Stand Your Ground Gun Laws (infographic)

The map is updated and now clickable!

Thanks to Instapundit for the link.

This map is intended for use as a summary. Please see our disclaimer below.* We used multiple sources to update our map** but the very best resource we found is the book by Mitch Vilos Self Defense Laws of All 50 States. This book is required reading for anybody who carries a weapon. Many states have complex laws. We highlighted those states when you Click for Summary on the map.

Click on Your State for a Summary

In order to view this page you need Flash Player 9+ support!


Get Adobe Flash player

*DISCLAIMER-This map is intended only for use as a summary. We used extensive research to make it as complete and up to date as possible, but we do not guarantee the accuracy of the information. Do not rely on this map, or any other online resource as your final source for self defense information.

SHARE

To put this map on your web site, just highlight, and copy and paste the HTML code below:

We HIGHLY RECOMMEND consulting a criminal defense attorney in your state BEFORE threatening or using deadly force. A few hundred dollars spent initially can save you thousands of dollars later, as well as help keep you out of prison. Be careful with advice from friends or even firearms instructors for your information. Always back up any information you receive with a visit to an attorney.

Below is our original Stand Your Ground infographic.

It contains a lot of errors that have been fixed in the map above, but we’ve left it in this blog post 1st as a point of reference and 2nd because below the map contains statistics that we want to keep showing.

The topic of Stand Your Ground Gun Laws has been in the news a lot in recent months due to all the media coverage given to the Trayvon Martin / George Zimmerman case. Because of this, we decided to take it upon ourselves to put together an infographic that breaks down exactly what the Stand Your Ground Gun Laws include, Where different states fall with regards to adoption of these laws, and some additional stats related to firearm related violence. We hope you enjoy this graphic and share it with your friends!

Click Image to Enlarge>>
Stand Your Ground Gun Laws by State Infographic
Click Image to Enlarge>>

**Sources:
State Statutes from the various states
http://www.truthout.org/news/item/8086-23-states-with-stand-your-ground laws
Book: Self Defense Laws of all 50 states by Mitch Vilos

http://www.hlntv.com/article/2012/04/18/does-your-state-have-stand-your-ground-law

This entry was posted in Gun Laws, Infographics and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

66 Responses to Stand Your Ground Gun Laws (infographic)

  1. David Allred says:

    Great infographic. It’s amazing to see the crime statistics and how often they occur. Sometimes I wonder why people even take the risk of not owning a firearm. And it’s always nice to know how much force you can use in your own state or while traveling across the states.

    • countrystarr says:

      Thanks for your comment David. I agree, I thinking owning a firearm and being aware of our rights as well as responsibilities and laws as firearm owners is one of the most important things we can do as US citizens.

  2. Pingback: Stand Your Ground Law

  3. Adam Bryce says:

    It is always better to be alive with a dead assailant, than a dead victim and the assailant gets away with the one thing you do have. Your life.

  4. Larry says:

    “It’s a hell of a thing, killing a man. Take away all he’s got and all he’s ever gonna have.” – William Munny

    I guess all things being equal, if it’s between me and someone invading my home, I’d rather do the taking. I’ll stop shaking eventually.

  5. rassd71 says:

    California may have a ‘castle doctrine’ on the books, but IF you defend yourself, loved ones or property, be prepared to be brought before a Grand Jury and more than likely charged!

    One house we lived in was robbed or had an attempted break (that we KNOW of) 5 times in 2 years, three of those were successful! In each case, the police were reluctant to come out, the first time they were called while the burglar was in house (who they caught and then released with NO charges because he hadn’t left the house with any ‘property’… despite the damages done! On the first attempted where they cut the screen on a window and had a perfect hand print, they refused to come because they had not gotten into the home! I asked the officer on the phone…’so in the future should I just shoot an armed intruder breaking into my home and THEN call you’? In 5 minutes there was a cruiser at my home, NOT to take a report, but to see WHAT firearms I had, were they ‘licensed’ and to give ME a lecture regarding making threats!

    So, don’t count on a ‘castle doctrine’ or ‘stand your ground’ law to protect you!

