Michigan Self-Defense Reform

[Ian Kinder]

The Great Lakes Self-Defense Association is happy to announce the passing of MI Public Acts 309 through 314 of 2006, the most significant self-defense reforms since P.A. 381 of 2000 transformed Michigan into a "shall issue" state for concealed pistol licenses.

Below is a brief review. Please visit their website at www.glsda.org for more details.

Public Act 309 (HB5143) states that an individual who has not or is not engaged in the commission of a crime at the time he or she uses deadly force may use deadly force against another individual anywhere he or she has the legal right to be with no duty to retreat if either of the following applies:

(a) The individual honestly and reasonably believes that the use of deadly force is necessary to prevent the imminent death of or imminent great bodily harm to himself or herself or to another individual.

(b) The individual honestly and reasonably believes that the use of deadly force is necessary to prevent the imminent sexual assault of himself or herself or of another individual.

(2) An individual who has not or is not engaged in the commission of a crime at the time he or she uses force other than deadly force may use force other than deadly force against another individual anywhere he or she has the legal right to be with no duty to retreat if he or she honestly and reasonably believes that the use of that force is necessary to defend himself or herself or another individual from the imminent unlawful use of force by another individual.

Public Act 310 (HB5153) states that an individual who uses deadly force or force other than deadly force in compliance with section 2 of the self-defense act and who has not or is not engaged in the commission of a crime at the time he or she uses that deadly force or force other than deadly force commits no crime in using that deadly force or force other than deadly force.

Public Act 311 (SB1046) states that, except as provided in subsection (2), it is a rebuttable presumption in a civil or criminal case that an individual who uses deadly force or force other than deadly force under section 2 of the self-defense act has an honest and reasonable belief that imminent death of, sexual assault of, or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another individual will occur if both of the following apply:

(a) The individual against whom deadly force or force other than deadly force is used is in the process of breaking and entering a dwelling or business premises or committing home invasion or has broken and entered a dwelling or business premises or committed home invasion and is still present in the dwelling or business premises, or is unlawfully attempting to remove another individual from a dwelling, business premises, or occupied vehicle against his or her will.

(b) The individual using deadly force or force other than deadly force honestly and reasonably believes that the individual is engaging in conduct described in subdivision

NOTE: Exceptions are listed. Please read the act directly for complete details.

Public Act 312 (SB1185) states that the court shall award the payment of actual attorney fees and costs to an individual who is sued for civil damages for allegedly using deadly force or force other than deadly force against another individual if the court determines that the individual used deadly force or force other than deadly force in compliance with section 2 of the self-defense act and that the individual is immune from civil liability under section 2922b.

Public Act 313 (HB5142) states that in cases in which section 2 of the self-defense act does not apply, the common law of this state applies except that the duty to retreat before using deadly force is not required if an individual is in his or her own dwelling or within the curtilage of that dwelling.

(2) As used in this section, "dwelling" means a structure or shelter that is used permanently or temporarily as a place of abode, including an appurtenant structure attached to that structure or shelter.

Public Act 314 (HB5548) provides individuals who uses deadly force or force other than deadly force in self-defense or in defense of another individual in compliance with section 2 of the self-defense act immunity from civil liability for damages caused to either of the following:

(a) The individual against whom the use of deadly force or force other than deadly force is authorized.

(b) Any individual claiming damages arising out of injury to or the death of the individual described in subdivision (a), based upon his or her relationship to that individual.

Thank you to all of the Legislators, activist, public servants, organizations and other individuals who made this reform possible!

 

[Ian Kinder]

Here are two GLSDA members / State Legislators discussing the reform before it passed. Both articles appeared in Volume 1, Issue 4 of The Edge, which is the membership newsletter of the Great Lakes Self-Defense Association.

Article One of Two:

I firmly believe that the right to self-defense is a very basic right that all Americans should enjoy. Unfortunately, we live in a society where we may be attacked by a violent criminal. After 33 years in law enforcement, 31 with the Eaton County Sheriff's Office, I saw many victims of violent criminals. My work on the streets as a deputy, then road sergeant and ultimately being elected Sheriff served to reaffirm my belief in victims’ rights and the right for law-abiding citizens to not retreat, but defend themselves and their families.

I’d like to tell you two true stories. In the first, the year is 1925. Ossian Sweet, a Detroit doctor and grandson of slaves, moved his family to a neighborhood where they would be the only black family. This enraged Ku Klux Klan who gathered a crowd and surrounded his home yelling insults and racial slurs. Some of the crowd rushed and shots were fired from the house. One man was killed and another was injured.

