Does Ohio have a "Duty to retreat" law?

Michael Courtney · Post by **Michael Courtney** » Sat Aug 13, 2005 7:43 am

The law itself (Ohio Revised Code) contains no duty to retreat, nor does say that a person who at one point acted agressively (but later backs down and gets pursued) has relinquished the right to self defense. The duty to retreat is a creative interpretation of the Ohio courts and an example of "legislating from the bench." It is a part of instructions to the jury in self defense cases, but it is not an actual part of the law. In actual practice, Ohio juries stick more with the "reasonable man" doctrine than the duty to retreat.

Michael Courtney

BB62 · Post by **BB62** » Sat Aug 13, 2005 9:28 am

marinecorpsmike wrote:... It is much better to know the rules and follow them as best as we can. I learned a long time ago that the best legal advice I give is the advice that keeps you out of court, not the advice that may help you win if you wind up there.

THANKS for taking the time to answer. I appreciate it, and tip my hat to you.

BB62

Glock and dagger · Post by **Glock and dagger** » Tue Aug 16, 2005 1:23 pm

Oh, and it actually gets even better. It's actually a "foot in the door" toward effective tort reform. See, if said goblin (or goblin's family) decides to go forth with some sort of civil suit prior to any criminal investigation being concluded - which subsequently clears the good guy of any and all wrongdoing, guess who's on the hook for all court costs and good guy's legal fees, lost wages, etc!?

This would be like bleeding a turnip. I have a better idea. We hold the attorney filing the claim for all wrong-doings, lost wages, court costs and legal fees. That would keep them from even trying to subvert the law.

Post by **NavyChief** » Tue Aug 16, 2005 7:32 pm

Glock and dagger wrote:This would be like bleeding a turnip.

True. But when you consider the fact most attorneys take these cases on a contingency basis for the simple fact the good guy (or his insurance company) is more likely to settle out of court because in the long run it's cheaper even if you do win, how many are gonna be steppin' up to the plate? The ones that take these cases might be slimy, but they're not stupid.

Post by **NavyChief** » Tue Aug 16, 2005 8:11 pm

To amplify on my above post - Even if you have an absolute slam-dunk justified self-defense shooting you can easily spend upwards of $20k+ defending yourself in a civil action. I'd be a fool not to take advantage of a deal that costs me $5k in an out of court settlement in exchange for legally binding documents from their side saying they'll go away - forever. Contingency fee lawyers count on that. Yes, there's always the option of a counter-suit, but then you're back to your original point of bleedin' a turnip...

Brian_Horton · Post by **Brian_Horton** » Wed Aug 17, 2005 8:53 am

There was a fella down here in Cincinnati that was carrying in a bar on the affirmative defense and had to use his gun to save his friend's life during an armed robbery. I have talked to him personally and it was a good self defense shoot. The Hamilton County prosecutor purposely ran a lightweight case to let him win and not get indited by the grand jury and his legal defense still cost him something like $7,000!

Post by **TunnelRat** » Wed Aug 17, 2005 9:14 am

I once had to use a firearm in self-defense. The judge was very sympathetic and kind to me. Even so it cost me over $10,000.

JU-87 · Post by **JU-87** » Wed Aug 17, 2005 7:18 pm

A big sincere Thanks to:

Marinecorpmike, Navychief,TunnelRat,and rightwingzealot

for links and info disproving the mythical Ohio duty to retreat "law".
It is nothing like other states true "Duty to retreat"laws.

To those few who only offered sarcasm, you were of no help at all.

Post by **NavyChief** » Thu Aug 18, 2005 6:17 am

JU-87 wrote:It is nothing like other states true "Duty to retreat"laws.

Just remember, the lack of a legal duty to retreat is somewhat akin to a motorcycle having right of way v. a panel truck - the motorcyclist might not get a citation, but...

Post by **TunnelRat** » Thu Aug 18, 2005 7:42 am

NavyChief wrote:Just remember, the lack of a legal duty to retreat is somewhat akin to a motorcycle having right of way v. a panel truck - the motorcyclist might not get a citation, but...

Excellent! Sometimes you have to let the Wookie win...

Glock and dagger · Post by **Glock and dagger** » Thu Aug 18, 2005 7:57 am

The lack of "legal duty to retreat" can still result in the unjust suing from the next of kin or injured bad guy.

This problem needs rectified.

And, nowhere in civil law are these law suits barred. That is all up to a judge, and can be expensive to the true hero/would-be victim.

Sad...

Post by **NavyChief** » Thu Aug 18, 2005 9:47 am

Glock and dagger wrote:The lack of "legal duty to retreat" can still result in the unjust suing from the next of kin or injured bad guy.

Not in Florida after October 1, though. Sometimes it really does pay to be from Ohio...

Glock and dagger · Post by **Glock and dagger** » Fri Aug 19, 2005 1:57 pm

True... true...

Ohioans For Concealed Carry Discussion Forums

Does Ohio have a "Duty to retreat" law?

Re: first swing and jury nullification