    • countrystarr says:

      I agree, even a ‘Castle Doctrine’ or ‘Stand Your Ground’ law may not protect you from everything. I know the guy who gave my my Concealed Carry Class said that in Utah if you shoot somebody, regardless of the circumstances, it will cost you $100k in court costs (possible criminal and usually civil suits). I didn’t validate that was the truth….I just took him at his word. But regardless, if you shoot somebody you should 1) Know the law in your state, and 2) Be prepared to be in court.

      • Lina Inverse says:

        Low six figures is the general metric for what it’ll cost you to competently defend yourself against a serious felony charge. Of course, you may not get charged, and some states bar civil suits in various circumstances, but this should be kept in mind when going to someone’s aid. A typical analogy is you’re visiting a hospital and see someone in need of $250K worth of medical care; would you out of the blue hand him a check for that much?

  6. Jake says:

    It’s nice to see crime rates don’t correlate at all to the laws in effect.

    I’m pretty sure 60% of rapes aren’t from breaking and entering, though. Especially if there’s one every 2 minutes. Doesn’t jibe with the break in statistics.

  7. Robert Johnson says:

    So…. does only half of Maryland have a stand your ground law and the other half a castle law? I noticed the painting mistake and it just made me chuckle is all.

  8. J. Anthony Carter says:

    I’ve lived in Nebraska most of my life and am appalled to find out I have to run from a criminal instead of having the constitutional right to defend myself, loved ones and property.
    This is un-American. I demand the constitutionally given right to protect what is mine, where I live and where I am!

    • stonedome says:

      just make sure nobody finds the body…no body, no crime

    • Mike B says:

      Mr Carter,

      Just so you know, the Constitution did not give you your rights, they are endowed by your Creator (or if you are not a believer in such, you may think of them as Natural Born rights). The Constitution is there to protect your rights, though.

      I whole-heartedly agree with you on protecting ourselves. I don’t have a problem with the law stating that if you walk to your parked car and see someone trying to/breaking in that you should keep your distance and call 911 (car/belongings can be replaced). What I have a problem with is when someone tries to/gains access to my home (think O’dark thirty), I should have every right to ‘end the threat’ since I don’t know if he/she/they are just looking for a TV or access to my female family members. They certainly are not ‘accidentally’ in my home and should know it may cost them their life to enter. Maybe if CD/SYG laws were strong in your state and mine, crooks wouldn’t try entering for something as trivial as a TV or computer and crime would go down.

      Since my state supposedly has CD but not SYG, I could take action without running, but I was warned by my carry instructor that unless I have children/others in other parts of the house, just run. I do have kids so I would never run, but someday I will be an empty-nester.

  9. Ryan Fitzgerald says:

    I’m gonna have to agree with Jake, the laws seem to have little to no bearing on crime rates… it looks like your best bet is to live somewhere with more livestock than people..

  10. Richard Gassen says:

    Ideally, crime laws should attempt to strike a balance, if that’s at all possible. I live in Michigan where the Castle Doctrine prevails, which is certainly better than having to retreat. Although I have to say, as a martial artist and instructor, at our school we teach our students that there’s escaping is nothing to be ashamed of when faced with a deadly threat. But sometimes one can’t get away — and that’s were the mandatory escape laws fail the test of common sense. In theory, Stand Your Ground seems to make sense, but the problem is, as the Martin/Zimmerman case demonstrates, it’s difficult to access in the heat of battle what a real deadly threat is, especially when the alleged assailant is unarmed. Shoot first, then ask questions? All I can say is, if you feel you need to pull the trigger, you better know what you’re doing and hope that the threat was genuinely real. That’s what Mr. Zimmerman is going to have to prove. And he should well have to do so. We don’t need millions of people running around with itchy trigger fingers.

    • Deoxy says:

      Stand Your Ground is irrelevant to the Martin/Zimmerman case – Zimmerman claims to have been on his back, with Zimmerman over him attacking him when he shot. That would even meet the “duty to retreat” requirement for self-defense!

      (Note: whether Martin is lying or not is not the point – he is not invoking Stand Your Ground in any way, and in fact, his testimony essentially precludes it.)

