S

On Feb. 14, the Metro Nashville Police Department announced the arrest of a 19-year-old for allegedly shooting into a Whites Creek-area home, wounding a resident inside. The gunfire came, police said, after the resident yelled through the window at people “who were lurking around his pickup truck parked in the driveway.”

The incident was a frightening example of a scenario the department had warned about just days earlier. On Feb. 10, the MNPD posted a clip of Ring camera footage on social media of several individuals who appeared to be holding guns as they broke into a parked car.

“AN IMPORTANT REMINDER,” the caption read, “if you see something, say something by calling 911. DO NOT ENGAGE car burglars, they may be armed!”

But a bill at the state legislature seems to contradict that warning from local law enforcement. The proposed legislation — HB 856 / SB 1407, sponsored by Rep. Kip Capley (R-Summertown) and Sen. Joey Hensley (R-Hohenwald) — would lower the standard for using deadly force to protect property. As written, it states that a person would be legally justified in using lethal force if they believe it is “immediately necessary to prevent or terminate the other’s actual or attempted trespass; arson; damage to property; burglary; theft; robbery; or aggravated cruelty to animals, serious bodily injury, or death to animals or livestock.”

Currently, state law states that a person is justified in “threatening or using force” against another person if “it is reasonably believed the force is immediately necessary” to protect property. Deadly force is explicitly not justified when property is the only concern.

Hensley told the Banner that he and Capley “felt like people should be able to protect their property from an invader, from a robber, from a looter.”

“Now, even if somebody is robbing you, if somebody is on your property, you have limited ability to defend yourself or your property,” he said.

When asked whether any particular incidents inspired the bill, he said he “didn’t have any specific cases, but I’ve certainly heard of cases over the years.”

Hensley said he didn’t believe the bill’s intent was inconsistent with recent police warnings to residents not to engage with car burglars.

“We’re certainly not encouraging people to try to apprehend someone that’s armed,” he said. “We don’t want people to be harmed by trying to defend their property.”

But he also said that the law should protect a person who tries to do so.

“I think people should be able to do something to prevent those things,” he said. “Somebody shouldn’t be breaking into a car. They should realize they’re taking their life in their hands if they’re committing a crime. Now, a lot of times, looters, robbers, burglars aren’t too afraid of that.”

“We don’t advocate somebody just shooting somebody,” he added, “but at least being able to pull a gun on them and hold them until the police come.”

If a person does shoot someone in that situation, he said, “they’d go to court and have to defend why they did it. This just would give them more leeway to have some law to back them up.”

MNPD spokesperson Kris Mumford told the Banner that the department has not reviewed the proposed legislation and has no position on it. The Tennessee Association of Chiefs of Police did not respond to a request for comment.

However, the bill will be opposed by at least one group representing law enforcement officials across the state. The Tennessee District Attorneys General Conference, which includes local district attorneys, has voted to oppose the bill, conference spokesperson Elizabeth Dixon said. The group believes it “will not advance public safety and will create confusion around the well-established concepts of self-defense, defense of others, and defense of property.”

This article is courtesy of the Nashville Banner. Sign up for the Nashville Banner’s newsletters here.