Quote Originally Posted by Gman
Quote Originally Posted by HunterCO
How about a bill that does not permit them to do so period?
If they let the database sunset, it will go away and the Sheriffs won't have the option.

newracer, your link no workie. I found the text of the bill. I don't think it's "sneaky" at all. When I lived in TX you could use deadly force if someone entered your home, but there was a catch. You had to state that you feared for your life or bodily harm. With HB 1011, it is assumed that it is reasonable for someone in their homes to fear bodily harm from someone that unlawfully enters your home. You don't have to be explicit in stating your fear nor do you have the burden of identifying the intent of an intruder as in the old law. I can't find the forum tags to identify text that has been struck through, so anything in red is being removed from the exisiting law. All CAPS in words identifies additions to the law.
18-1-704.5. Use of deadly physical force against an intruder.
5 (1) The general assembly hereby recognizes that the citizens of Colorado
6 have a right to expect absolute safety within their own homes DWELLINGS,
7 PLACES OF BUSINESS, AND VEHICLES.
The edit of the pertinent info in modifying the old law;
Notwithstanding the provisions of section 18-1-704, any
16 occupant of a dwelling, PLACE OF BUSINESS, OR VEHICLE is justified in
17 using any degree of physical force, including deadly physical force,
18 against another person when that other person has made an unlawful entry
19 into the dwelling, PLACE OF BUSINESS, OR VEHICLE, and when the
20 occupant has a reasonable belief that such other person has committed a
21 crime in the dwelling in addition to the uninvited entry, or is committing
22 or intends to commit a crime against a person or property in addition to
23 the uninvited entry, and when the occupant reasonably believes that such
24 other person might use any physical force, no matter how slight, against
25 any occupant HOLDS A REASONABLE FEAR THAT THE OTHER PERSON
26 CREATES AN IMMINENT PERIL OF DEATH OR SERIOUS BODILY INJURY TO
27 THE OCCUPANT OR A THIRD PERSON.
The law looks good to me where the burden of proving a "reasonable fear" is no longer required. Please let me know where I'm wrong.

Let's see if this link works;
HOUSE BILL 07-1011--PDF Format
If the red is being deleted and the CAPS is being added than the revised wording would seem to absolutely require you to prove you had a resonable fear the other person creates an IMMINENT PERIL OF DEATH OR SERIOUS BODILY INJURY ... So a skinny teen aged gang member whom you shot when you caught him inside your DWELLING uninvited shows up in court, dressed nicely and claims they were in the house by mistake and you now have to prove you had a reasonable fear of death or injury whereas before you just had to prove a reasonable belief a crime was being committed or about to. Sounds like a step backwards to me. In the previous case, if they broke in any reasonable person would belive they were about to commit a crime - like stealing something at a minimum. In the new case, now a reasonable person has to fear DEATH or SERIOUS BODILY INJURY. There's a lot of naive sheeple out there who don't recognize evil and would say they wouldn't have been in fear of DEATH or SERIOUS BODILY INJURY. Or am I wrong?