Attorneys Say ‘Castle Bill’ Would Create Loophole For Trespassers

On Ohio’s Senate Bill 184:

“There is no necessity for the person to show that the trespasser was a real threat to them,” said John Murphy, with the Ohio Prosecuting Attorney Association. “It doesn’t matter whether it was a burglar or a child.”

Well, it doesn’t allow homeowners to just shoot up the place. It simply shifts the burden of proof to the state.

Even after watching the video at the link, I don’t quite understand what the “loophole” is. Here is what the article says:

Murphy said the bill could also provide criminals with a loophole.

“What this bill really does is protect criminals who might be able to raise this kind of defense and get away with murder,” Murphy said.

Is the fear that someone would invite someone into their home and then, after shooting them, claim the entry was uninvited?

Also at stake is the fact that this legislation would made someone’s home away from home their “castle” as well. The situation pointed out is a college dorm room. Of course, they interview two students who don’t think it’s needed and that “having a gun there would probably kill people.”

Here’s a crazy idea: Why not look at states with similar caslte doctrine laws and see just how deep that blood running in the street is?

Tags: OH

This entry was posted on Thursday, April 3rd, 2008 at 7:59 am and is filed under Castle Doctrine, Schools. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.