Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel

Log In

A valid email is required.
Password is required.
Site Notices
Basic
Offline
  • Joined Jun 2011
  • Posts 80
  • EE 0% (0)
USA IN, USA
Posted: 8/5/2013 5:49:15 PM EST
Question re: TN Stand Your Ground Law. Is there any requirement to take a step back from imminent attacker before drawing weapon?

Just Let It Go
Avatar
Bronze
Offline
  • Joined Mar 2006
  • Posts 6618
  • EE 100% (1)
USA TN, USA
Military
Link Posted: 8/5/2013 6:12:33 PM EST
AFAIK you have no duty to retreat.
Thanks TescoVee
I will not comply!
Avatar
Bronze
Offline
  • Joined Apr 2010
  • Posts 5892
  • EE 100% (152)
SPM SPM
Military
Link Posted: 8/6/2013 4:13:55 PM EST
In TN, there is ZERO duty to retreat before using lethal force to counter a threat of death or serious bodily harm.
Ne Desit Virtus! Let Valor Not Fail!

Thanks for the Team Membership, 1ExtremeGTO!
Kentucky HTF Moderator
Avatar
Gold
Offline
  • Joined Oct 2002
  • Posts 4307
  • EE 100% (6)
USA KY, USA
NRAInstructorMilitary
Link Posted: 8/6/2013 5:08:32 PM EST

Basic
Online
  • Joined Apr 2012
  • Posts 319
  • EE 0% (0)
USA TN, USA
Link Posted: 8/9/2013 2:41:08 PM EST
[Last Edit: 8/9/2013 2:48:10 PM EST by OhShoot]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Jeep29:


Stand your ground? Tennessee has had Castle Doctrine since 2007. Google it.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Jeep29:
Originally Posted By Steve59Ind:
Question re: TN Stand Your Ground Law. Is there any requirement to take a step back from imminent attacker before drawing weapon?


Stand your ground? Tennessee has had Castle Doctrine since 2007. Google it.


"Castle Doctrine" is not mentioned anywhere in TCA, just in case someone is looking for it.

Within your domicile you are given the initial presumption of being in reasonable fear of death or serious bodily injury with regards to an intruder. Note however that this presumption can be negated through evidence to the contrary, it is not a license to "execute" the intruder. You do not have even that same initial presumption elsewhere, though.

But in neither case is there a duty to retreat.

- OS

11B -- All Hope Is Gone!
Avatar
Platinum
Offline
  • Joined Nov 2011
  • Posts 1353
  • EE 100% (64)
USA USA
NRAMilitary
Link Posted: 8/12/2013 4:08:43 PM EST
My mind keeps thinking "civil lawsuit" for some reason!
Lord, make me fast, and accurate. Let my aim be true, and my hands faster than those who would seek to destroy me. Grant me victory over my foes, and those that wish to do harm to me, and mine!
Team Member
Avatar
Bronze
Offline
  • Joined Jun 2007
  • Posts 326
  • EE 100% (9)
USA TN, USA
NRA
Link Posted: 8/12/2013 4:42:40 PM EST
Pertinent TCA Code.

39-11-611. Self-defense.

(a) As used in this section, unless the context otherwise requires:

(1) "Business" means a commercial enterprise or establishment owned by a person as all or part of the person's livelihood or is under the owner's control or who is an employee or agent of the owner with responsibility for protecting persons and property and shall include the interior and exterior premises of the business;

(2) "Curtilage" means the area surrounding a dwelling that is necessary, convenient and habitually used for family purposes and for those activities associated with the sanctity of a person's home;

(3) "Dwelling" means a building or conveyance of any kind, including any attached porch, whether the building or conveyance is temporary or permanent, mobile or immobile, that has a roof over it, including a tent, and is designed for or capable of use by people;

(4) "Residence" means a dwelling in which a person resides, either temporarily or permanently, or is visiting as an invited guest, or any dwelling, building or other appurtenance within the curtilage of the residence; and

(5) "Vehicle" means any motorized vehicle that is self-propelled and designed for use on public highways to transport people or property.

(b) (1) Notwithstanding § 39-17-1322, a person who is not engaged in unlawful activity and is in a place where the person has a right to be has no duty to retreat before threatening or using force against another person when and to the degree the person reasonably believes the force is immediately necessary to protect against the other's use or attempted use of unlawful force.

(2) Notwithstanding § 39-17-1322, a person who is not engaged in unlawful activity and is in a place where the person has a right to be has no duty to retreat before threatening or using force intended or likely to cause death or serious bodily injury, if:

(A) The person has a reasonable belief that there is an imminent danger of death or serious bodily injury;

(B) The danger creating the belief of imminent death or serious bodily injury is real, or honestly believed to be real at the time; and

(C) The belief of danger is founded upon reasonable grounds.

(c) Any person using force intended or likely to cause death or serious bodily injury within a residence, business, dwelling or vehicle is presumed to have held a reasonable belief of imminent death or serious bodily injury to self, family, a member of the household or a person visiting as an invited guest, when that force is used against another person, who unlawfully and forcibly enters or has unlawfully and forcibly entered the residence, business, dwelling or vehicle, and the person using defensive force knew or had reason to believe that an unlawful and forcible entry occurred.

(d) The presumption established in subsection (c) shall not apply, if:

(1) The person against whom the force is used has the right to be in or is a lawful resident of the dwelling, business, residence, or vehicle, such as an owner, lessee, or titleholder; provided, that the person is not prohibited from entering the dwelling, business, residence, or occupied vehicle by an order of protection, injunction for protection from domestic abuse, or a court order of no contact against that person;

(2) The person against whom the force is used is attempting to remove a person or persons who is a child or grandchild of, or is otherwise in the lawful custody or under the lawful guardianship of, the person against whom the defensive force is used;

(3) Notwithstanding § 39-17-1322, the person using force is engaged in an unlawful activity or is using the dwelling, business, residence, or occupied vehicle to further an unlawful activity; or

(4) The person against whom force is used is a law enforcement officer, as defined in § 39-11-106, who enters or attempts to enter a dwelling, business, residence, or vehicle in the performance of the officer's official duties, and the officer identified the officer 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.

(e) The threat or use of force against another is not justified:

(1) If the person using force consented to the exact force used or attempted by the other individual;

(2) If the person using force provoked the other individual's use or attempted use of unlawful force, unless:

(A) The person using force abandons the encounter or clearly communicates to the other the intent to do so; and

(B) The other person nevertheless continues or attempts to use unlawful force against the person; or

(3) To resist a halt at a roadblock, arrest, search, or stop and frisk that the person using force knows is being made by a law enforcement officer, unless:

(A) The law enforcement officer uses or attempts to use greater force than necessary to make the arrest, search, stop and frisk, or halt; and

(B) The person using force reasonably believes that the force is immediately necessary to protect against the law enforcement officer's use or attempted use of greater force than necessary.

"It does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brush fires in people's minds." Samuel Adams
Basic
Offline
  • Joined Oct 2003
  • Posts 90
  • EE 0% (0)
USA TN, USA
Link Posted: 8/14/2013 8:48:40 AM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Jeep29:


Stand your ground? Tennessee has had Castle Doctrine since 2007. Google it.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Jeep29:
Originally Posted By Steve59Ind:
Question re: TN Stand Your Ground Law. Is there any requirement to take a step back from imminent attacker before drawing weapon?


Stand your ground? Tennessee has had Castle Doctrine since 2007. Google it.


Tennessee dropped the duty to retreat in 1989. In 2007, the legislature revised the self-defense statute.

Top