# Castle theory of guns and protection **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [February 4, 2009, 3:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/castle-theory-of-guns-and-protection/484368 "2009-02-04T03:53:56Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![DanBlather](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/f4b2a3/32.png) [@DanBlather](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DanBlather)\ **Post date:** [February 5, 2009, 2:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/castle-theory-of-guns-and-protection/484368/61 "2009-02-05T02:29:55Z")
> [@Stealth\_Potato](#): > > That wasn’t even close to a home invasion though; it was a crazy felon hopped up on drugs who fired through the door as soon as someone rang the bell _on Halloween_. Who believed he was the target of a home invasion. ---
**Author:** ![ExTank](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/35a633/32.png) [@ExTank](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ExTank)\ **Post date:** [February 5, 2009, 2:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/castle-theory-of-guns-and-protection/484368/62 "2009-02-05T02:32:38Z")
And who was charged with murder for it, _because he was wrong._ ---
**Author:** ![DanBlather](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/f4b2a3/32.png) [@DanBlather](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DanBlather)\ **Post date:** [February 5, 2009, 2:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/castle-theory-of-guns-and-protection/484368/63 "2009-02-05T02:44:44Z")
> [@ExTank](#): > > And who was charged with murder for it, _because he was wrong._ But he met your criteria “where there’s any reason to believe I’m in danger I should have the right to use my own discretion in shooting”. ---
**Author:** ![Chimera](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/8e8cbc/32.png) [@Chimera](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chimera)\ **Post date:** [February 5, 2009, 2:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/castle-theory-of-guns-and-protection/484368/64 "2009-02-05T02:49:47Z")
> [@DanBlather](#): > > But he met your criteria “where there’s any reason to believe I’m in danger I should have the right to use my own discretion in shooting”. I think your position here is the very model of the insane and illogical straw man that no one on the other side is supporting in any way, shape or form. It doesn’t prove anything to anyone but you. ---
**Author:** ![Todderbob](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/e47774/32.png) [@Todderbob](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Todderbob)\ **Post date:** [February 5, 2009, 2:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/castle-theory-of-guns-and-protection/484368/65 "2009-02-05T02:53:03Z")
> [@DanBlather](#): > > But he met your criteria “where there’s any reason to believe I’m in danger I should have the right to use my own discretion in shooting”. And if he had been driving a car and killed four people, would you be saying that people shouldn’t be allowed to drive cars? ---
**Author:** ![ExTank](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/35a633/32.png) [@ExTank](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ExTank)\ **Post date:** [February 5, 2009, 2:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/castle-theory-of-guns-and-protection/484368/66 "2009-02-05T02:56:11Z")
> [@DanBlather](#): > > But he met your criteria “where there’s any reason to believe I’m in danger I should have the right to use my own discretion in shooting”. And in [this](http://www.firstcoastnews.com/news/usworld/news-article.aspx?storyid=122588&catid=6) case, the law very rightfully said, “You’re wrong.” The boy wasn’t “in the home.” He was at the front door, outside the home, knocking on the door/ringing the doorbell. That’s the thing about these kinds of laws: they tend to spell out when/where such measures can be taken. Quentin Patrick’s actions did not, ever, fall into the category of “justifiable use of force in defense of a self or home as allowed by South Carolina law.” And quite frankly, you need to quit representing it as such. ---
**Author:** ![DanBlather](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/f4b2a3/32.png) [@DanBlather](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DanBlather)\ **Post date:** [February 5, 2009, 3:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/castle-theory-of-guns-and-protection/484368/67 "2009-02-05T03:03:36Z")
> [@Chimera](#): > > I think your position here is the very model of the insane and illogical straw man that no one on the other side is supporting in any way, shape or form. It doesn’t prove anything to anyone but you. First of all, by definition, it’s not a strawman because it is a real case. Secondly, the OP referenced a case where the man breaking in thought he was going into his own house. It’s also very much in line with ExTank’s criteria: the homeowner was in fear of his life and used his discretion to shoot. Now you may argue that a homeowner can not just use his own discretion in deciding when to shoot, but that was not what ExTank maintained and you would be disagreeing with him and agreeing with me. ---
**Author:** ![Todderbob](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/e47774/32.png) [@Todderbob](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Todderbob)\ **Post date:** [February 5, 2009, 3:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/castle-theory-of-guns-and-protection/484368/68 "2009-02-05T03:05:44Z")
> [@DanBlather](#): > > First of all, by definition, it’s not a strawman because it is a real case. Secondly, the OP referenced a case where the man breaking in thought he was going into his own house. It’s also very much in line with ExTank’s criteria: the homeowner was in fear of his life and used his discretion to shoot. > > Now you may argue that a homeowner can not just use his own discretion in deciding when to shoot, but that was not what ExTank maintained and you would be disagreeing with him and agreeing with me. But, even though it’s a real case, it’s not actually applicable in this instance, because no one is arguing that you should be able to shoot individuals through a door. In the case of the person that broke into someone elses home, intoxicated, and claiming it was their own, what do you think the individual, who can’t use his key to open the door to his own home, and finds a family of four, and still claims it’s his home, is going to do? Serve tea and crackers? ---
