Yes I do agree that is a possibility. Once the thieves take off it is done. If you fire at them while in a moving vehicle and hit an innocent bystander you will be held responsible.
4 Likes
What state is that?
Generally speaking, according to the lawyers, even if you have a âcastle doctrineâ type scenario that presents a presumption of imminent threat of serious harm/death justifying lethal force, that word presumption comes with the word rebuttable.
This per Tom Grieve, attorney, USCCA Ask an Attorney videos
2 Likes
But in some states if the perp is unarmed and walking out of your home with your property you cannot shoot them.
5 Likes
It is rebuttable but the presumption is much harder to get around than the need to retreat.
2 Likes
Especially if they have a duty to retreat law. I donât know how the Castle Doctrine would treat that but then again, why would you bother to shoot them walking out if you wouldnât shoot them coming in?
3 Likes
Carry 2011. Safety selector, nice trigger and constant bullseye from 25 yards. 
2 Likes
Currently reading this one. Written by Andrew Branca (Lawyer) and the forward written by Massad Ayoob.
5 Likes
Self-Defense
Although not codified by statute, Virginia case law supports self-defense, a version of the castle doctrine and stand your ground in certain circumstances. There is no duty to retreat, and you can defend yourself at any location you are legally permitted to be.
Defense of Self or Others
Virginia law allows the use of self-defense where a person, who is not the aggressor:
- Reasonably believes the person is in imminent danger of an overt act threatening unlawful force, serious bodily harm or death; and
- Uses the amount of force reasonable in relation to the threat.
A person may only use deadly force if there was a present danger of great bodily injury. An individual is allowed to defend not only his or her person from harm if the person being defended would have been justified in using self-defense.
Defense of Dwelling
Although Virginia law does not allow deadly force to prevent an entry into a home or dwelling, non-deadly force may be used to prevent an unlawful entry into a dwelling. Deadly force is only justified in circumstances where a person reasonably believes the intruder will commit great bodily injury or death
5 Likes
This is the NC law. Virginia law looks to be a little different.
§ 14-51.2. Home, workplace, and motor vehicle protection; presumption of fear of death or serious bodily harm.
(a) The following definitions apply in this section:
(1) Home. - A building or conveyance of any kind, to include its curtilage, whether the building or conveyance is temporary or permanent, mobile or immobile, which has a roof over it, including a tent, and is designed as a temporary or permanent residence.
(2) Law enforcement officer. - Any person employed or appointed as a full-time, part-time, or auxiliary law enforcement officer, correctional officer, probation officer, post-release supervision officer, or parole officer.
(3) Motor vehicle. - As defined in G.S. 20-4.01(23).
(4) Workplace. - A building or conveyance of any kind, whether the building or conveyance is temporary or permanent, mobile or immobile, which has a roof over it, including a tent, which is being used for commercial purposes.
(b) The lawful occupant of a home, motor vehicle, or workplace is presumed to have held a reasonable fear of imminent death or serious bodily harm to himself or herself or another when using defensive force that is intended or likely to cause death or serious bodily harm to another if both of the following apply:
(1) The person against whom the defensive force was used was in the process of unlawfully and forcefully entering, or had unlawfully and forcibly entered, a home, motor vehicle, or workplace, or if that person had removed or was attempting to remove another against that personâs will from the home, motor vehicle, or workplace.
(2) The person who uses defensive force knew or had reason to believe that an unlawful and forcible entry or unlawful and forcible act was occurring or had occurred.
(c) The presumption set forth in subsection (b) of this section shall be rebuttable and does not apply in any of the following circumstances:
(1) The person against whom the defensive force is used has the right to be in or is a lawful resident of the home, motor vehicle, or workplace, such as an owner or lessee, and there is not an injunction for protection from domestic violence or a written pretrial supervision order of no contact against that person.
(2) The person sought to be removed from the home, motor vehicle, or workplace is a child or grandchild or is otherwise in the lawful custody or under the lawful guardianship of the person against whom the defensive force is used.
(3) The person who uses defensive force is engaged in, attempting to escape from, or using the home, motor vehicle, or workplace to further any criminal offense that involves the use or threat of physical force or violence against any individual.
(4) The person against whom the defensive force is used is a law enforcement officer or bail bondsman who enters or attempts to enter a home, motor vehicle, or workplace in the lawful performance of his or her official duties, and the officer or bail bondsman identified himself or herself in accordance with any applicable law or the person using force knew or reasonably should have known that the person entering or attempting to enter was a law enforcement officer or bail bondsman in the lawful performance of his or her official duties.
(5) The person against whom the defensive force is used (i) has discontinued all efforts to unlawfully and forcefully enter the home, motor vehicle, or workplace and (ii) has exited the home, motor vehicle, or workplace.
(d) A person who unlawfully and by force enters or attempts to enter a personâs home, motor vehicle, or workplace is presumed to be doing so with the intent to commit an unlawful act involving force or violence.
(e) A person who uses force as permitted by this section is justified in using such force and is immune from civil or criminal liability for the use of such force, unless the person against whom force was used is a law enforcement officer or bail bondsman who was lawfully acting in the performance of his or her official duties and the officer or bail bondsman identified himself or herself in accordance with any applicable law or the person using force knew or reasonably should have known that the person was a law enforcement officer or bail bondsman in the lawful performance of his or her official duties.
(f) A lawful occupant within his or her home, motor vehicle, or workplace does not have a duty to retreat from an intruder in the circumstances described in this section.
(g) This section is not intended to repeal or limit any other defense that may exist under the common law. (2011-268, s. 1.)
4 Likes
Yes.
But, it takes practice. Lots of it.
4 Likes
Iâm sick and tired of the bullshit excuses, the head of the Secret Service is incompetent and must be fired. What happened is inexcusable!
3 Likes
This should be a goal regardless of what kind of handgun you choose to carry and how much experience you have. Drawing, firing and reholstering.
The majority of my practice with these is dryfire at home and it definitely improves my abilities at the live fire range.
8 Likes
It seems to me the âDefense of Dwellingâ clauses are irrelevant most of the time.
Is a loved one in the dwelling?
Are you standing in the doorway and the aggressor has to go through you to get in the dwelling?