Definition
In law, "forcible" describes conduct accomplished through the use of physical force, threats of force, or coercion sufficient to overcome resistance or compulsion. The term most commonly appears as a modifier in compound legal phrases rather than standing alone as an independent term of art.
Key legal uses include:
1. FORCIBLE ENTRY: The act of entering real property in the possession of another by physical force or intimidation, without legal right or authority. Distinct from simple trespass by the element of force or threat.
2. FORCIBLE DETAINER: Wrongfully retaining possession of real property by force or threats after the right to possession has ended. Typically the second stage of a forcible entry and detainer (FED) action.
3. FORCIBLE RAPE / FORCIBLE SEXUAL ASSAULT: Sexual conduct accomplished against the victim's will through physical force, threat of force, or incapacitation. The modifier historically distinguished rape requiring proof of physical resistance from other forms of non-consensual sexual conduct. Modern criminal codes have largely replaced this framing.
4. FORCIBLE FELONY: A statutory category in many jurisdictions encompassing violent crimes — including murder, robbery, burglary, arson, and rape — that may trigger enhanced penalties, self-defense rights, or felony-murder liability.
In each context, "forcible" signals that the underlying wrongful act was accomplished not merely by stealth, deception, or legal maneuvering, but through actual or threatened physical compulsion.
Common Language
Modern common usage (Wiktionary): Done by force; having physical force; having a powerful effect; convincing or effective.
Historical common usage (Webster's 1913): Possessing force; characterized by force, efficiency, or energy; powerful; efficacious; impressive; influential — used broadly to describe anything from rhetoric to physical strength.
The gap between ordinary and legal meaning is meaningful in one specific direction: in common usage, "forcible" can describe anything vigorous or persuasive — a forcible argument, a forcible style of writing. In legal usage, the term is nearly always anchored to physical force or its threat. A legally "forcible" act cannot be established by mere verbal persuasion or economic pressure; some element of physical compulsion or intimidation must be present. Researchers encountering the word in older texts should not assume the modern common meaning applies.
Common Confusion
FORCIBLE vs. VIOLENT: These terms overlap but are not synonymous. "Violent" typically requires actual physical force causing harm. "Forcible" can be satisfied by threats or intimidation that compel compliance without actual physical contact — a landlord barring reentry with a show of arms may be guilty of forcible detainer without violence occurring.
FORCIBLE ENTRY vs. BREAKING AND ENTERING: Forcible entry into real property (a civil or quasi-criminal wrong giving rise to an FED proceeding) is distinct from breaking and entering as an element of common law burglary. The former focuses on possession of land; the latter focuses on criminal intent to commit a felony inside a structure.
FORCIBLE RAPE (historical) vs. RAPE: In jurisdictions that modernized their sexual assault statutes, the elimination of the word "forcible" was substantive, not cosmetic. Older statutes requiring proof that force was used or that the victim resisted have been replaced in most states by statutes focusing on lack of consent. Historical sources using "forcible rape" describe a narrower offense than modern non-consent-based rape statutes.
Why It Matters in Research
The word "forcible" is almost never the primary subject of research — it is a modifier, and its legal significance depends entirely on the noun it modifies. Researchers must identify the compound term (forcible entry, forcible detainer, forcible felony, forcible rape) and treat each as a distinct term of art with its own doctrinal history.
In property law research, the forcible entry and detainer action is a creature of statute in every American jurisdiction. The common law background matters for interpreting ambiguous statutory language, but the statutory text controls. Pre-20th century sources may describe FED proceedings that look quite different from summary eviction procedures in modern landlord-tenant codes.
In criminal law research, the shift away from "forcible" rape definitions is a significant doctrinal fault line. Sources predating the Model Penal Code reforms and the wave of state-level sexual assault statute overhauls (roughly 1970s–1990s) describe a different legal landscape. FBI Uniform Crime Reports used the term "forcible rape" in their definitions until 2012, which affects the comparability of crime statistics across decades.
In self-defense and firearms research, the term "forcible felony" is a statutory trigger in many stand-your-ground and castle doctrine provisions. The list of crimes qualifying as forcible felonies varies by state and controls the scope of justified use of deadly force. Do not assume a uniform definition across jurisdictions.
Rapalje & Lawrence's entry, as captured in the source material, appears to have been corrupted in transmission — the text shifts mid-sentence to an unrelated discussion of force in the context of trespass, rescous, and disseisin. What survives is nonetheless useful: the observation that "all force is contrary to law" reflects the deep common law presumption that any use of force to assert or defend a legal right, absent specific justification, is actionable. This background informs why "forcible" as a modifier elevates the gravity of the underlying wrong.
Historical Dictionary Support
The Rapalje & Lawrence entry, though fragmentary in the source material, contains a significant doctrinal statement: that force "of itself alone is criminal; or implied, as in every trespass, rescous, or disseisin." This reflects the common law maxim that force vitiates legal right — a party who might otherwise have a valid claim to possession forfeits procedural and substantive protections by resorting to force rather than legal process. Courts of equity applied this principle strictly; a landlord with an unimpeachable right to possession who forcibly ejected a tenant could still be liable for the manner of reentry.
Webster's 1913 illustrates the breadth of the common usage — biblical, rhetorical, scientific — which explains why legal draftsmen found it necessary to specify "forcible" in compound terms rather than relying on contextual meaning. The word alone was too general to carry legal weight without a noun to anchor it.
Modern legal dictionaries (Black's, Ballentine's) treat "forcible" primarily through its compounds. This is the right approach: the term functions as a legal intensifier marking physical compulsion as the operative fact, and its meaning is inseparable from the noun it modifies.
Jurisdictional Note
The definition of "forcible felony" varies considerably across state statutes and directly affects self-defense law, felony-murder doctrine, and sentencing enhancements. Similarly, the elements required to establish a "forcible entry" sufficient to support an FED action differ by state, particularly regarding what level of threat or intimidation (short of actual physical force) qualifies. Federal law uses "forcible" in specific statutory contexts (18 U.S.C. provisions on sexual abuse, for example) with definitions that may not track state law.