      Ignorance like this, heavily encouraged by the media, is you most people (on both sides) sound like idiots regarding that particular case.

      • Dingle says:

        You really shouldn’t call anyone ignorant with comments like this…

        ” Zimmerman claims to have been on his back, with Zimmerman over him attacking him when he shot. ”

        Zimmerman couldn’t have been over himself.

        ” (Note: whether Martin is lying or not is not the point – he is not invoking Stand Your Ground in any way, and in fact, his testimony essentially precludes it.)

        Martin is dead. How can he lie?

  11. Lina Inverse says:

    According to the authors of Self Defense Laws of All 50 States (With Plain-Talk Summaries) Missouri’s Castle Doctrine has been judicially nullified at the appeals court level, and they simply couldn’t figure out if we have a duty to retreat, so we’d best assume that we do.

    There are strange wrinkles like it is as far as I know still legal to use lethal force on a home invader while they are breaking through your door or window, but once they’re in the case law reverts to the normal requirements for justification.

  12. skidmark says:

    Virginia does NOT require one to retreat. Not in the home or curtilige thereof, nor anywhere else one has a legal right to be. But there is no legislation dealing with these matters – they derive from The Common Law. IMHO Common Law offers better protection than any legislated SYG/CD law. Admittedly we are still lacking civil immunity, but are working on getting that into the laws.

    stay safe.

  13. Lloyd Reese says:

    Skidmark is correct regarding VA not requiring one to retreat. See the link below which quotes Phillip Van Cleave of Virginia Citizen Defense League. Now, will you update your map? I doubt it.

    http://www.bvbl.net/index.php/2012/03/31/on-virginias-self-defense-laws/

    • countrystarr says:

      Thanks for the additional insight. This graphic is more geared toward those states that actually have SYG laws on the books. In most states SYG protections are spelled out in the statute. In Virginia, it is not spelled out specifically, but the protection is from common law history and case law. Since the SYG right is not explicitly statutorily given we chose not to list it as a SYG state.

  14. Professor Joseph Olson says:

    Minnesota has “Castle Doctrine” and the “no retreat” rule IN one’s “place of abode” ONLY.

    Everywhere else, an actor must reasonably perceive a threat of death or GBH before acting. Even then, retreat is required if available and safe. The retreat rule is a hurdle “made up out of thin air” by the Supreme Court and never mandated by the Legislature.

    I am a lawyer.

  15. Pooh Huffy says:

    I was looking at the pictures of George Zimmerman’s gun and holster. It appears to be left handed, if he had it on his right hip wouldn’t it have been butt forward on his right side.
    He writes with his left hand but shoots with his non dominant hand in his re enactment.

    • Gramsonfire says:

      I write left-handed, bowl, throw, bat and shoot right -handed. My left eye is dominant, but I’m pretty darned accurate!

  16. Pingback: Instapundit » Blog Archive » WHERE YOU’RE SAFE AND WHERE YOU’RE NOT: A map of “stand your ground,” “castle doctrine,” and “duty …

  17. brian says:

    You should check Virginia’s laws more closely. You are not required to retreat if defending yourself or another. A fairly strong Castle Doctrine is also part of Common Law in the state.

  18. Apollo says:

    I question your Illinois number. It cannot possibly have the second lowest firearm-robbery rate in the nation, better than rural states like Wyoming, Vermont, and South Dakota, and nearly tied for lowest with North Dakota.

  19. Matt says:

    Hey — any chance you could update with info about the District of Columbia (where I live) and other territories, like Puerto Rico?

    • countrystarr says:

      That’s a great idea. I didn’t really think of that. I’ll look into that and maybe we can add it as a supplement to this map, or even create a separate one.

  20. anemone says:

    love this graphic, but “Doctrine” is spelled “Doctorine” in a couple of places.

  21. North Carolina is incorrect. We have a Stand Your Ground law, it’s included in our Castle law.
    http://www.ncga.state.nc.us/enactedlegislation/statutes/html/bysection/chapter_14/gs_14-51.3.html

    However, a person is justified in the use of deadly force and does not have a duty to retreat in any place he or she has the lawful right to be if either of the following applies:

    (1) He or she reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another.

