They could have been legally a squatter which still requires eviction proceedings. Also, the solution to that situation, even if they were a straight up trespasser, isn't to get your friends to go in with guns when you're not in immediate danger. You call the police and let them know there's a trespasser.

I guess it wasn't clear...I also think that laws regarding evictions, threatening with a deadly weapon, etc. ought to be enforced too.

Yeah crazy how we cant have "large" magazines but an off duty cop can shoot at teenagers during road rage and be found not guilty.

Lol what you want to do no knock raids on people who bought magazines in the past? You want another Brenna Taylor incident? I doubt the guy shot more than 10 times lol. Also they just throw charges to see what sticks. You're allowed less than 16 inch barrel if it's on a pistol.

the above does not preclude a claim of self defense, it merely precludes (or would preclude, if a court accepted it) a statutory claim of self defense under ch 8 specifically.

[removed]

So the guy would have been defenseless against an armed group of vigilantes at best trying to throw him out into the street in winter.

If you can make your argument with some actual statistics, I won’t stop you.

That’s the beauty of critical thinking.

But I warn you, it will require thinking.

> I noticed in all your posts that have to do with firearms

That seems to be the case for you too

> would be better suited for you since you seem to live them so much.

Do you need me to invite you to leave for somewhere with gun laws that align with your preferences too?

Or can we just all agree that there's value in seeking to improve where we live, and that the "if you don't like it you can leave" mentality is pretty meaningless?

Well gosh, it’s equally pleasing to have you there to parse my every word to impute meaning that wasn’t communicated! So I’m doubly lucky!

Such guardians of “accuracy” truly improve society 😁

>Think about what you just said lmao.

I think pple are missing the note of sarcasm.

Yeah it must be annoying not being able to just say whatever you want without regard for its accuracy

This is actually a really interesting case. Let's see if there's a good answer in the books on whether or not self-defense here could presumably be lawful under the castle doctrine, even in the face of an illegal self-help eviction.

The statute codifying the doctrine in RI is:

>§ 11-8-8. Injury or death — Defense.
>In the event that any person shall die or shall sustain a personal injury in any way or for any cause while in the commission of any criminal offense enumerated in §§ 11-8-2 — 11-8-6, it shall be rebuttably presumed as a matter of law in any civil or criminal proceeding that the owner, tenant, or occupier of the place where the offense was committed acted by reasonable means in self-defense and in the reasonable belief that the person engaged in the criminal offense was about to inflict great bodily harm or death upon that person or any other individual lawfully in the place where the criminal offense was committed. There shall be no duty on the part of an owner, tenant, or occupier to retreat from any person engaged in the commission of any criminal offense enumerated in §§ 11-8-2 — 11-8-6.

Key here - a tenant, or even a mere occupier (who presumably has an even more tenuous grasp on possession than a tenant) are protected here with a rebuttable presumption. The defense offered by a rebuttable presumption of self-defense is significant, but not absolute. Let's look to §§ 11-8-2 — 11-8-6, part of RI's B&E statutes to see if the landlord's conduct even falls under those crimes delineated in § 11-8-8. The closest I found were § 11-8-2 & § 11-8-2.2, with the latter secondary to the former, so we only need review the latter:

>§ 11-8-2. Unlawful breaking and entering of dwelling house.

>(a) Every person who shall break and enter at any time of the day or night any dwelling house or apartment, whether the dwelling house or apartment is occupied or not, or any outbuilding or garage attached to or adjoining any dwelling house, without the consent of the owner or tenant of the dwelling house, apartment, building, or garage, shall be imprisoned for not less than two (2) years and not more than ten (10) years for the first conviction, and for the second and subsequent conviction shall be imprisoned for not less than four (4) years and not more than fifteen (15) years, or fined not more than ten thousand dollars ($10,000), or both.
The language of the statute is unambiguous, even if the intent is not. If the owner (landlord) gives consent, then it is not a crime under § 11-8-2 — 11-8-6, and the presumption of self-defense is not afforded under RI's castle doctrine.

A source for you, in case anyone doesn't think what you said is accurate:

> When it comes to using deadly force to defend yourself, Rhode Island is a “duty to retreat” state, as opposed to a “stand your ground” state. The duty to retreat means you must first avoid the danger by retreating to safety before you can exercise deadly force, if you are aware of an available way to escape the situation.

https://www.thomasianlaw.com/blog/2020/december/self-defense-in-rhode-island/

Too bad they weren't enforced sooner or a life may have been saved

Sure, how about we start with a license to watch tv, like the UK has? Or, we could require federal registration and licensing of computers, licenses to be able to post and reply to things online, and we could also limit how many posts you can make, all to try and prevent cyber bullying. That would be better way wouldn’t it?

Given his landlord and vigilantes tried to kick in his door and kill or throw him out in winter, it sounds like he is exactly the person who should have a gun.

Useless law to pretend they care

I’ve noticed that less educated, lower intellect individuals with a minimum of worldly experience tend to be resentful of the notion that they can learn from other places and people who are different from them and do certain things better.

The world is full of such small-minded places, commonly referred to as “underdeveloped.”

I’d like to avoid seeing my state and country continue to backslide towards underdeveloped status when we have potential to be much greater.

Therefore, if another country has a better way to build a car, or a smarter health delivery system, or a better design for transit systems, or a system that has largely eliminated gun violence, I choose to learn from them rather than stew in parochial ignorance.

You should try it!

I noticed in all your posts that have to do with firearms, you are always talking about other countries and how they do things, especially the UK. Perhaps one of those other countries, like the UK, would be better suited for you since you seem to live them so much.

In the middle of winter no less.

Assuming they were considered a squatter, you still have to follow eviction to remove them. You’re just wrong.

Kicking someone out of a house in the dead of winter is a form of violence.

Its crazy how 2 months ago 3 of those gun laws didnt exist.

>see post history

Lmao, do people actually do this?

We're in for some interesting times, my friend. I think you can tell.

😉