**Author:** ![DanBlather](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/f4b2a3/32.png) [@DanBlather](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DanBlather)\ **Post date:** [February 5, 2009, 3:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/castle-theory-of-guns-and-protection/484368/69 "2009-02-05T03:19:50Z")
> [@ExTank](#): > > And in [this](http://www.firstcoastnews.com/news/usworld/news-article.aspx?storyid=122588&catid=6) case, the law very rightfully said, “You’re wrong.” > > The boy wasn’t “in the home.” He was at the front door, outside the home, knocking on the door/ringing the doorbell. > > That’s the thing about these kinds of laws: they tend to spell out when/where such measures can be taken. Quentin Patrick’s actions did not, ever, fall into the category of “justifiable use of force in defense of a self or home as allowed by South Carolina law.” > > And quite frankly, you need to quit representing it as such. I am not representing is such. It’s clear to me that what he did was illegal and I would appreciate if you didn’t imply that I think SC law allows it. That incident indicates that it is not up to the sole discretion of the homeowner to legally decide whether he can shoot. Instead there is a “reasonable person” standard. ---
**Author:** ![DanBlather](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/f4b2a3/32.png) [@DanBlather](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DanBlather)\ **Post date:** [February 5, 2009, 3:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/castle-theory-of-guns-and-protection/484368/70 "2009-02-05T03:23:11Z")
> [@Todderbob](#): > > But, even though it’s a real case, it’s not actually applicable in this instance, because no one is arguing that you should be able to shoot individuals through a door. > > In the case of the person that broke into someone elses home, intoxicated, and claiming it was their own, what do you think the individual, who can’t use his key to open the door to his own home, and finds a family of four, and still claims it’s his home, is going to do? Serve tea and crackers? Is there anyone arguing that a person reasonably in fear of his life, or the life of others, does not have the legal right to use force? ---
**Author:** ![ExTank](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/35a633/32.png) [@ExTank](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ExTank)\ **Post date:** [February 5, 2009, 3:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/castle-theory-of-guns-and-protection/484368/71 "2009-02-05T03:25:15Z")
> [@DanBlather](#): > > First of all, by definition, it’s not a strawman because it is a real case. Secondly, the OP referenced a case where the man breaking in thought he was going into his own house. It’s also very much in line with ExTank’s criteria: the homeowner was in fear of his life and used his discretion to shoot. > > Now you may argue that a homeowner can not just use his own discretion in deciding when to shoot, but that was not what ExTank maintained and you would be disagreeing with him and agreeing with me. And here’s where you fall on your face, **Dan.** I said: > [@ExTank](#): > > There are several situations wherein I would, reluctantly but without hesitation, use all legally appropriate force upon an unwelcomed intruder in my home. > > But, unlike you, that’s not a value judgement I would make for others who feel differently. I never exempted myself from legal scrutiny into the appropriateness of my actions (should I ever again have to take any such action), nor do I exempt others. I exempted myself (and others) from _your_ moral scrutiny of my actions. Quentin Patrick did not use legally (or morally, for that matter) appropriate force; he also didn’t apply it to someone in his home. While our moral scurtiny of Mr. Patrick is probably the same (as in, “what a fucking douchebag, I hope they throw the book at him”), neither the moral or legal comparison with the OP is the same. The drunken intruder in the OP is not a little boy in a Halloween costume, on Halloween night, approaching a lit home festooned with Halloween decorations, which typically signifies a “Welcome, Trick-or-Treaters!” in American society. As such, I’m perfectly satisfied with the _legal_ scrutiny in the two cases; that I’m also morally satisfied is not relevant to anyone but me. ---
**Author:** ![DanBlather](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/f4b2a3/32.png) [@DanBlather](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DanBlather)\ **Post date:** [February 5, 2009, 3:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/castle-theory-of-guns-and-protection/484368/72 "2009-02-05T03:41:27Z")
> [@ExTank](#): > > And here’s where you fall on your face, **Dan.**. You said that you had not heard of a case where someone had emptied their clip into an 8 year old holding a teddy bear and I replied with a link to a case where a person in fear of his life emptied an AK47 into a 12 year-old trick or treater. Then I responded to your statement that you have the right to shoot “where there’s any reason to believe I’m in danger”. You more recent post make it clear that you think the legal system has the right to apply a reasonable person standard after the fact. In that we are in violent agreement. ---
**Author:** ![ExTank](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/35a633/32.png) [@ExTank](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ExTank)\ **Post date:** [February 5, 2009, 3:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/castle-theory-of-guns-and-protection/484368/73 "2009-02-05T03:45:52Z")
> [@DanBlather](#): > > You said that you had not heard of a case where someone had emptied their clip into an 8 year old holding a teddy bear and I replied with a link to a case where a person in fear of his life emptied an AK47 into a 12 year-old trick or treater. I said no such thing. > [@DanBlather](#): > > Then I responded to your statement that you have the right to shoot “where there’s any reason to believe I’m in danger”. Again, I said no such thing. Edit: and quite frankly, I’d appreciate an apology for your misrepresenting my statements. ---