    (2) Under the circumstances permitted pursuant to G.S. 14‑51.2.

    GS 14-51.2 is our Castle law. It covers home, car, and business.

  22. James Nelson says:

    Michigan has Castle Doctrine and Stand Your Ground, so your graph is wrong. There were 6 bills enacted in 2006 and in essence, no retreat is required anywhere you happen to legally be. Your house, all of your real property and your car are covered by Castle Doctrine. The laws also made it more difficult for prosecutor to bring charges in self defense shooting cases, and civil lawsuits are blocked incases of proper self defense with those bring suit liable for double damages.

  23. N. Mn says:

    I have to disagree with your categorization of Virginia as a “duty to
    retreat” jurisdiction. That is incorrect. If one is threatened in VA and
    has no fault in bringing about the situation there is no duty to retreat and
    any and all reasonable force up to and including deadlly force may be used
    if such use is reasonable in the particular circumstances of the situation.

  24. Stranger says:

    While it is a common error, “homicide” is a catchall for any sort of man killing. Murder is – well, murder. Here is a link to the FBI’s murder total for 2006 – 2010

    http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2010/crime-in-the-u.s.-2010/tables/10shrtbl08.xls

    And of course, since the FBI lumps justifiable homicide with murder to call the 14,748 homicide total murders elsewhere, the 12,996 man killings officially declared murders get passed over. And when people start comparing the US and other countries murder rates, we come off about 12 percent high.

    Stranger

  25. Don Rodrigo says:

    Virginia is a “retreat” state?

    This must be rectified immediately, as it makes no sense!

  26. New Mex says:

    FYI, New Mexico does not have a duty to retreat. _State v. Horton_, 57 N.M. 257, 258 P.2d 371 (1953). Additionally, a person may use deadly force to defend himself or herself, his or her own home, or in defense of another, all under certain circumstances.

    I think New Mexico should be re-categorized as a Stand Your Ground jurisdiction.

    • New Mex's Neighbor says:

      In New Mexico, use of deadly force is also authorized to stop a felony in progress. I forget the specific statutory reference offhand.

      I’d say that is fairly close to stand your ground. Not to mention we still have the so called “pioneer laws” on the books, allowing for openly carried “locked and cocked” firearms right on one’s hip, barring the usual prohibited locales. I believe that would classify us as “Constitutional Carry” as well.

  27. Brad D. S. says:

    About your stand-your-ground infographic, I believe Arkansas ought to be
    considered a castle-doctrine state rather than retreat. There is a general
    duty to retreat, but that duty does not apply in your home unless you are
    the aggressor. The relevant statute follows (note 607(b)(1)(B)(i) “a person
    is not required to retreat if the person is in the person’s dwelling or on
    the curtilage surrounding the person’s dwelling and was not the original
    aggressor”):

    5-2-607. Use of deadly physical force in defense of a person.
    (a) A person is justified in using deadly physical force upon another
    person if the person reasonably believes that the other person is:
    (1) Committing or about to commit a felony involving force or violence;
    (2) Using or about to use unlawful deadly physical force; or
    (3) Imminently endangering the person’s life or imminently about to
    victimize the person as described in § 9-15-103 from the continuation of a
    pattern of domestic abuse.
    (b) A person may not use deadly physical force in self-defense if the person
    knows that he or she can avoid the necessity of using deadly physical force
    with complete safety:
    (1) (A) By retreating.
    (B) However, a person is not required to retreat if the person is:
    (i) In the person’s dwelling or on the curtilage surrounding the
    person’s dwelling and was not the original aggressor; or
    (ii) A law enforcement officer or a person assisting at the
    direction of a law enforcement officer; or
    (2) By surrendering possession of property to a person claiming a lawful
    right to possession of the property.
    (c) As used in this section:
    (1) “Curtilage” means the land adjoining a dwelling that is convenient
    for residential purposes and habitually used for residential purposes, but
    not necessarily enclosed, and includes an outbuilding that is directly and
    intimately connected with the dwelling and in close proximity to the
    dwelling; and
    (2) “Domestic abuse” means:
    (A) Physical harm, bodily injury, assault, or the infliction of fear
    of imminent physical harm, bodily injury, or assault between family or
    household members; or
    (B) Any sexual conduct between family or household members, whether
    minors or adults, that constitutes a crime under the laws of this state.

