Booby Trap Laws: Are They a Thing?

The hit film Home Alone is packed with valuable life lessons, from resourcefulness and overcoming fears to, most famously, using booby traps. With its iconic scenes involving hot irons, flamethrowers, and paint cans, the movie makes booby traps seem like a clever way to protect your home. However, not everything in the movies is as glamorous or true as it appears. In reality, important booby trap laws could throw a wrench in your next big home protection plan!

Booby Trapped Moped: Is This Crossing The Line? 

There’s seemingly no end to viral videos of insane pranks. The clip above may take the cake for pranks, taking a turn for the dangerous. 

The video shows a man walking up to a supposedly booby-trapped moped. The moped looks normal, so the man hops on, ready to ride into the sunset with his new stolen ride. As the man takes off, it appears he has a rocky start, but he eventually begins to settle himself out. 

The prank becomes clear as a mini airbag inflates underneath the man’s seat. As expected, this causes him to swerve and fly off the moped. Although the video claims the man wasn’t injured, many wonder if booby trap laws could allow him to sue for damages.

An Attorney’s Take On Booby Trap Laws 

According to Ugo Lord, there are plenty of ways a person can defend their homes and property from thieves. The issue comes when people deliberately set booby traps to protect their property in malicious and harmful ways. There is a clear and much-needed delineation between protecting your property and devising ways to hurt others in the process. 

Situations involving dangerous booby traps have been brought to the Supreme Court. Historical cases of this nature have often resulted in the same conclusion: booby traps are not legal under U.S. law. Any injuries or damages caused by booby traps can result in their creator receiving civil or even criminal charges. 

Katko V. Briney: A Historic Booby Trap Case 

One case that has been touted as the originator of booby trap laws is Katko V. Briney. The Brineys owned an abandoned farmhouse, a popular spot for looters on their property. They created a spring-loaded shotgun booby trap that would fire on anyone who entered a bedroom in the home. 

A man named Marvin Katko entered the home to loot antique jars, and the booby trap shot him at point-blank range. Luckily, the shot only hit his leg, but it caused enough damage to land Katko in the hospital for 40 days, along with physical and mental trauma.

The Iowa Supreme Court ultimately heard the case and held the Briney family responsible for the injuries they caused to Katko. The court also ruled that U.S. law prohibits booby traps. Under the so-called booby trap law, no person should face jeopardy while attempting to protect land, property, or personal goods.

Lawmakers implemented booby trap laws not only for pre-emptive protection but also because booby traps can harm people without explicit warning. For instance, kids may play near abandoned structures, or others might accidentally approach abandoned places and get hurt without malicious intent.

Booby Traps vs. The Castle Doctrine 

Many people quickly confuse the differences between booby traps and the castle doctrine. The castle doctrine is a legal idea that allows one to protect themselves if they are in immediate danger. On the other hand, booby traps are devices that have the potential to injure anyone that comes across them without any regard for self-defense. To better understand the difference between these two ideas, it may be helpful to understand what each is separately: 

• The castle doctrine is a self-defense concept that protects the use of defensive force. The doctrine removes the duty to retreat, allowing one to use force for self-defense. Specific rules of the doctrine differ by jurisdiction. Most areas have similar rules, such as the force used to defend must be proportional to the force of the incoming threat. 
• Booby traps are devices that are meant to cause bodily injury when triggered by an unsuspecting party. Unlike the castle doctrine, booby traps are set up before anyone perceives a threat. Combined with their inability to be a proportional force in all situations, they do not fall under the protections of the castle doctrine. 

The main difference between these two is that the castle doctrine protects those actively facing a threat. In contrast, booby traps are devices designed to injure anyone who triggers them, regardless of whether they pose a threat.

There Are Better Ways to Protect Your Home 

If booby trap laws make booby traps illegal, then what are some other ways you can protect your home? 

There are many great legal methods you can use to protect your home or property. Most methods rely on deterring criminals rather than injuring them after they have stolen from you. Some better methods you can use include: 

• Motion-sensing lights. 
• Securing doors, windows, and locks. 
• Security signs and warning signs.
• Having dogs or other pets around your property. 
• Security cameras. 

In addition to these basic methods, experts commonly suggest signing up for a professional security service, especially in high-crime areas. Regardless of your choice, it’s important to understand where booby trap laws and litigation intersect in legally protecting your home and property.