Kings are also Given the Right to Kill

   If a man's home is his castle, it is the gun that makes it so -- at least, to some degree. Well, let's just say that if a man's home is his castle, the gun is the enforcer. We even have a law we refer to as a castle law, which makes it lawful to use deadly force in defense of a habitation.
   How appropriate of a name, Castle Law. Kings live in castles and kings also have the right (well, they take the right) to kill anyone who enters their domain, no questions asked. How interesting, then, that the Castle Law gives homeowners the right to kill those who enter their domain, and face limited questioning for what they have done.
   The Castle Law it is, then, but we could call it the King's Law, just as well. If a king kills someone, he isn't subject to second-guessing from the people. No one questions his right to kill. He's the king. There will be no arrest and there will be no trial.
   Even so, it is with the home owner, thanks to the Castle Law. If he works it right, when killing someone, there will be no arrest and there will be no trial. There might not even be much of an investigation.
  If the invader is killed, and there is no evidence of foul play and no one left alive to witness against him, then the homeowner's word is accepted as the rule of law and as the judgment on what happened.  The homeowner is king of the home, and of the castle, and judgment is settled by the decree of the king. I would go so far as to wonder, when we set these laws up, whether we were thinking we should, indeed, give the homeowner such power, and that is why we named them castle laws?
  As long as the homeowner is in position to say the use of lethal force was necessary, who can question him? Murder becomes a right. Yes, most of the killings might be truly justified and in self defense, and done in an upright and honorable way, but the process we have created makes it possible for some not to be so. It makes it possible for legalized murders to slip in. As our law spells it out, anyone who enters the home secretly or by stealth can legally be shot and killed as long as the homeowner can say he had reason to believe killing them was necessary to stop them.
   Murder by decree, or justified by the king's decree, then. Or can we even call it murder? I don't know that in all the stories I've heard of kings saying, "Off with your head," if I've ever heard it suggested it was a murder. Rather, it was his right. Have we created the possibility of the same scenario with our castle laws?
  The other person might have been backing up with his hands up, but if the homeowner kills him and insists it was his own life that was being threatened, no one will ever know. The homeowner will get away with it. He will get away with murder.
   For those who care to read it, here's what the law (Utah Code 76-2-405) says:

(1)

A person is justified in using force against another when and to the extent that he reasonably believes that the force is necessary to prevent or terminate the other's unlawful entry into or attack upon his habitation; however, he is justified in the use of force which is intended or likely to cause death or serious bodily injury only if: (a) the entry is made or attempted in a violent and tumultuous manner, surreptitiously, or by stealth, and he reasonably believes that the entry is attempted or made for the purpose of assaulting or offering personal violence to any person, dwelling, or being in the habitation and he reasonably believes that the force is necessary to prevent the assault or offer of personal violence; or (b) he reasonably believes that the entry is made or attempted for the purpose of committing a felony in the habitation and that the force is necessary to prevent the commission of the felony.

(2)

The person using force or deadly force in defense of habitation is presumed for the purpose of both civil and criminal cases to have acted reasonably and had a reasonable fear of imminent peril of death or serious bodily injury if the entry or attempted entry is unlawful and is made or attempted by use of force, or in a violent and tumultuous manner, or surreptitiously or by stealth, or for the purpose of committing a felony. (Note: Parts of the blog were rewritten 6/15/18 in hopes of giving it a little more focus.)