  28. punditius says:

    I think that this map needs a little written definitional clarity.

    Here’s what I think you mean by these colors – am I right?

    1. Green: Duty to Retreat and no Castle Doctrine
    2. Yellow: Castle Doctrine, regardless of Duty to Retreat
    3. Red: Stand Your Ground

    Personally, it seems to me that SYG on this map (and as generally misunderstood) conflates a procedural right with the right to self-defense. So my map would be:

    1. Green: Duty to Retreat and no Castle Doctrine (no self defense until you get caught)
    2. Yellow: Duty to Retreat plus Castle Doctrine (no self-defense till you get home)
    3. Blue: No Duty to Retreat (whether or not there’s a CD) (self-defense anywhere you lawfully are)
    4 Red: Stand Your Ground (you don’t have to wait till the trial is going on to assert self-defense)

    In theory, I suppose, there’s no reason SYG laws couldn’t exist in any of the first 3 situations, but as a practical matter it does not seem to be the case…

  29. rb says:

    Graphics and information are great. But the Left will notice your spelling errors. In their eyes, this invalidates the information.

  30. Bill Bolduc says:

    Like the map but from reading all comments made to date it seems you need a bit more accurate research. I don’t envy the effort required to make this accurate but I do admire your attemp to enlighten us. Please keep trying!

  31. Exurban says:

    Great stuff. The feedback will only make it better :^) BTW I was surprised to see Delaware’s rating as the worst state per capita for robberies with a firearm. That one I would not have guessed.

  32. Dogbert says:

    Illinois with the 2nd lowest @ 1.85 per 100k? Either the Land Of Lincoln has (understandably) disowned Chicago or they that “per 100,000″ referred to $$$ from cocaine sales.

  33. Shelgeyr says:

    I believe that the fantastically wonderful and by the way Great State of Texas has both Castle Doctrine and Stand Your Ground laws… Quick question: “For the purpose of this graphic, does SYG assume CD?” I guess another way of asking that would be “Do any states have SYG but not CD? How would that work? I know it sounds nonsensical, but weirder things have happened in law I’m sure.”

  34. Tony Ploski says:

    Took the Personal Protection in Home (PPIH) course about a month ago in NJ. The legal part was taught by a Police Sargent. He said NJ does not have the Castle Doctrine. You must retreat, even in your own home, until you cannot retreat any longer. Only then can you defend yourself as a last resort. But be prepared to be arrested and expect a lengthily and costly trial to defend yourself. So I don’t think your map and information is accurate with respect to NJ.

  35. Andy Allen says:

    Nebraska has never had a duty to retreat when in your home or place of employment, so the Castle Doctrine exists. We have been fighting to get the duty to retreat outside your home removed that was added in 1972 but so far that has been blocked.

    As the President of the states largest firearms organization this has long been an issue because everyone say’s Nebraska needs the Castle Doctrine, unfortunatly they are incorrect. What we need is Stand Your Ground and Civil Liability protections, which are seperate issues.

    Using incorrect language is an issue when we have folks asking their Senator to pass the Castle Docrine, and the Senator is standing there going we already have it.

    I also noticed that you have California as not haveing Stand Your Ground. They are like Washington where their laws do not address retreat or standing your ground. So there you may stand your ground and it is supported by a couple of 100 year old US Supreme Court rulings. As well as a couple of rulings inthe California courts.

  36. While California’s laws may be accurately described as a Castle Doctrine, California’s judicial ruling for over a hundred years effectively have legalized a stand-your-ground doctrine in the state.

    California gives the following instruction to the jury (CALCRIM 3470): “A defendant is not required to retreat. He or she is entitled to stand his or her ground and defend himself or herself and, if reasonably necessary, to pursue an assailant until the danger of (death/bodily injury/ ) has passed. This is so even if safety could have been achieved by retreating.”

