SB 611 repeal castle doctrine

[Tallbear]

SB 0611 of 2015 (http://www.legislature.mi.gov/mileg.aspx?page=getobject&objectname=2015-SB-0611)
Crimes; other; "castle doctrine" right to use of deadly force in self-defense and defense of others; repeal. Repeals (see bill).
Last Action: 11/10/2015 REFERRED TO COMMITTEE ON JUDICIARY

[TacJoe]

Me: Wonder who's sponsoring this? ::clicks:: Yep, that's the ones I expected.

[Kaeto]

Well there are four senators that need to be unemployed.

[Roundballer]

WHAT?

I would love to hear the reasoning behind this one!

Just remove all of the written protections for defending yourself, and open it up so that every thug that you do "nick", and their families, can sue your pants off for the "precious little good boy"!

[DrScaryGuy]

So, when are they going to make it illegal to put locks on your doors? After all, that innocent college bound good kid might cut himself breaking through a window, when he does that thing that he wouldn't ever do.

[Leader]

So, when are they going to make it illegal to put locks on your doors? After all, that innocent college bound good kid might cut himself breaking through a window, when he does that thing that he wouldn't ever do.

That is really thoughtful of you Doc.
Perhaps you could send that suggestion to Sen. Warren and maybe it will become a law.

[DEVIL DOG]

Who wrote this bull, Stevie Wonder ?

[SteveS]

I don't think this bill will go anywhere. Regardless, if by some miracle it did pass, we would go back to the way it was previously and very little would actually change, in terms of what is allowed.

That being said, I'd also like to hear their reasoning for proposing this. Our statute is in line with what the common law rule is.

[Tallbear]

I don't think this bill will go anywhere. Regardless, if by some miracle it did pass, we would go back to the way it was previously and very little would actually change, in terms of what is allowed.

That being said, I'd also like to hear their reasoning for proposing this. Our statute is in line with what the common law rule is.

My take is it's an election year coming up and it shows their constitutes they are trying to be be "good Democrats".

[SteveS]

It just doesn't make sense to do this without proposing some alternative because it really doesn't make any major changes.

I agree that they just might want to appear like they are doing something.

[jgillmanjr]

It just doesn't make sense to do this without proposing some alternative because it really doesn't make any major changes.

I agree that they just might want to appear like they are doing something.

The constituents they're pandering to are probably too stupid to know what common law even is.

[bigt8261]

Ammoland republished MOC's article on the "Gangbanger Protection Act of 2015", with a bit of their own seasoning. Well done Ammoland.

http://www.ammoland.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/Rebekah-Warren-Michigan-Gangbanger-Protection-Act-of-2015-600x286.jpg?182e3e

http://www.ammoland.com/2015/11/michigan-gangbanger-protection-act-of-2015-introduced/#axzz3rldDH4dW

[G36 Shooter]

Very good.

[fr3db3ar]

I'm pretty damned tired of representatives that "appear" to be doing something.

[JasonJ]

I'm probably too young to remember... but how was it before we had Castle Doctrine? It was mentioned that not much would essentially change... can anyone expound upon this to better educate me? I'm really quite curious.

Also, this proposed legislation is ridiculous. Sen. Warren makes broad, unsubstantiated claims implying that Michiganders are mowing down people all over the place, without prosecution, as a result of the current law. I dare her to present even ONE such example where an otherwise UNJUSTIFIED use of a firearm for self-defense lead to a death, and subsequently no prosecution.