From the Billings Gazette:

“These are situations where milliseconds matter and even a spark of doubt can have life-threatening impacts – we need to change Montana’s self-defense law,” Fox said.

Fox’s stance is considerably softer than one proposed previously by conservative lawmakers who would have allowed people to open fire with immunity just about anywhere they reasonably felt threatened.

Reaction to Fox’s proposal was mixed. Politicians, peace officers and even Fox’s opponent agreed that when at home people should be able to defend themselves even it means killing someone.

Some argue, however, that Montanans already have the right to defend their homes without a “castle doctrine,” so named from the phrase that a man’s home is his castle.

Jim Smith, executive director of the Montana Sheriff’s and Peace Officer’s Association, said legislative fights over self-defense laws turned ugly during the 2007 Legislature, as

Democrats and law enforcement officers argued that it wasn’t necessary to soften laws governing when it was appropriate to kill someone.

“I remember Senator Jesse Laslovich’s (D-Anaconda) comment during the Senate committee action. He said there’s nothing wrong with Montana law as it relates to self-defense,” Smith said. “I think there’s a question about whether the castle doctrine is needed in Montana.”

Read the Rest…