Senator Mumper

As we all know, the quintessential "American dream" is that of homeownership.  We have seen visions of neatly-kept houses with white picket fences in the front yards and believe that these are the places where our families will make memories and can find security and comfort.  Of course, a large part of maintaining this dream is being able to defend our homes against those who would destroy our property or harm our families. (Audio interview included.)

Accordingly, the Senate recently passed legislation that reaffirms Ohioans' Second Amendment right to bear arms and solidifies our entitlement to protecting our homes and families, even if it means using violent force.  Senate Bill 184, appropriately dubbed the "Castle Doctrine," makes common sense revisions to the state's self-defense laws as they apply to Ohioans' homes.  Modeled after legislation that is already in place in neighboring states, such as Kentucky, Indiana and Michigan, S.B. 184 gives Ohio residents more freedom to defend themselves against criminals who are unlawfully intruding into their homes. 

Under current Ohio law, the victim of a home intruder, whose safety is threatened, is obliged to retreat, if possible.  If this person should react with force and harm the attacker, he or she is responsible for proving in court that the action was in self-defense.  Moreover, if these actions cause injury to the intruder, the victim could possibly be held liable for the resulting civil damages.  While some Ohio courts have recognized property owners' rights to defend themselves against violent trespassers, existing laws have the potential to diminish these rights and place those who act in self-defense under scrutiny.

In contrast, among the "Castle Doctrine's" provisions are the removal of a person's "duty to retreat" in a life-threatening situation.  Under this bill, those who use force to protect themselves or their families against someone who has unlawfully entered their homes are automatically presumed to have acted in self-defense.  In other words, the onus is on the prosecutor, not the victims, to prove that the home owner did not act legally in defending themselves.  In addition to recognizing this affirmative self-defense, S.B. 184 prohibits accused trespassers from seeking civil damages from the physical harm they might have experienced while unlawfully in another's home.

Because Senate Bill 184 touches on a number of contentious issues, such as the possession of weapons and the use of violent force, it was under serious consideration in the Senate Criminal Justice Committee for weeks.  Senators deliberated multiple versions of the bill and heard all sides of the issue, talking with policy makers, law enforcement and victims of attacks and other interested parties.  Ultimately, the "Castle Doctrine" passed the Senate unanimously with bipartisan support.

I believe that, with regard to the "Castle Doctrine," we reached a decision that upholds a fundamental human right - to defend oneself and one's family against criminals - and preserves the security of our homes, the "American dream."  For this reason, I am a co-sponsor of S.B. 184.  Now, this legislation moves to the House of Representatives, and I am sure that it will be weighed there with great care, as it was in the Senate.

Senator Mumper was featured on "Zell on the Bell" last week and discussed the "Castle Doctrine" in-depth.

Listen to Mumper explain why he likes the doctrine.