**Author:** ![Odesio](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/odesio/32/20003_2.png) [@Odesio](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Odesio)\ **Post date:** [February 5, 2009, 3:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/castle-theory-of-guns-and-protection/484368/74 "2009-02-05T03:47:14Z")
> [@DanBlather](#): > > I am not representing is such. It’s clear to me that what he did was illegal and I would appreciate if you didn’t imply that I think SC law allows it. That incident indicates that it is not up to the sole discretion of the homeowner to legally decide whether he can shoot. Instead there is a “reasonable person” standard. Has anyone here spoken out against the “reasonable person” standard? Obviously there’s some disagreement on what constitutes reasonable but nobody says you can just shoot people willy nilly. Odesio ---
**Author:** ![Stealth\_Potato](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/d78d45/32.png) [@Stealth\_Potato](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stealth_Potato)\ **Post date:** [February 5, 2009, 4:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/castle-theory-of-guns-and-protection/484368/75 "2009-02-05T04:11:50Z")
Er, yeah, this seems like a rather pointless derailment. Quentin Patrick clearly did not have any reasonable cause to believe he was in danger, ergo he was not justified in using lethal force. The fact that in his messed up mind he was fighting returning burglars or demons or Godzilla does not excuse him. I don’t think anybody would dispute that, and frankly **DanBlather** it seems rather disingenuous of you if you were attempting to distort **ExTank** ’s words in that direction. If that was not in fact your aim I would wonder why you embarked upon such an obviously fruitless and asinine tangent in the first place. ---
**Author:** ![DanBlather](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/f4b2a3/32.png) [@DanBlather](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DanBlather)\ **Post date:** [February 5, 2009, 4:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/castle-theory-of-guns-and-protection/484368/76 "2009-02-05T04:11:54Z")
> [@ExTank](#): > > I said no such thing. > Again, I said no such thing. Who are you going to believe, me or your own threads? Sorry, I was wrong, neither of those quotes were from you, they were from **Sampro**. ---
**Author:** ![furt](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/439d5e/32.png) [@furt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/furt)\ **Post date:** [February 5, 2009, 4:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/castle-theory-of-guns-and-protection/484368/77 "2009-02-05T04:17:27Z")
> [@Odesio](#): > > Has anyone here spoken out against the “reasonable person” standard? Obviously there’s some disagreement on what constitutes reasonable but nobody says you can just shoot people willy nilly. This is why we have trials, juries and precedents: to fill out what, exactly, is “reasonable.” ---
**Author:** ![DanBlather](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/f4b2a3/32.png) [@DanBlather](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DanBlather)\ **Post date:** [February 5, 2009, 4:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/castle-theory-of-guns-and-protection/484368/78 "2009-02-05T04:18:13Z")
> [@Stealth\_Potato](#): > > Er, yeah, this seems like a rather pointless derailment. Quentin Patrick clearly did not have any reasonable cause to believe he was in danger, ergo he was not justified in using lethal force. The fact that in his messed up mind he was fighting returning burglars or demons or Godzilla does not excuse him. I don’t think anybody would dispute that, and frankly **DanBlather** it seems rather disingenuous of you if you were attempting to distort **ExTank** ’s words in that direction. If that was not in fact your aim I would wonder why you embarked upon such an obviously fruitless and asinine tangent in the first place. Again, I ask if anyone has taken the position that people reasonably in fear of their lives do not have the right to use force? The disagreement seem to be on whether shooting an intruder is justified based on the defense of property and whether in the case of the OP the homeowners were reasonably in fear of their lives. ---
**Author:** ![furt](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/439d5e/32.png) [@furt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/furt)\ **Post date:** [February 5, 2009, 4:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/castle-theory-of-guns-and-protection/484368/79 "2009-02-05T04:26:08Z")
> [@DanBlather](#): > > Again, I ask if anyone has taken the position that people reasonably in fear of their lives do not have the right to use force? > > The disagreement seem to be on whether shooting an intruder is justified based on the defense of property and whether in the case of the OP the homeowners were reasonably in fear of their lives. I think what people are telling you is that having someone breaking into your house pretty much constitutes reasonable grounds for such fear in and of itself. There is simply know way to know in advance which burglars are “just” there to rob you, and which ones intend more. Once you know they are willing to violate one norm and break one law, it becomes reasonable to fear they will break more. ---
**Author:** ![DanBlather](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/f4b2a3/32.png) [@DanBlather](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DanBlather)\ **Post date:** [February 5, 2009, 4:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/castle-theory-of-guns-and-protection/484368/80 "2009-02-05T04:30:42Z")
> [@furt](#): > > I think what people are telling you is that having someone breaking into your house pretty much constitutes reasonable grounds for such fear in and of itself. There is simply know way to know in advance which burglars are “just” there to rob you, and which ones intend more. Once you know they are willing to violate one norm and break one law, it becomes reasonable to fear they will break more. How about if a child returms home one day to surprise his parents and lets himself in the back door, or if the police serve a warrant at the wrong house, or someone goes to the wrong house when they are invited to a party. Fair game? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/castle-theory-of-guns-and-protection/484368.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/castle-theory-of-guns-and-protection/484368.md?page=5)