.
The Attorneys on Retainer program at the Attorneys For Freedom Law Firm is an opportunity to both secure a trusted law firm and to avoid paying outrageously high legal fees.
Find Out More:
480-755-7110
——-
Viewing this brief legal information does not create and attorney/client relationship and is not legal advice. Consult an attorney regarding your specific situation. This is intended only as a general overview of one legal topic.
I don't give a RIP what any law says; any thug that breaks in my house is gonna get hos head blown off; the heck with any perverted law that says you can't protect your home, your life and your family!!!
In Massachusetts you dont have the right to defend your castle . You have to hide and call the police once the invader leaves with your children and money .
All education is simple to read the Constitution and the bill of rights, kill the bastard, shut up, you are alive, that's what was intended. by our founders.
Get USCCA or US Law Sheild or whatever insurance and defend away. It's your home. I'm not going to be thinking what will my neighbor think of me if I shoot an attacker inside my home. They're not the one handling the situation.
Enforcing moral views by law is one of the excuses used by tyranny. Both sides of the spectrum are willing to coerce their moral views by law, just depends on what agenda they have. I've encountered many socialists like this but also many fundamentalist Christians.
Libertarians — plotting to take over the world and leave you alone.
Fleeing my home into the hands of more attackers is not an option. I DONT know what’s outside. I may run outside and be pursued. My attacker may have more help outside…lm not running into an ambush.
This “attorney” gives scenarios in which he supposes that the situation allows for a clear-headed, calm evaluation of your options. So, as a prosecuting attorney, he states that the question of “why didn’t you just walk away?” will inevitably be asked in court. So, in you list of options available to you during this time of a threat to your personhood, this attorney thinks that you should just “walk away.” Why, because he thinks the situation is a moral one that needs to be taken into account. What I take issue with regarding his thinking is that, in an emergency, you don’t have time to consider your options or deliberate about moral questions. His thinking as an “attorney,” is coming from the courtroom where fear, anxiety, panic don’t come into play. What he is presenting, and he doesn’t make it clear, is how the situation involving self-protection with a firearm would be argued in the courtroom. Now, from that vantage point his discussion is a little more palatable. This is the important point I want to make: “Stand Your Ground” law was designed to give another option to the victim as a means to defend your use of a weapon in self-defense. In other words, when he says that the prosecuting attorney will inevitably ask you the question concerning your options for your actions, before the Stand Your Ground Law, you were almost sure to be on shaky ground to respond to the question of “you could have just walked away,” but the Stand Your Ground law now gives you the option of stating that law as a valid reason for legal purposes of defending yourself with a weapon. Otherwise, in a courtroom trial, when the prosecutor makes his or her case, they will try to convict you of murder on the grounds that you could have walked or ran away and left your house, car, belongings, whatever to the criminal to steal. The prosecutor could paint you as a ego maniac who used undue force because of some character flaw that caused you to be so aggressive in choosing your options and that macho impulse was the reason you killed the other guy. However, the courtroom trial does not and can not convey the panic, the stress, the anxiety and fear one might feel in a situation where you feel trapped and mortally threatened. Just think about how ridiculous the options a prosecutor could come up with during a trial as to how you could have avoided defending yourself: “well, Mr Smith, you could have jumped out of the second story window of your house and ran away,” “Well, Mr. Smith, you could have just ran out of the house without shooting the intruders.” “Well Mr. Smith, you shot two minority intruders and you could have asked them nicely to let you have your property, but you shot them because you were a racist.” The prosecuting attorney would have a field day making you seem like you had so many other options to pick from at a time when you were in a panic, fearful, stressed and thinking the worst case scenario would happen to you and your family. This attorney is discussing the use of a gun in this cold, dispassionate, Calm and logical frame of mind of the courtroom. This is why the “Stand Your Ground law is so important to have as another legal option for the victims of violent crimes. If you take that law from the people, the criminals have the ability to sue you or their families can sue you in civil court for the crime of self-protection.
Well there were a couple of people broke into a house that I have and stole everything I owed but the good thing is that my kids and I wasn't home at the time it's a good thing because my kids would had been asleep and I would had opened fired on all of the people who broke in with no questions asked they interred unlawful and I have a right to defend myself and my family
If an "attacker" is on your property, first just try to get them to leave. Often times people having mental health issues will end up trespassing in peoples houses or backyards with no intent to harm anyone or steal anything simply because they're confused or don't know what's going on. The only time I've had somebody on our property it was a homeless man who saw the garden hose in our backyard on a really hot day and just wanted to get a drink of water and get out of the heat, he did not intend harm or to steal anything. Afterwards it became apparent that he had mental health issues shortly after because he came back later in the day and started looking through our front windows. That's when he started to be a little bit of a threat so we told him to leave again (which he did) and then my dad went outside and guarded the house until the police were able to find him and help him on his way (I'm not sure exactly what happened but I'm assuming he was arrested)
I think moral of the story is that if somebody is on your property, don't just fucking shoot them, but still be wary even if they leave relatively easily.
Excuse me! Having insurance doesn't allow a home invader to do as they please! I hear this argument by the left all the time. Why don't you just let it go? You have insurance don't you?
All of you are leaving comments on stuff he explained lol he said MOST things can be replaced and IF you can retreat without leaving kids and spouses behind.
NEVER shoot outside your home unless your life is surely being threatened. Be damn sure the person breaking in advances on you. It would be helpful if he carried a weapon. Also, all this legal crap does nothing for you if the prosecutor decides to charge you but you could be freed from jail quickly with a good lawyer. You will only need $50,000 to retain this lawyer. This did happen.
){kind=link}
){kind=link}
This is why we need to rid of this justice system and follow the constitution!