Dr. Sweet was charged with murder. The story of famous attorney Clarence Darrow’s brilliant courtroom defense and Sweet’s eventual acquittal is immortalized in the book "One Man's Castle" by Phyllis Vine.
Many years later, a violent man broke into a home in Eaton County, Michigan. He attacked the homeowner and seemed to have the upper hand. The homeowner’s wife looked around for something to use to defend her husband and her home from this criminal. She spied a jar of pennies and struck the robber on the head. Law enforcement officers gave him a ride to the hospital and then to jail. Apparently the wife didn’t knock any sense into the criminal because he sued the couple in civil court. The case was eventually thrown out, but not before they had gone through all the mental anguish of being sued and fear of losing everything they worked so hard for. In effect, these victims of a violent criminal were re-victimized by the system.

Both of the victims in these two instances used force to protect themselves from attackers. Both had the expense of hiring their own legal counsel because homeowners insurance does not provide an attorney in these kinds of situations. Both put their lives and property on the line to defend themselves from prosecution and lawsuits. Both times, common sense and justice prevailed. Both times, there was no guarantee that it would.

That’s why my colleague, state Rep. Tom Casperson from Escanaba, and I have introduced House Bills 5143 and 5153 to hold law-abiding residents harmless when they use force to defend themselves and their loved ones from imminent bodily harm or rape.

The measures do three things.

The first is to create a presumption in the law that someone who unlawfully enters your home or vehicle is there to do you bodily harm. I think most people realize that an intruder is up to no good, but at this point in the law, you must show that you reasonably believed the attacker meant to harm you. This shifts the burden of proof from the law-abiding citizen to the criminal. Of course, this would not apply to a 10-year-old neighbor visiting unexpectedly or even playing a prank because it is not reasonable to consider him a threat.

Secondly, the bills remove the duty to retreat when you reasonably believe you are threatened with imminent bodily harm. As a retired law enforcement officer with 33 years experience, I have been shot at twice in the line of duty and faced with deadly attacks from both knives and guns. Let me tell you something – in that split second when you are confronted with evil, you don’t have time to parse the legal duty to retreat and decide if you are going to have criminal or civil liability for protecting yourself or your family. You have a hairsbreadth of time to make a decision. Your life is on the line. If your instinct tells you to stand your ground, the law needs to back you (the law-abiding resident).

Thirdly, the legislation will prohibit the civil or criminal prosecution for defending yourself, your spouse, or your children. Although I think American courts are mostly just, it seems to me that allowing the criminal to be portrayed as the victim and forcing law-abiding citizens to defend themselves from frivolous lawsuits is a moral and legal travesty.

Clearly, none of this applies to a criminal in the middle of a criminal act. A drug dealer will not be able to claim self-defense in a drug deal gone bad. Most people understand that but I have to spell it out for others. There are also protections in place to prevent evil-minded people from using it to set up an ex-spouse or other family members.

The bill is patterned after Florida legislation that ensures your ability to defend yourself in your home, your car, or in a public place, not committing a crime and where you have a legal right to be.

There is a lot support around the state for these bills. In a recent poll commissioned by Bill Ballenger, editor of the newsletter, Inside Michigan Politics, 71 percent of Michigan residents favor my legislation. Only 19 percent were opposed to the measure. Not surprisingly one of the strongest demographics in favor of my legislation was women age 18-34. They appreciate the confidence this legislation would give them to stand up to a criminal who is intent upon raping or harming them.

If you live in Michigan, I urge you to contact your state representative, state senator and the governor and urge the passage of this important piece of legislation. Like the Concealed Pistol License laws passed a few years back, the “Brady Bunch” is crying that the sky is falling and it will be O.K. Corral in the streets. It is important that you make your voice known for the future of Michigan.

About the Author:

GLSDA member Rick Jones (R – Grand Ledge) was elected to the Michigan House of Representatives in 2004. Prior to this, he worked 33 years in law enforcement, serving over 30 years with the Eaton County Sheriff Department. Rick started as a deputy and worked his way up through the ranks as sergeant, lieutenant, and captain before being elected sheriff in 2000.

Rick volunteers with Eaton Community Hospice, delivers Meals-On-Wheels to shut-ins, and volunteers with Area 8 Special Olympics. Rick is a 12-gallon donor with the Red Cross. He is a fundraising-events volunteer for Woldumar Nature Center. He was a construction volunteer for the Imagination Station and Playground of Dreams, community playgrounds in Potterville and Eaton Rapids. Rick is a Member of Grand Ledge Rotary, American Legion S.A.L Post 42, Eaton County Farm Bureau. Rick has been an active participant in charity events: Crop Walk, Relay for Life, and Walk for Warmth.

Rick has been awarded the Service to Children Award from the Eaton County Child Abuse and Neglect Prevention Council, the "Very Involved Person" Award from the Greater Lansing 100 Club for volunteer work, as well as appreciation awards from the Dimondale Lions, the Olivet Rotary, and the American Legion. He received the Charlotte Community Excellence Award for volunteer work from the Charlotte Chamber of Commerce. He was also awarded Eaton County Sheriff’s Award for Bravery.

