leahcim 673 Posted September 23, 2019 And yes, I agree that you should not have to spend $1000000s and go through potentially losing much more than just assets. Just to clear your name and defend yourself (in court) after engaging in a self-defense situation. Especially involving an intruder in your own home. We can all imagine how such a HD shooting would turn out for the victim in this state. 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
capt14k 2,051 Posted October 17, 2019 On 9/22/2019 at 1:00 PM, leahcim said: Yeah, sorry I didn't elaborate. This case did not involve fire arm,. But judge ruled on no duty to retreat inside your house, regardless of the defensuve weapon. "The defendant may, under our law, meet the assailant at the threshold of the home and prevent him from entering by any means, including deadly force." My point was, no duty to retreat in the home. My other point, this is 30 year old case law, good luck with that today. The no duty to retreat from ones dwelling is codified in 2C:3-4. Just one of those NJ Myths that we don't have a Castle Doctrine and have to run from our home. 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GRIZ 3,365 Posted October 17, 2019 12 minutes ago, capt14k said: The no duty to retreat from ones dwelling is codified in 2C:3-4. Just one of those NJ Myths that we don't have a Castle Doctrine and have to run from our home. @capt14k is spot on. If you claim you were in fear of your life it is on the prosecutor to prove you weren't. Other states are different. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites