Editorials
>
Local News
>
Editorials
'Castle Doctrine' Law Appropriate
For the News-Register
POSTED: March 3, 2008
A bill approved by the Legislature and sent to Gov. Joe Manchin last week would merely codify what we think most West Virginians already view as a solid principle. It is the “Castle Doctrine,” as the bill has come to be known — the belief that a person’s home is his or her “castle” and that there’s nothing wrong with defending it.
At least 20 other states already have “Castle Doctrine” laws that shield their residents who, while in their homes — or anywhere else they have a legal right to be — use “reasonable and proportionate force” in defense of themselves, loved ones or even property.
The “civil liberties” crowd often protests such statutes, claiming that, in effect, criminals have rights, too. Well, yes they do — but those rights should not extend to intimidating law-abiding people who may fear that if they respond to a threat with force, they will find themselves arrested and/or subjected to civil lawsuits. Too many times in the past, precisely that has happened to those who had the courage to resist thugs with enough force to stop them.
The bill sent to Manchin would protect Mountain State residents from both criminal charges and civil liability in many such situations.
We don’t expect Manchin to have any problem with the bill, simply because we believe he shares the feelings of the vast majority of West Virginians. We encourage him to resist any demands that he reject the bill. It ought to be signed into law — again, to reflect the philosophy most people in our state have in regard to self-defense.
At least 20 other states already have “Castle Doctrine” laws that shield their residents who, while in their homes — or anywhere else they have a legal right to be — use “reasonable and proportionate force” in defense of themselves, loved ones or even property.
The “civil liberties” crowd often protests such statutes, claiming that, in effect, criminals have rights, too. Well, yes they do — but those rights should not extend to intimidating law-abiding people who may fear that if they respond to a threat with force, they will find themselves arrested and/or subjected to civil lawsuits. Too many times in the past, precisely that has happened to those who had the courage to resist thugs with enough force to stop them.
The bill sent to Manchin would protect Mountain State residents from both criminal charges and civil liability in many such situations.
We don’t expect Manchin to have any problem with the bill, simply because we believe he shares the feelings of the vast majority of West Virginians. We encourage him to resist any demands that he reject the bill. It ought to be signed into law — again, to reflect the philosophy most people in our state have in regard to self-defense.
Share:
Member Comments
View Comments: | 1-4 | Post a comment
|
cory1978
|
|
|---|---|
|
03-05-08 4:20 PM
|
i actually thought this already was a law...my mistake...it should be for everyone and everystate....GOD MADE MAN....SAMUEL COLT MADE THEM EVEN
|
|
atoddh
|
|
|
03-04-08 6:05 PM
|
This bill is long over due.It is not uncommon for trespassers to file charges on land owners who attempt to remove them.
|
|
Georgetwin
|
|
|
03-04-08 10:54 AM
|
I have 2 guards on my place, Smith & Wesson.
|
|
DasBoot
|
|
|
03-03-08 8:45 PM
|
A criminals civil liberties end the minute he takes a step into my house. Then, he can either leave immediately, or I'll take the ``liberty' of arranging an early meeting with St. Peter.
|






