Posted on 02/26/2025 2:32:34 PM PST by yesthatjallen
FRESNO, Calif. – A state lawmaker is seeking to change what qualifies as self-defense with a new bill in the state assembly. AB 1333 would eliminate certain circumstances for self-defense including defense of home or property.
“I’m calling it a criminal-first agenda,” Assemblyman David Tangipa said.
Assemblyman Tangipa is questioning the motive behind Assembly Bill 1333, making self-defense during crimes, like home break-ins, illegal.
“If somebody broke into somebody’s house, then that individual, the homeowner had to do everything within their power to either leave, flee and prove that the individual is trying to kill them if they used necessary self-defense and took that individual out,” Tangipa said.
The Merced County Sheriff can’t believe AB 1333 was introduced at all.
“That bill, to me, is too ambiguous to protect the people that actually need protecting,” Merced County Sheriff Vern Warnke said.
Sheriff Warnke said the bill would make his job difficult
“Now we’ve got to second guess somebody that was in fear for their life,” Sheriff Warnke said.
SNIP
(Excerpt) Read more at yourcentralvalley.com ...
Remember democrats want you, your spouse, your children dead
This has to be the most stupid bill ever introduced.....
Any bets on how long before David Tangipa’s house is broken into?????
Any bets on how long before David Tangipa’s house is broken into?????
Just like the UK - the homeowner would go to jail like it’s happened before there.
They hide the name of the fag who wrote the bill in the article, likely intentionally. last name is Zbur. Interesting who he caucuses with as a “friend and ally”...
There must be something in the water in CA.
5.56mm
Sounds like the way they treated Trump in court.
My mistake...I thought it was Tangipa...
That was their point. Slimeballs
Need to send teams to attack the law makers who choose to vote for this and see how they would respond to criminals who only want to rob and beat them just ALMOST to death.
If someone breaks into your house you must assume you’re in a fight to the death... Duh.
Exactly. Trump was not allowed defend himself in the three trials in NYC. In each case, the judges denied the defense from entering crucial evidence or testimony. Shameful.
sounds too much like the old Slave and Black code laws requiring a black person to flee rather than defend themselves.
Now they are applying them to EVERYONE!
I would shoot and worry about the circumstances later. Wouldn’t matter what the law says. Family and home come first.
California men need to cowboy up and kick some of these politician fags in the butt.
Politicians are so smart. Where would we be without them?
Some states have limited or no castle doctrine, including Idaho, Iowa, New Hampshire, and New Mexico.
Explanation
The castle doctrine is a legal exception that allows someone to use deadly force to defend themselves in their home without retreating. The stand-your-ground doctrine is a similar law that allows someone to use proportional force to defend themselves in any place they are legally present.
States with limited castle doctrine
Idaho: Has limited or no castle doctrine
Iowa: Has limited or no castle doctrine
New Hampshire: Has limited or no castle doctrine
New Mexico: Has limited or no castle doctrine
States with duty to retreat
Connecticut
Requires retreating in public places and vehicles, but allows the castle doctrine in homes and workplaces
Delaware
Requires retreating in public places and vehicles, but allows the castle doctrine in homes and workplaces
Hawaii
Requires retreating from violent encounters, except in homes
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.