>Castle doctrine is scary

Not having castle doctrine is equally if not more scary. The idea that I could wind up in jail because I didn't make enough effort to retreat within my own home is not exactly comforting. The idea that one has to retreat within their own home or personal vehicle is just kind of absurd to begin with. I can through my own actions greatly reduce the (already minuscule) chances of getting shot by someone else in their home. I cannot through my own actions effect (or at least not to nearly the same extent) the chances of having my life threatened by someone else.

I don't live somewhere "nice" by HN standards (I'm perfectly fine with where I live). While my house will probably never be robbed it will also probably never catch on fire yet I have smoke alarms and a couple fire extinguishers.

>and appearance codes as well, sometimes for practical reasons, often purely for aesthetics.

This is the HOA-esque behavior I'm talking about. Yes, it's common in suburbs of SF, on Long island, etc. It's not the norm.

I'm not sure I'd say HOAs are common in the suburbs of SF. Maybe the exurbs. HOAs are more common in what you might call sprawl, newer neighborhoods, and most suburbs of SF are old enough that they don't have HOAs. Unless you're talking, like, out in Danville or something.

I agree in general about castle doctrine, BTW. The laws aren’t always clear in their scope around when, where, and how you can defend yourself and if they are even constitutional. Inside of your home seems like an obvious place you don’t have to retreat.

Even California has castle doctrine laws.

Many are unaware that in the U.S. the police is not responsible for an individual's personal safety; see Warren v. District of Columbia, Town of Castle Rock v. Gonzales, etc.

> The idea that one has to retreat within their own home or personal vehicle is just kind of absurd to begin with.

If my home had two pairs of doors I'll be rushing through second one the moment I thought someone would try to brake in through the first one. Not because I had to, just because defending your stuff with your life and health is a bad choice. You have one life and body that will not be the same again after it's shot or stabbed or beaten, but you can always earn more money and get more stuff.

>You can always earn more money and get more stuff.

I can't just buy another wife

I thought it goes without saying that I'd grab her along the way. Unless she can move only in a wheelchair then I'd have to reconsider my position but we are getting into very specific scenarios.

I take it you're not a parent.

No. I'm not, but if I was, I'd grab my kid(s) on my way out. That's still prefferable to keeping them in wooden house of flying bullets.

Trayvon Martin was an application of "Stand Your Ground", not the Castle Doctrine.

> Castle doctrine is scary.

only if you spend a lot of time in other people's houses uninvited.

It depends on the state. Castle doctrine laws and stand your ground laws often get intertwined in some states. It isn’t a properly simple term to define.