My contention was not to lie to the police or anyone else. The point was that “if you had been drinking prior to the event” it might be a viable option to counter the soon to be administered BAT/UDS by being seen taking a slug of booze IN THEIR PRESENCE. The prosecuting attorney will certainly point to your BAT/UDS and say you were intoxicated, the reply “No kidding he drank 3 fingers of scotch in the presence of the PD after the shooting and was BAT’d/UDS’d after that”. Under oath I would be absolutely truthful and if directly asked tell them what and how many I had or what meds I was on if that was the case.
I agree. After that the question becomes how do I survive the next several months with the least damage possible, which ostensibly is why we are here as a group.
I agree with WildRose on the fact that LIVING is the #1 priority here, but I also agree with Craig’s point of knowing that you will be dealing with this (potentially) long after the night of the incident. If I had 6 beers one night and experienced a home invasion, maybe grabbing a baseball bat or stun gun instead of a firearm would alleviate many of the headaches later on down the line (including a potential civil action against me) - (assuming the home invaders are not packing AK-47’s)
I have a strong feeling that shooting someone in 100% self-defense while (for sake of a measurement) over the legal limit to drive a car might play well for me in court during a criminal investigation/case, there will probably be some family member out there seeking ‘justice’ for their long lost relative, and THAT jury may not be so kind when their attorney plays the ‘drunk’ card in court. I don’t know. I’m not a lawyer nor do I work in law enforcement. It’s just something that keeps me up at night sometimes as a responsible gun owner.
I live in a ‘decent’ neighborhood but surrounded by some bad parts of the city. There are a lot of break-ins and crimes within a mile radius of me on a daily basis. I almost always have my firearm on my side - even while at home - just to be fully prepared. Although this practice probably won’t change - even after having a few drinks at home - but I will probably keep a non-lethal weapon in an easy-to-reach area as a first option but always have the firearm for backup. As WildRose said, LIFE is the #1 priority.
(and I may keep a “break open bottle in case of emergency” pint in the pantry just in case)
In cases where force is used, there are two trials you must face. Criminal and Civil. I can’t think of a clearer example of the extremes than the O.J. Simpson case. It’s just gonna suck no matter what happens. I’ll take all the defense I can get for both.
So after reading all of the information you provided, thank you for being thorough, I have a few questions to see if I’m understanding all the information.
So Ohio’s Castle Doctrine is a Stand Your Ground, right? No duty to retreat, right? Now, if I am correct in the assumption that the answer to both of those questions is yes then we move forward to the next set of questions.
Although, you have a right to defend yourself in your home, doing so while under the influence presents you with challenges. To be clear, the scenario is, a home intruder attempts to or successfully breaks into your home while you are under the influence.
Not sure if this was you or another attorney but someone stated that using lethal force on a home intruder while under the influence could have you under civil scrutiny. For? Scrutiny on whether you had the right to use lethal force when someone attempts or successful breaks in? OR Civil scrutiny for using a firearm while intoxicated? Or both?
The way I understood all that information was you would not be charged with murder or manslaughter, but would possibly face criminal charges for using a firearm while intoxicated. Is this correct?
*Now, do you have a right to refuse screening for level of intoxication? Is it standard practice to run a tox screen on anyone who fires a gun? Any homeowner? Anyone in self defense? In other words is this standard practice?
I’m not a lawyer so take my opinion for what it is worth. I suspect that if you defend yourself in your home in most States while under the influence and responding LEOs have reason to believe that you were under the influence (or even just had a sip of alcohol recently in some states) then you could be subject to increased scrutiny both legally and civilly.
Not only would you face potential charges for using a firearm while drinking, your decision to use deadly force could be questioned based on the potential that your judgement of the threat was impaired by the alcohol. The same argument could be used against you in a civil trial.
As with any self defense situation a lot will likely depend on the specific situation you are faced with, how you respond to it and the judgement of your response by LEOs, the local prosecutor and potentially a jury.
The Castle Doctrine and Stand your ground are actually not the same, although can be codified together. The Castle Doctrine basically says that there is a presumption that someone entering your “castle” (home) is there with the intent to cause you physical injury and you have the right to defend yourself. It is typically only applicable to a place where you live or are staying like a hotel.
Stand your ground, on the other hand, is the concept that you are not required to retreat (or attempt to retreat) when a dangerous circumstance arises. This concept can be included to only when in your home or apply at any time you are somewhere you are lawfully allowed to be present, like walking down a street.
Yes, alcohol can play a major role in a self defense situation. If you are under the influence of alcohol, or any other substance for that matter, your senses and thought processes are compromised to some degree. Obviously, if you acted beyond the scope of self defense laws, you will likely be charged. If your actions were appropriate under the circumstances, the self defense should not involve being charged but it may be a crime for possessing or using a dangerous weapon.
And yes, if you defend yourself you will probably be sued and if your intoxicated it will strengthen the plaintiff’s case against you.
You can always refuse screening for intoxicants, however, they can still be obtained with a warrant. The Warrant eliminates your right to choose.
No, it is not a standard practice to run a ton screen on anyone who shoots a gun.
NPR was talking to someone during an interview about ak rifles. They were giving worldwide statistics and kept using the word dangerous…
I didn’t go buy an ak, but added another firearm to my collection before dark that day! I never thought an ak was dangerous. I always thought of them as reliable in poor environments.
I am of the opinion and I have stated this here several times. IF I were involved in a in house shooting and I had even thought that I had a drink that evening. The first thing the police would see is me pouring a hefty smackeral of something tasty into a glass and taking a long pull on it as they came in. IDK if @MikeBKY would approve but it would be interesting to see the legalities of it and if anything you said could be defensible/prosecutable as you were observed to be under the influence at the time of questioning.
Kentucky has 2 basic classifications for weapons defined by statute in KRS 500.080. They can be a “dangerous instrument” or a deadly weapon."
Deadly weapons are in an enumerated list. Dangerous instruments are literally anything that is not a deadly weapon that is or can be used to cause serious physical injury or death
(3) “Dangerous instrument” means any instrument, including parts of the human body when a serious physical injury is a direct result of the use of that part of the human body, article, or substance which, under the circumstances in which it is used, attempted to be used, or threatened to be used, is readily capable of causing death or serious physical injury;
(4) “Deadly weapon” means any of the following:
(a) A weapon of mass destruction;
(b) Any weapon from which a shot, readily capable of producing death or other
serious physical injury, may be discharged;
(c) Any knife other than an ordinary pocket knife or hunting knife;
(d) Billy, nightstick, or club;
(e) Blackjack or slapjack;
(f) Nunchaku karate sticks;
(g) Shuriken or death star; or
(h) Artificial knuckles made from metal, plastic, or other similar hard material;
@Craig6 I feel ya! I’m not sure if I approve or not. It might be very useful if you had a few drinks before the incident and then crack the bourbon open when the first officer shows up. THIS IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE
