N.J.S.2C:3-4 b. (2)(b)(i)
The actor is not obliged to retreat from his dwelling, unless he was the initial aggressor; and ...
家里还有 Duty to retreat 的，就根本不能叫 Castle Doctrine 了。美国只有 Vermont 一个州和 Washington DC 在法律上没有 Castle Doctrine，然而也遵从 Common Laws 里的自卫法则，虽然要求退让，但是是在能保证当事人完全安全的情况下，才必须退让。如果对方拿着枪闯进家来，你把后背露给他逃跑，能叫“完全安全”吗？
(3) Use of deadly force. The use of deadly force is not justifiable under subsection a. of this section unless the actor reasonably believes that:
(a) The person against whom the force is used is attempting to dispossess him of his dwelling otherwise than under a claim of right to its possession; or
(b) The person against whom the force is used is attempting to commit or consummate arson, burglary, robbery or other criminal theft or property destruction; except that
(c) Deadly force does not become justifiable under subparagraphs (a) and (b) of this subsection unless the actor reasonably believes that:
(i) The person against whom it is employed has employed or threatened deadly force against or in the presence of the actor; or
(ii) The use of force other than deadly force to terminate or prevent the commission or the consummation of the crime would expose the actor or another in his presence to substantial danger of bodily harm. An actor within a dwelling shall be presumed to have a reasonable belief in the existence of the danger. The State must rebut this presumption by proof beyond a reasonable doubt.
使用致命武力保卫居所的条件：
a. 当事人被对方无理强行赶出居所；
b. 对方已经或将要实施纵火、盗窃、抢劫或其它偷盗或毁坏财产的犯罪；
c. 上述两项条件是基于当事人合理地认为以下两项也成立：
1. 对方已经或针对当事人威胁使用致命武力；
2. 如果使用非致命武力会使当事人或他人受到严重的人生危害。在当事人居所内，假设这种危害已经成了(即不必先使用非致命武力)。
[复制链接]
发表于 2018-1-31 21:10