AN ACT to amend Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 39, relative to the defense of property.
Summary
SB1847 expands Tennessee’s justification for using deadly force in defense of property. The bill amends the state’s defense-of-property statute to allow a person who is lawfully in their residence, and who is not engaged in conduct that would itself be a felony or Class A misdemeanor, to use deadly force against another person when the person reasonably believes it is immediately necessary to stop an imminent arson, burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, or aggravated cruelty to animals. The bill also requires the person to reasonably believe the property cannot be protected or the other person’s actions cannot be stopped by any other means.
The bill further ties this authority to situations involving serious personal danger: deadly force is justified only if there is an imminent danger of death, serious bodily injury, or grave sexual abuse to the person or a third person, or if using lesser force would expose someone to that level of risk. It also updates related cross-references in Tennessee law so that other statutes referring to self-defense and defense of third persons now also include the protection-of-property statute, and it makes a related conforming change to another section addressing use-of-force defenses. The act takes effect July 1, 2026.
Impact
SB1847 amends Tennessee Code Annotated Title 39, specifically Section 39-11-614 and related cross-references in Sections 39-11-621 and 39-11-616, to broaden and clarify when deadly force may be used in defense of property within a lawful residence. It changes the legal standard for property-defense justification and aligns other use-of-force provisions with the expanded statute, affecting criminal liability and affirmative defenses in cases involving home defense, property crimes, and certain violent threats.
Sentiment
The bill appears to have received generally favorable support, moving through the Senate Judiciary Committee with a 7-1 recommendation and passing floor votes by clear margins, including final passage and concurrence on a House amendment. The voting pattern suggests broad legislative approval, though not unanimous, indicating some concern or hesitation among a minority of members about expanding deadly-force authority.
Contention
The main point of contention is the expansion of deadly-force justification in defense of property, especially because it applies in a residence and includes offenses such as burglary, robbery, arson, aggravated robbery, and aggravated cruelty to animals. Supporters likely viewed the bill as strengthening home and property protection, while opponents or dissenting members may have been concerned about the breadth of the force authorization, the risk of escalation, and whether the added language could lower the threshold for lethal force in property disputes. The recorded nays in committee and on the floor indicate that some legislators were uneasy with the scope of the change, even though the measure ultimately passed.
AN ACT to amend Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 16; Title 36; Title 37; Title 38; Title 39; Title 40; Title 49; Title 55 and Title 65, relative to weapons.
AN ACT to amend Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 16; Title 36; Title 37; Title 38; Title 39; Title 40; Title 49; Title 55 and Title 65, relative to weapons.
AN ACT to amend Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 16; Title 36; Title 37; Title 38; Title 39; Title 40; Title 49; Title 55 and Title 65, relative to firearms.