Thanks, Charlie, for the Castle Doctrine

Clarion-Ledger journos David Hampton and Sid Salter approach the sad story of a store clerk shooting a would-be robber from two different angles.

I tend to agree with both of them.

First, from Sid:

This really isn't a Castle Doctrine case. But it's understandable that the clerk was frightened, isolated and might well have been in fear for his life.

Is a case of beer worth a man's life? Of course not. Did the clerk make a terrible mistake in shooting Hawthorne in the heat of the moment? Yes. But this incident didn't happen in a vacuum. Consider these facts.

• Convenience store clerk Daljit Singh, 51, was shot in the abdomen during a robbery on Nov. 3, 2005, and died later at University of Mississippi Medical Center.
• Convenience store clerk Manav Virmani was shot twice at close range at Mac's Convenience Store on July 2, 2001. Virmani, a college student working at the store in Canton for the summer, was shot as he prepared to close the store.

But what David says cannot be ignored:

For one thing, people misunderstand the Castle Doctrine. It is not a license to kill. It is a license to protect, yes, but not kill for some offense which does not threaten life or even rise to the need to protect home or vehicle.

The Castle Doctrine was little more than former Sen. Charlie Ross trying to put a tough-as-nails feather in his cap for his then-yet-to-happen run for lieutenant governor.

It seems all the Castle Doctrine left us with was a two-time loser in Ross (see here and here) and what could be years of confusion and despair, as is the case in this incident. (Let's not forget, however, that the shooter allegedly followed the would-be robber outside and shot him in his car. That should offer some perspective here.)

Mind you, what happened in the store is not Charlie Ross' fault. I would never intimate such a thing, as should no one else. But that doesn't change David's point:

At the same time, I thought the Mississippi Legislature's approval of the so-called Castle Doctrine was a mistake because it would be misunderstood, wrongly interpretted and result in tragedy. We now have an example of what I feared.

Thanks, Charlie.