Checkmark
Legislation watch

Search all years.

2005 House Bill 5143: Repeal “duty to retreat” in self defense

Public Act 309 of 2006

Introduced by Rep. Rick Jones (R) on September 7, 2005
To create a new law establishing that a person who uses deadly force for self defense in his or her home, contiguous private property or occupied vehicle need not first flee from a threatening attacker, and that a person who unlawfully and forcibly enters one of these is presumed is to be doing so with the intent to commit an unlawful act involving force or violence, with certain minor exceptions. This would place the “home is my castle” doctrine in statute. Also, to establish that a law-abiding person who is attacked in any other place where he or she has a right to be, has no duty to retreat, and can “stand his or her ground” and meet force with force, including deadly force if necessary to prevent death or great bodily harm.   Official Text and Analysis.
Referred to the House Judiciary Committee on September 7, 2005
Reported in the House on April 19, 2006
With the recommendation that the substitute (H-4) be adopted and that the bill then pass.
Substitute offered in the House on April 25, 2006
To replace the previous version of the bill with one that does not presume that a person who breaks and enters into a dwelling or occupied vehicle is presumed to be doing so with the intent to committ an unlawful or violent act, and thus may me shot without first retreating. Instead, bill instead establishes a rebuttable presumption that this is the case.
The substitute passed by voice vote in the House on April 25, 2006
Amendment offered by Rep. Rick Jones (R) on April 25, 2006
To remove provision that a person who breaks and enters into a dwelling or occupied vehicle is presumed to be doing so with the intent to committ an unlawful or violent act. The bill instead establishes a rebuttable presumption that this is the case.
The amendment passed by voice vote in the House on April 25, 2006
Amendment offered by Rep. Rick Jones (R) on April 25, 2006
To name the bill the "Dr. Ossian Sweet self-defense act".
The amendment passed by voice vote in the House on April 25, 2006
To create a new law establishing that a person who uses deadly force for self defense in his or her home, contiguous private property or occupied vehicle need not first flee from a threatening attacker, and that there is a rebuttable presumption that a person who unlawfully and forcibly enters one of these is doing so with the intent to commit an unlawful act involving force or violence, with certain minor exceptions. This would place the “home is my castle” doctrine in statute. Also, to establish that a law-abiding person who is attacked in any other place where he or she has a right to be, has no duty to retreat, and can “stand his or her ground” and meet force with force, including deadly force if necessary to prevent death or great bodily harm.
Received in the Senate on April 26, 2006
Referred to the Senate Judiciary Committee on April 26, 2006
Reported in the Senate on May 18, 2006
With the recommendation that the substitute (S-2) be adopted and that the bill then pass.
Substitute offered in the Senate on June 6, 2006
To replace the previous version of the bill with one that reflects that its home defense provisions are now in Senate Bill 1046.
The substitute passed by voice vote in the Senate on June 6, 2006
Amendment offered by Sen. Samuel B. Thomas, III (D) on June 6, 2006
To not name the main bill in the package the "Dr. Ossian Sweet Self Defense Act".
The amendment passed by voice vote in the Senate on June 6, 2006
To establish that a law-abiding person who is attacked in any place where he or she has a right to be has no duty to retreat, and can “stand his or her ground” and meet force with force, including deadly force if necessary to prevent death or great bodily harm. See also Senate Bill 1046, which places the "castle docrine" regarding home defense in law.
Received in the House on June 6, 2006
Signed by Gov. Jennifer Granholm on July 18, 2006

Comments