About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

34 Crim. Just. Rev. 515 (2009)
The State of the Castle: An Overview of Recent Trends in State Castle Doctrine Legislation and Public Policy

handle is hein.journals/crmrev34 and id is 535 raw text is: Criminal Justice Review Volume 34 Number 4 December 2009 515-535 0 2009 Georgia State University Research Foundation, Inc. 10.1177/0734016809332095 http://cjr.sagcpub.com hosted at in State Castle Doctrine Legislation http://online.sagepub.com and Public Policy Denise Paquette Boots Jayshree Bihari Euel Elliott University of Texas at Dallas Second Amendment issues regarding the right to bear arms in the home have come into focus recently with the U.S. Supreme Court landmark decision in District of Columbia v. Heller Despite strong antigun sentiment in the wake of high-profile shootings, sweeping new castle doctrine legislation has passed in 23 states in the last 4 years. These laws effectively expand individuals' right to defend their home and possessions with lethal force without the necessity to retreat. To date, there is little criminological research that examines the evolution of the modem castle doctrine legislation in the United States. The present article addresses this gap in the literature by offering a historical perspective on the legal etiology of the castle doctrine relating to self-defense and then analyzes existing and pending castle doctrine legislation through December 2008. A discussion of the legal and criminological implications of these statutes on public policy is offered. Keywords: castle doctrine; Second Amendment; gun rights; crime control; gun laws S econd Amendment issues have recently moved to the forefront of American jurispru- dence and public policy debates with the landmark decision by the United States Supreme Court on June 26, 2008, in District of Columbia v. Heller (2008). In this highly awaited ruling, the Supreme Court upheld the March 2007 holding of the Court of Appeals (see Parker v. District of Columbia, 2007) and (a) reinforced an individual's right to pos- sess firearms as a preexisting and fundamental right confirmed by the historical background of early America, (b) struck down the District of Columbia's requirements to keep firearms inoperable in the home, and (c) held that the District's absolute ban of firearms in the home was unconstitutional provided individuals are not disqualified from possessing such weap- ons (e.g., mental illness or felony conviction). In delivering the majority opinion (5-4), Justice Scalia stated the following: Authors' Note: The authors wish to thank Drs. Tom Kovandzic, John Worrall, Gary Kleck, Robert Morris, Brian Berry, and the anonymous reviewers for their meaningful commentary and suggestions on this work. Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Denise Paquette Boots, University of Texas at Dallas, Program in Criminology, 800 W. Campbell Road GR 31, Richardson, TX 75080; e-mail: deniseboots(a4 utdallas.edu. 515

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline.

Purchase Access

Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most