WI. to take up bill on self-defense in violent crimes

Topics that do not fit anywhere else. Absolutely NO discussions of religion, race, or immigration!

Moderators: carlson1, Charles L. Cotton

Post Reply
RPB
Banned
Posts: 8697
Joined: Tue Nov 17, 2009 8:17 pm

WI. to take up bill on self-defense in violent crimes

Post by RPB »

September 30, 2011,
Wisconsin State Assembly to take up bill on self-defense in violent crimes
A bill headed to the floor of the state Assembly would allow a person who kills or injures someone who breaks into their home, business or car, to claim self-defense.
http://www.superiortelegram.com/event/a ... roup/News/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
I'm no lawyer

"Never show your hole card" "Always have something in reserve"
User avatar
C-dub
Senior Member
Posts: 13584
Joined: Sat May 16, 2009 7:18 pm
Location: DFW

Re: WI. to take up bill on self-defense in violent crimes

Post by C-dub »

Okay, but wasn't it always self defense? Apparently it's not, so I wonder what it is now.
I am not and have never been a LEO. My avatar is in honor of my friend, Dallas Police Sargent Michael Smith, who was murdered along with four other officers in Dallas on 7.7.2016.
NRA Patriot-Endowment Lifetime Member---------------------------------------------Si vis pacem, para bellum.................................................Patriot Guard Rider
User avatar
Jumping Frog
Senior Member
Posts: 5488
Joined: Wed Aug 25, 2010 9:13 am
Location: Klein, TX (Houston NW suburb)

Re: WI. to take up bill on self-defense in violent crimes

Post by Jumping Frog »

It is a Castle Doctrine bill.

Now, I am discussing self defense law in other states like WI here, not current Texas law.

WI currently has the traditional self defense laws. The traditional self defense claim was an affirmative defense. To present the affirmative defense, basically, you have to admit you committed the crime (shot someone) which starts you off at "guilty", and then the burden is on the defendant to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that it was valid self defense to be able to get back to "innocent".

In state's that have passed this kind of Castle Doctrine bill, it greatly changes the burden on the person who acts in self defense. If the person is in a place with special privilege -- usually their home and their car -- and has to defend themselves, the law now says they are innocent because they are assumed to have acted in valid self defense. Now the burden is upon the prosecutor to prove that it was not valid self defense, and thus a crime.

Typically, the elements of self defense are the same. The person must not have been at fault in starting, escalating, or provoking the incident, and the person must have had a legitimate fear of death or serious bodily injury. The bad guy who was shot must have been committing a crime or attempting to commit a crime and not had a legitimate, legal right to be there.

Castle Doctrine simply means the burden is on the prosecutor to prove that the elements of self defense do not apply because the person either started the incident or was not in fear for their life/serious bodily injury.

Good for WI to get this bill in motion so quickly. It took OH several years to get the Castle Doctrine passed after concealed carry was first introduced. It has a big real life impact after a self defense shooting.
-Just call me Bob . . . Texas Firearms Coalition, NRA Life member, TSRA Life member, and OFCC Patron member

This froggie ain't boiling! Shall not be infringed! Μολών Λαβέ
Post Reply

Return to “Off-Topic”