You can contact Representative Rick Jones at 517-373-0853, [email protected] or www.gophouse.com/jones.htm

 

[Ian Kinder]

Article Two of Two:

The Michigan Legislature is considering several bills that would have a direct impact on Michigan citizens’ ability to defend themselves and their homes or vehicles against invasions or other threats. Bills before both the House and the Senate would address this important issue.

In the Michigan Senate, I have sponsored legislation that would change how homeowners’ insurance policies deal with home invasions. Under Senate Bill 524, an individual who was injured breaking into a home could not sue the homeowner’s insurance company for injuries they suffered because the homeowner defended himself or his home against the invasion. This is just good common sense. Homeowners’ insurance policies were not intended to protect thieves and other criminals who injure themselves trying to gain illegal access to someone’s home. SB 524 was introduced in May and referred to the Senate Judiciary Committee.

In the Michigan House of Representatives, Rep. Tom Casperson, R-Escanaba, and Rep. Rick Jones, R-Grand Ledge, also have introduced legislation to address the issue of self defense in the case of home or car invasions. House Bills 5142 and 5143 would establish a presumption that a criminal who forcibly enters a home or occupied vehicle is there to cause death or great bodily harm. The measures also would remove the duty to retreat if you are attacked and prohibit criminal or civil prosecution for using force to defend life.

A recent poll found 71 percent of Michigan residents favor legislation like that sponsored by Reps. Jones and Casperson, while 19 percent opposed it. The poll found that urban residents favored “Castle Doctrine” legislation at a higher rate than rural residents. The poll was commissioned by Bill Ballenger, editor of the newsletter, Inside Michigan Politics. It was taken from a pool of 600 residents between September 16 and 21, 2005, and has a margin of error of +/- 4.1 percent. HBs 5142 and 5143 were introduced in September and referred to the House Judiciary Committee.

The legislation in the House is similar to a new law implemented in Florida earlier this year. That new law addresses three areas of self-defense: It codifies into law a long-standing assumption that a homeowner has the right to use deadly force against an intruder if he feels that his or his family's life is in danger; shields the homeowner from prosecution; and prevents the assailant from lodging future civil action against the homeowner.

My door is always open. If you have questions on this or any other state matter, please do not hesitate to contact my office.

About the Author:

Michigan State Senator and GLSDA member Michelle McManus (R, Lake Leelanau) was elected to the Michigan State Senate in November of 2002. Senator McManus represents the second largest geographical district, the 35th State Senate district, which includes: Benzie, Clare, Kalkaska, Lake, Leelanau, Manistee, Mecosta, Missaukee, Osceola, Roscommon, and Wexford counties in lower northwest Michigan.

The Senator serves on the Senate Appropriations Committee and chairs the Appropriation Subcommittees for the Department of Natural Resources and the Department of Environmental Quality, and serves as Vice-Chair for the General Government and History, Arts, and Libraries subcommittees. She also sits on the Senate Finance and Senate Commerce and Labor Committees.

Senator McManus is also Co-Chair of the Michigan Legislative Sportsmen’s Caucus which is dedicated to promoting the outdoors through education and conservation. She organized the printing of the first ever Michigan Legislative Sportsmen’s Caucus Wild Game Cookbook, the sales of which are being donated to the Michigan Sportsmen Foundation Against Hunger.

Before taking office, Senator McManus previously served as the Director of Governor Engler’s Northern Office and as a three term State Representative for the 104th District. She attended Traverse City Public Schools and earned her B.S. in political science from Central Michigan University. She is an avid sportsman who enjoys a wide variety of outdoor activities and is an active member in her community.

You can reach Senator Michelle McManus online at www.senate.michigan.gov/mcmanus or call her Lansing office at 517.373.1725.

 

[still learning]

Hello, Right on Michigan!! The right not to retreat and fight back....should not be a crime. Today the way the laws are written sometimes flavor the bad guys...why? .........Aloha

 

[Brian R. VanCise]

Thanks for the update Ian!
This is good news!

Brian R. VanCise
www.instinctiveresponsetraining.com

 

[Rich Parsons]

Thanks Ian!

I know you guys do good work.

I am glad people were able to put this forward and to get the government to listen.

 

[shesulsa]

Right on Michigan!

 

[SFC JeffJ]

I'm very glad to hear that the bill bacame law as I live very close to the border and find myself in MI quite a bit.

Great news.

JeffJ

 

[pstarr]

Very nice! I hope other states take notice-

 

[Adept]

Very nice! I hope other states take notice-

Not to mention other countries. The patently ridiculous laws regarding self defence in my country have lead to me seriously considering moving to the USA.

 

[Rich Parsons]

Not to mention other countries. The patently ridiculous laws regarding self defence in my country have lead to me seriously considering moving to the USA.

As you can see, My own state just got a little bit better, so check out the lcoal laws before you move.

 

[OUMoose]

Well done Michigan!!