Wyoming Gun Owners Turn Their Attention to Stand-Your-Ground Law

Stand Your Ground Law
Wyoming Gun Owners Turn Their Attention to Stand-Your-Ground Law

USA -(Ammoland.com)- As we prepare for the shortened 2018 legislative session, we are turning our attention to Stand-Your-Ground law.

You may recall that while Wyoming is a ‘Castle Doctrine’ state (meaning you have no obligation to retreat from an attacker in your own home) we are not a Stand-Your-Ground state.

This means that if you or your family is attacked in a public place, you are legally required to retreat before you can defend yourselves.

As preposterous as this sounds, it’s the law here in Wyoming, and gun owners have been prosecuted just this year over their failure to retreat from a criminal!

Stand-Your-Ground law would change all of that.

What’s more, this legislation is on the move all over the country with Iowa and Missouri having both enacted this legislation in just the past two years!

In addition to that, it’s on the move in Idaho, Minnesota, Ohio, and multiple other states.

Of course, that doesn’t mean that this will be an easy fight as the FAKE NEWS, the anti-gun lobby in Cheyenne, and sell-out moderates in the legislature will fight us at every step of the way.

That’s why I’m so happy to announce that Wyoming Gun Owners has secured a bill sponsor for the Stand-Your-Ground fight in Senator Anthony Bouchard!

(Pro-gun champion and State Senator Anthony Bouchard has agreed to sponsor our Stand-Your-Ground legislation in the upcoming 2018 legislative session.)

Longtime WyGo members will recognize the name of Senator Bouchard as the former Executive Director of Wyoming Gun Owners — a tireless fighter for the Second Amendment both inside and outside the legislature.

And in light of what gun owners experienced last session, with the legislature killing one pro-gun bill and the Governor vetoing the other, it’s obvious that we need a fighter to carry this legislation for us.

But while Senator Bouchard while be carrying the burden on the inside, it will be up to you and me to fire up grassroots gun owners on the outside!

No legislation moves in Cheyenne just because it’s the right thing to do, which is why the legislature and the Governor have blocked pro-gun legislation for six years.

It takes lots of grassroots pressure from incentivized gun owners, making sure that the legislature knows what we expect of them.

And with 2018 being an election year, the pressure will be even hotter in the Capitol as the legislature knows that they are going to have to face gun owners in the ballot box very soon!

Please help us ramp up the pressure for next session by:

  • Signing your petition calling on the legislature to enact Stand-Your-Ground law this session!
  • Renewing your membership in Wyoming Gun Owners, so we have the resources to fight within the upcoming session.
  • Contacting your legislators now, even before the session begins, to make sure they know that you expect them to pass Stand-Your-Ground law next session!

Gun rights run on momentum here in Wyoming.

We are either taking ground and securing our Second Amendment freedoms or we are losing ground.

It’s that simple.

You and I can sit back, hope for the best, and watch our state continue to turn into Colorado — and watch our gun rights suffer as a result.

Or we can stand and fight for the Second Amendment, and hold our elected officials accountable for what they do with Stand-Your-Ground law!

I hope you’ll continue to stand with us, to ensure that we protect our gun rights for our children and grand-children!

In the meantime, take a moment to thank Senator Bouchard for agreeing to carry this bill by sending him a message here.

For Freedom,

David Ball
President

P.S. When the 2018 legislative session gets underway in Cheyenne, Wyoming Gun Owners will be leading the charge for Stand-Your-Ground law.

This legislation, law in dozens of states, would simply remove your duty to retreat before you can defend yourself from a violent criminal.

I’m happy to announce with this email that pro-gun champion Senator Anthony Bouchard has agreed to carry this bill when the upcoming legislative session convenes!

Please take a moment to thank Senator Bouchard for standing up for the Second Amendment, by going here.

  • 6 thoughts on “Wyoming Gun Owners Turn Their Attention to Stand-Your-Ground Law

    1. A mother with three children can’t possibly “retreat safely” and neither can an old man with a can, walker or wheelchair. The SCOTUS has ruled “duty to retreat” to be unconstitutional.
      The Hollywood story-line is that the guy with a white hat is called a liar by the guy with a black hat. The black hat wants to kill kill white hat by making WH start the fight.
      White hat must leave and not take the bait.
      Thr fact in law is otherwise. You’re accosted by a robber with a weapon, demanding your wallet. If you try to run you will likely be smacked in the head with a baseball bat or stabbed in the back or perhaps shot.
      Not having SYG in Wyoming means you cannot draw your gun and order the robber to drop their weapon until you have tried to retreat.
      In some states drawing a gun that you don’t actually shoot can be considered as a crime and not self-defense because drawing a gun is considered to be Use of Deadly Force and since you did not shoot the DA can claim you really were not in immediate peril because you didn’t shoot.
      Kansas recently changed the law to make it clear that it was not a crime to not shoot.
      I would encourage Wyoming legislators to contact Kansas Attorney General Derek Schmidt for adice.

