Silver Lifetime
- Messages
- 42,878
- Reactions
- 111,411
In the case of of using deadly force during a burglary or (attempted burglary) of a DWELLING there doesn't appear to be a qualifier that fear of death or physical harm is required.
Furthermore, I believe it is established case law that anyone who burglarizes, or attempts to burglarize a DWELLING knows full well there is a high probability they will encounter/confront a dwelling occupant and is prepared to, and/or intends to inflict physical harm and/or death upon said occupant.
However, there IS a difference in use of force regarding "premises", that's why I made my flippant remark about keeping a cot and fridge in your (detached) garage (to make it a "residence"). Here are the relevant ORS below for your reading pleasure.
Yes, this goes way back several thousand years where the Bible (a lot of English common law is based on it) said it was okay to use lethal force without threat of violence from the invader if the home invasion happened after dark.
Exodus 22:2-3 2 "If the thief is found breaking in, and he is struck so that he dies, there shall be no guilt for his bloodshed. 3 "If the sun has risen on him, there shall be guilt for his bloodshed.
Note: not saying that the religious teachings should be the basis of law, just saying this for historical reasons.
In this day and age, with violent home invasions, it makes sense that lethal force laws would/should recognize the right of a home resident to defend their "castle". If it isn't explicit, then it is usually implicit either in the law or case law.