I don't give a RIP what any law says; any thug that breaks in my house is gonna get hos head blown off; the heck with any perverted law that says you can't protect your home, your life and your family!!!
In Massachusetts you dont have the right to defend your castle . You have to hide and call the police once the invader leaves with your children and money .
I didn't go looking for him. He came in my home looking for me!!!! End of story…..
All education is simple to read the Constitution and the bill of rights, kill the bastard, shut up, you are alive, that's what was intended. by our founders.
Get USCCA or US Law Sheild or whatever insurance and defend away. It's your home. I'm not going to be thinking what will my neighbor think of me if I shoot an attacker inside my home. They're not the one handling the situation.
Both of you are full of shit.
this goes down in split seconds , no time to think barely to act.
Enforcing moral views by law is one of the excuses used by tyranny. Both sides of the spectrum are willing to coerce their moral views by law, just depends on what agenda they have. I've encountered many socialists like this but also many fundamentalist Christians.
Libertarians — plotting to take over the world and leave you alone.
My rights under the law? Lol..
I live in a free state. Killing a home invader is legal and generally applauded.
Fleeing my home into the hands of more attackers is not an option. I DONT know what’s outside. I may run outside and be pursued. My attacker may have more help outside…lm not running into an ambush.
If they leave alive either in cuffs or escapes, you should expect some kind of retaliation…
Shoot to kill.
Kill, and bury !.. + Don't tell ANYONE!
This “attorney” gives scenarios in which he supposes that the situation allows for a clear-headed, calm evaluation of your options. So, as a prosecuting attorney, he states that the question of “why didn’t you just walk away?” will inevitably be asked in court. So, in you list of options available to you during this time of a threat to your personhood, this attorney thinks that you should just “walk away.” Why, because he thinks the situation is a moral one that needs to be taken into account. What I take issue with regarding his thinking is that, in an emergency, you don’t have time to consider your options or deliberate about moral questions. His thinking as an “attorney,” is coming from the courtroom where fear, anxiety, panic don’t come into play. What he is presenting, and he doesn’t make it clear, is how the situation involving self-protection with a firearm would be argued in the courtroom. Now, from that vantage point his discussion is a little more palatable. This is the important point I want to make: “Stand Your Ground” law was designed to give another option to the victim as a means to defend your use of a weapon in self-defense. In other words, when he says that the prosecuting attorney will inevitably ask you the question concerning your options for your actions, before the Stand Your Ground Law, you were almost sure to be on shaky ground to respond to the question of “you could have just walked away,” but the Stand Your Ground law now gives you the option of stating that law as a valid reason for legal purposes of defending yourself with a weapon. Otherwise, in a courtroom trial, when the prosecutor makes his or her case, they will try to convict you of murder on the grounds that you could have walked or ran away and left your house, car, belongings, whatever to the criminal to steal. The prosecutor could paint you as a ego maniac who used undue force because of some character flaw that caused you to be so aggressive in choosing your options and that macho impulse was the reason you killed the other guy. However, the courtroom trial does not and can not convey the panic, the stress, the anxiety and fear one might feel in a situation where you feel trapped and mortally threatened. Just think about how ridiculous the options a prosecutor could come up with during a trial as to how you could have avoided defending yourself: “well, Mr Smith, you could have jumped out of the second story window of your house and ran away,” “Well, Mr. Smith, you could have just ran out of the house without shooting the intruders.” “Well Mr. Smith, you shot two minority intruders and you could have asked them nicely to let you have your property, but you shot them because you were a racist.” The prosecuting attorney would have a field day making you seem like you had so many other options to pick from at a time when you were in a panic, fearful, stressed and thinking the worst case scenario would happen to you and your family. This attorney is discussing the use of a gun in this cold, dispassionate, Calm and logical frame of mind of the courtroom. This is why the “Stand Your Ground law is so important to have as another legal option for the victims of violent crimes. If you take that law from the people, the criminals have the ability to sue you or their families can sue you in civil court for the crime of self-protection.
Well there were a couple of people broke into a house that I have and stole everything I owed but the good thing is that my kids and I wasn't home at the time it's a good thing because my kids would had been asleep and I would had opened fired on all of the people who broke in with no questions asked they interred unlawful and I have a right to defend myself and my family
I announce I have a gun and they don't run out of my house then I will not hesitate to stop them from doing harm to me or mine
If an "attacker" is on your property, first just try to get them to leave. Often times people having mental health issues will end up trespassing in peoples houses or backyards with no intent to harm anyone or steal anything simply because they're confused or don't know what's going on. The only time I've had somebody on our property it was a homeless man who saw the garden hose in our backyard on a really hot day and just wanted to get a drink of water and get out of the heat, he did not intend harm or to steal anything. Afterwards it became apparent that he had mental health issues shortly after because he came back later in the day and started looking through our front windows. That's when he started to be a little bit of a threat so we told him to leave again (which he did) and then my dad went outside and guarded the house until the police were able to find him and help him on his way (I'm not sure exactly what happened but I'm assuming he was arrested)
I think moral of the story is that if somebody is on your property, don't just fucking shoot them, but still be wary even if they leave relatively easily.
Shoot first ask questions later.
Rights or no rights, come through my door uninvited,..game over.
Excuse me! Having insurance doesn't allow a home invader to do as they please! I hear this argument by the left all the time. Why don't you just let it go? You have insurance don't you?
All of you are leaving comments on stuff he explained lol he said MOST things can be replaced and IF you can retreat without leaving kids and spouses behind.
Waste of time, dude.
NEVER shoot outside your home unless your life is surely being threatened. Be damn sure the person breaking in advances on you. It would be helpful if he carried a weapon. Also, all this legal crap does nothing for you if the prosecutor decides to charge you but you could be freed from jail quickly with a good lawyer. You will only need $50,000 to retain this lawyer. This did happen.