      KANSAS’ SELF-DEFENSE & DEFENSE OF OTHERS STATUTES
      K.S.A. 2011 Supp. §§ 21-5220 through 21-5231
      21-5220. Use of force; construction and application. [Amends K.S.A. 2010 Supp. § 21-3220]
      The provisions of this act are to be construed and applied retroactively.
      History: L. 2010, ch. 124, § 1; April 29.
      21-5221. Use of force; definitions. [Amends K.S.A. 2010 Supp. § 21-3221]
      (a) As used in article 32 of chapter 21 of the Kansas Statutes Annotated, and amendments
      thereto:
      (1) “Use of force” means any or all of the following directed at or upon another person or
      thing:
      (A) Words or actions that reasonably convey the threat of force, including threats to
      cause death or great bodily harm to a person;
      (B) the presentation or display of the means of force; or
      (C) the application of physical force, including by a weapon or through the actions of
      another.
      (2) “Use of deadly force” means the application of any physical force described in
      paragraph (1) which is likely to cause death or great bodily harm to a person. Any threat to cause
      death or great bodily harm, including, but not limited to, by the display or production of a
      weapon, shall not constitute use of deadly force, so long as the actor’s purpose is limited to
      creating an apprehension that the actor will, if necessary, use deadly force in defense of such
      actor or another or to affect a lawful arrest.
      (b) An actor who threatens deadly force as described in subsection (a)(1) shall be subject
      to the determination in subsection (a) of K.S.A. 21- 5222, and amendments thereto, and not to
      the determination in subsection (b) of K.S.A. 21-5222, and amendments thereto.
      History: L. 2010, ch. 124, § 1; April 29.
      21-5222. Use of force in defense of a person. [Amends K.S.A. 2010 Supp. § 21-3211]
      (a) A person is justified in the use of force against another when and to the extent it
      appears to such person and such person reasonably believes that such use of force is necessary to
      defend such person or a third person against such other’s imminent use of unlawful force.
      (b) A person is justified in the use of deadly force under circumstances described in
      subsection (a) if such person reasonably believes that such use of deadly force is necessary to
      prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to such person or a third person.
      (c) Nothing in this section shall require a person to retreat if such person is using force to
      protect such person or a third person.
      History: L. 1969, ch. 180, § 21-3211; L. 2006, ch. 194, § 3; L. 2010, ch. 124, § 4; L. 2010, ch.
      136, § 21; L. 2011, ch. 30, § 7, July 1.

      1. Jim, working to get a Stand Your Ground Law on the books is a very good and laudable thing – but the lack of such a statute is not necessarily a death sentence in lethal confrontations.

        You will find that the requirement – in every state – to attempt retreat is accompanied by an interesting proviso. Retreat must be attempted, yes, but ONLY if it can specifically and rationally be done “safely”… No one is lawfully required to run into danger, and it would very difficult for a prosecutor to convince a jury that stupidly exposing yourself to unavoidable violence – without any realistic expectation of successfully evading that violence – is justified.

        Absent the ability to outrun bullets, or absent the time to adequately search for a safe escape route, or absent the ability to move adequately with physical impediments (or with children), etc… can indeed be successfully used as a legal defense in court for not retreating before using deadly force (presuming deadly force is reasonably and sanely a requirement under the exigent circumstances).

    2. I AM MY OWN FIRST RESPONDER…..Thankfully LEO/FIRE/EMT’s (God Bless them ALL!) are my backup in a real self / family defense scenario both inside & outside the home and the perp(s) need to be grateful that these pro’s are enroute to the likely last attempted felony crime scene of theirs before a lengthy hospital stay followed by hopefully an lengthy prison term……….or not!
      Yes….it will be articulated that a full retreat was in progress or attempted at the time of using lethal/deadly force to stop the perp(s) intended murderous intentions.
      The way to tell if the perp(s) have murderous intentions is due to the presence of multiple perp(s) and/or the presence of any perceived weapons of any sort or kind…….unless you are elderly, feeble, physically disabled( a 2A response) or a snowflake ( just roll with it & hope for the best immediately afterwards head for a safe space & a latte ) otherwise just b!tch-slap the turd and carry on with your day as a non-2A response would be prudent.

      1. The problem here is that a lot of our reps and state Senators talk a good line, then vote otherwise. We have been in a yearly fight against incremental as well as overt attacks on our 2A rights seemingly forever.

      2. Not intending to be critical of you personally, but you really should stop referencing “sensible” and “common sense”… which have been so horribly misused and abused by the Liberals that the instant it occurs in a sentence, sane people (ie, conservatives) roll their eyes and stop listening. After all, common sense is only “common” to those who actually have it !!

        Conservatives have many other vocabulary options… “responsible,” “fact-based,” “honest,” “accurate,” “lawful,” “constitutional,” etc and – for the sake of persuasion (past mere “talking points”) – we need to take an intelligent path to explaining our position.

    Leave a Comment 6 Comments

    Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *