Posted: 9/8/2008 7:49:52 PM EDT
While crafting a response in GD, I stumbled across this little tidbit:
Have a few drinks at home, someone breaks in and you shoot them, you have commited a class 2 misdemeanor. ETA: Min/Max punishments for a class 2 in Colorado: Class 2 3 months / 250 dollar fine or both 1 year / 1,000 dollar fine or both IIRC, anything punichable by a year or more permanently disqualifies one from owning firearms. Hopefully a lawyer will point out where I'm wrong 
|
Hollywood is no basis for legal defense and rarely bears any relation to reality but I remember some series or another about 20 years ago in which a drunk driver called his lawyer before the police and said unscrupulous lawyer advised him to "calm his nerves with a stiff drink" before the cops arrived. If I was all that concerned, I think I'd be so rattled by the confrontation that I'd have a belt or two as I dialed 911.... |
That was "Picket Fences". |
They did the same thing on an episode of Boston Legal. While the OP is technically correct, the Castle Doctrine law in Colorado commonly known as 'Make My Day Law' gives a homeowner the absolute right to use deadly force to protect himself and his family inside his home if warranted. It also specifically states that he is exempt from criminal or civil charges resulting from the shooting. If a homeowner had a few drinks and during a break in or assault, he was justified under the provisions of the law to fire, he would be entirely correct arguing that the provisions of the Make My Day law guarantees him the right to protect himself and his family, even if not sober. In that case I'd argue that it's provisions trump the class 2 misdemeanor charge and I'd win. The validity of the shooting doesn't hinge on one's sobriety (although it does make the evaluation more interesting), but rather on the circumstances and actions of the perp who forces the confrontation and the homeowner's actions to resist. |
|
As far as I know the castle doctrine prevents you from any and all prosecution if you are found to be within your rights and you prove self defense was absolutely necessary. It is one thing if you are CCW and have drinks and then get in a fight and use your firearm. It is a whole other story if you are sitting in your house having a drink not doing anything and then all of a sudden your house is broken into. besides, you are not driving a car, why would they give you a breathilizer or blood test unless you have been taken to the hospital and the doctors find alcohol in your blood. Even then the castle doctrine will protect you. I wouldn't worry about it in the end. somebody already said it before -- judged by 12 than be carried by 6. what would you rather have? |
|
<devil's advocate> While the "make my day" law shields a person from prosecution for shooting a criminal in thier home, possesing a firearm while intoxicated is a seperate unrelated act, and therefore not covered by the immunity to prosecution. </devil's advocate> Don't get me wrong, I'll take being judged by twelve over being carried by six any day of the week - this doesn't change that far more twisted leaps of logic have been made by prosecutors and judges. |
This is not an element of Colorado's "Make My Day" law. |