Vermont use of deadly force questions

[Kevin M Waters]

§ 2305. Justifiable homicide

If a person kills or wounds another under any of the circumstances enumerated below, he or she shall be guiltless:

(1) In the just and necessary defense of his or her own life or the life of his or her husband, wife, parent, child, brother, sister, master, mistress, servant, guardian or ward; or

(2) In the suppression of a person attempting to commit murder, sexual assault, aggravated sexual assault, burglary or robbery, with force or violence; or

(3) In the case of a civil officer; or a military officer or private soldier when lawfully called out to suppress riot or rebellion, or to prevent or suppress invasion, or to assist in serving legal process, in suppressing opposition against him or her in the just and necessary discharge of his or her duty. (Amended 1983, No. 23, § 2.)





Above is what I have found on the use of deadly force, but my main question is when it comes down to being home and having someone attempt to enter and or has made entry what are my limits of what I can do to protect my family. If someone could elaborate more on "(2) In the suppression of a person attempting to commit murder, sexual assault, aggravated sexual assault, burglary or robbery, with force or violence" to me this is vague. after reading the article of the 18 year old mother who asked for permission to shoot the intruders, I want to know what can be done before anything like that ever happens to me. I pray that I never have to act in any such manner, but the bottom line is my family could be in harms way.

 

[Kevin M Waters]

to be more clear the part that states "burglary or robbery, with force or violence" what is considered force/violence

 

[kelcarry]

That's the way the law is written when it comes to use of your firearm? What a jumble of crap. Your presumption of imminent death or great bodily injury to any and all (which would include an alter ego rule allowing you to presume you are the person who you see being attacked) should be all the requirements for use of force that includes your firearm. If this is in your home then castle doctrine will allow you to automatically assume the presumption, as stated above, and there is no question as to your legal right to use force. Statements 1 and 2 are just plain garbage----IMO. What these confusing words mean is what you consider them to be and what a prosecutor and judge and jury consider them to be. Case law has a lot to do with defining this, but bottom line is, as they say about pornography, you will know what these words all mean when you see it. If you are in fear of your life and are going to think about this, then you are better off not carrying a firearm--it will end up being used on you. It is all about "a resonable person's presumption of an imminent threat to their life or great bodily injury" or that of others.

 

[Kevin M Waters]

correct me if I am wrong, but I do not think Vermont is a doctrine state

 

[kelcarry]

Hey--they break into your house-ya gonna offer them coffee? Ya gonna ask them to stop what they are doing? Ya gotta get real here. They are a threat to you--they have already committed a felony. What else do you want before you defend yourself. The police? They are probably multi-minutes away and they have firearms to protect themselves--not you. Your defense is only a mini second away, if you have a firearm. If that is not good enough for Vermont--move. I am sure your state reps will defend themselves and have firearms to do so and will use them if someone breaks into their houses. You try this crap in SC, you die.