    (Source: Stand-your-ground the rule in state, courts affirm, CALCRIM 3470.)

  37. JJ says:

    I am confused about the use of the two terms “Castle Law” and “SYG” law, as if they were mutually exclusive. In WV, for example, what is called the “Castle Doctrine” has all of the elements, unless I’m reading it wrong, of the definition given here of a SYG law. So what’s the difference? Yes, there are variations among states, it seems, in terms of civil liability, retreat, and location.

    However, in WV, deadly force may be used in some circumstances in any place that a person has a right to be. This would include not only his car or church, but also Burger King, WalMart parking lot, or Taco Bell bathroom. In this state there is no requirement to retreat so long as there is a legitimate deadly threat to a person or even another person. The defender cannot be held civilly liable if he or she uses deadly force in situations defined by the law.

    So why is the WV law described as “Castle Law” and not “SYG law?” Seems to me, at least here in WV, and using the criteria contained in the graphic, that they are the same.

    My point is that I think, and as another comment describes, that other criteria should be used to make this map, instead of only the three given criteria (Castle, SYG, Must Retreat), in order to be anywhere near useful.

    The graphic would have to outline at least the other major variables (retreat? civil liability? inside the home/outside the home? etc. And so, as the saying goes, and as we recognize, “That ain’t so simple.” The graphic is thus much over-simplified, and as others have said, is misleading and incorrect.

    I am glad to see that the posted WV crime rate is low. Maybe it’s because the bad guys know, or assume, that every home in WV is likely to be outfitted with a firearm and an occupant willing to use it. One can only guess….

    The updated WV statute is quoted below. (You will note that it also contains a prohibition of what I call “booby traps” around the home [aka “hazardous and dangerous conditions”]).

    §55-7-22. Civil relief for persons resisting certain criminal activities.

    (a) A lawful occupant within a home or other place of residence is justified in using reasonable and proportionate force, including deadly force, against an intruder or attacker to prevent a forcible entry into the home or residence or to terminate the intruder’s or attacker’s unlawful entry if the occupant reasonably apprehends that the intruder or attacker may kill or inflict serious bodily harm upon the occupant or others in the home or residence or if the occupant reasonably believes that the intruder or attacker intends to commit a felony in the home or residence and the occupant reasonably believes deadly force is necessary.
    (b)A lawful occupant within a home or other place of residence does not have a duty to retreat from an intruder or attacker in the circumstances described in subsection (a) of this section.
    (c) A person not engaged in unlawful activity who is attacked in any place he or she has a legal right to be outside of his or her home or residence may use reasonable and proportionate force against an intruder or attacker: Provided, That such person may use deadly force against an intruder or attacker in a place that is not his or her residence without a duty to retreat if the person reasonably believes that he or she or another is in imminent danger of death or serious bodily harm from which he or she or another can only be saved by the use of deadly force against the intruder or attacker.
    (d) The justified use of reasonable and proportionate force under this section shall constitute a full and complete defense to any civil action brought by an intruder or attacker against a person using such force.
    (e) The full and complete civil defense created by the provisions of this section is not available to a person who:
    (1) Is attempting to commit, committing or escaping from the commission of a felony;
    (2) Initially provokes the use of force against himself, herself or another with the intent to use such force as an excuse to inflict bodily harm upon the assailant; or
    (3) Otherwise initially provokes the use of force against himself, herself or another, unless he or she withdraws from physical contact with the assailant and indicates clearly to the assailant that he or she desires to withdraw and terminate the use of force, but the assailant continues or resumes the use of force.
    (f) The provisions of this section do not apply to the creation of a hazardous or dangerous condition on or in any real or personal property designed to prevent criminal conduct or cause injury to a person engaging in criminal conduct.
    (g) Nothing in this section shall authorize or justify a person to resist or obstruct a law-enforcement officer acting in the course of his or her duty.

  38. Andy says:

    The New Mexico stand your ground law differs somewhat from the Florida law currently at issue. According to the New Mexico stand your ground law, “A person who is threatened with an attack need not retreat. In the exercise of his right of self defense, he may stand his ground and defend himself.” While a person in Florida must have a right to be at the location where the altercation takes place, in New Mexico a person merely needs to be “threatened with attack.”

    This web site is incorrect, there is not a castle doctrine in NM, BUT IS NOT A RETREAT STAE

  39. BlackDog says:

    Sorry, I don’t believe your numbers. For example, Illinois, Chicago specifically, has some of the worst gun crime in this country, yet according to your numbers, you’d think it was a sanctuary from crime! Once again, someone has twisted the qualifications of an otherwise innocuous poll and turned out a graphic that will ‘persuade’ you, sutbly or otherwise, towards their point of view. In this case, the implication that what I know to be factual isn’t really valid. Tell that to the dead from just this weekend alone!

  40. Antero Takkala says:

    No wonder, Illinois is the home state of our President.

  41. Pauli Hirvonen says:

    South Carolina has stand your ground law, http://www.scstatehouse.gov/code/t16c011.php
    ARTICLE 6. PROTECTION OF PERSONS AND PROPERTY

  42. dustydog says:

    The information for Maryland is a flat lie. Maryland statute is silent on the issue; Maryland case law absolutely demands that victims flee.

    • countrystarr says:

      Maryland has no self-defense statues. You are taking serious legal risks in Maryland if you do not attempt to retreat. Taken directly from Burch V. State (Md. 1997) “One of the elements of the defense of self-defense is ‘the duty of the defendant to retreat to avoid danger if such means were within his power and consistent with his safety.'”

  43. Hi,
    We shared your infographic of Stand Your Ground gun laws by state on the Thompson/Center Facebook page. We’ve received lots of great feedback from hunters across the country that will help provide greater accuracy. Check it out!

    http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=504854576209654&set=a.155445501150565.34262.155441161150999&type=1&theater

    • countrystarr says:

      Cool, thanks for posting that. We just went like yesterday with the updated version which includes a lot more research and is a clickable flash style map which provides a summary of the self defense laws of each state.

  44. anonymous says:

    Any way to update the info for WI? Those laws have been updated since May 2012.

    • countrystarr says:

      I looked for the updated laws you are referring to but I could not find them. I do see a law from last year that provides immunity from Civil Liability in your home, car, or place of business. But this is pretty limited additional protection. Can you e-mail me the new statue that was signed in 2012 that updates the self defense laws of Wisconsin? If so I’ll ready through them and make the necessary updates on the map.

      Thanks!

  45. Anonymous says:

    I suppose if it were me, I would have to go with my conscience and worry about the consequences later. I will protect myself if I feel it is warranted. This also reminds me of the story about the man who called 911 to report intruders and was told that it would be 15 minutes before police could be there. He hung up. Waited a couple of minutes and called back. Told the 911 operator to cancel the emergency as the he had shot the intruders. The police were there in seconds and caught the intruders. The officer said he thought the man had shot the intruders and the man told the officer he thought they couldn’t get there for 15 minutes. Sometimes you have to do what you feel is right.

  46. Curt says:

    It troubled me to see Texas, (My home State) Is the (only) Red State that does “NOT” have immunity from Civil Liability, You kill a Bad guy & You “May” have to “Possibly” Pay his family for his Act, In a Civil Trial. I know Texas is BIG on suits for most anything. But, This is odd, That We are “The Only State” With very clear SYG laws Castle Doc. etc. But, Without Immunity From Civil Action. Which tells me If you have to Shoot Someone You may lose everything you own just paying a Lawyer. (or just shoot the Lawyer. You know, Like a bonus)
    I`m lucky I don`t have a damn thing, I`ll just have to Owe you. So, Finding a Lawyer could be a “task” A Public Defender will lose your case. So What`s the point? I`m Insured by the NRA, But, I`ve never heard of anyone ever actually getting a Lawyer thru the NRA. Guess we`ll just have to gun it out & see what is next. Death, Jail or Foodstamps. Either way you lose. Even on a “Good Shoot” and pointing a gun at somebody don`t always work like in the Movies. You may have to pull the trigger.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>