Bad Experience with Carmel PD

[Expat]

well too late. I mentioned the constitution, guess im screwed now.

We have had our eyes on your for some time comrade.

 

[Hotdoger]

I can only tell you with certainty that this entire thread was printed out and sitting on the prosecutor's desk during my trial.

Don't say anything here that will give the government a motive to drive an APC through your wall (nowadays, that sure ain't much).

Wonder if he knows that I think he is a dumb , no good, stupid ________ ________ !


BTW congrats!

 

[Kutnupe14]

First to Liberty. Congrats. I told you you'd get a "fair shake." In whichever way I leaned, I can respect that you proved your case, and prevailed. In terms of the purest sense of the law, justice was done.

(previous post before edit, I mis-read. I'm an idiot)

 

[firecop9774]

First to Liberty. Congrats. I told you you'd get a "fair shake." In whichever way I leaned, I can respect that you proved your case, and prevailed. In terms of the purest sense of the law, justice was done.

(previous post before edit, I mis-read. I'm an idiot)

I liked your response before the edit......

 

[INGunGuy]

LS, Congrats I have to say I am impressed. I would think at the LEAST, you would be able to recoup your expenses for defending yourself in a small claims lawsuit. Law prevailed.

INGunGuy

 

[T.Lex]

Wonder if he knows that I think he is a dumb , no good, stupid ________ ________ !

haha

If you didn't, it would mean I hadn't done my job very well.

First and foremost, a tip of my hat to LS and his attorney, who did a capable job representing him. IMHO, it was a well-fought fight. One side wins, one side loses, but the process should keep its integrity.

Second, let me try to dispel any paranoia about "monitoring" of this site. When I go into court, I want to be the most prepared attorney in that courtroom. So, I spend more than the usual amount of time researching. LS has a certain... footprint... on the internet. It took me awhile to find this particular thread, but... I am good at what I do.

Third, a little about me. I basically grew up in Carmel, the product of a military family. I guess you guys in the courtroom didn't pick up on it, or chose to ignore it, but I'm an avid (and responsible) gun owner, with a LTCH myself. I worked for the City when this case started, but no longer do - I am with a firm. A firm that has a very specific policy about what its attorneys can and cannot talk about. Oh - one other thing, years ago, under a different nickname, I frequented several gun boards (and rec.guns back in the day) not much different from this one. So, between Atterbury and the other gun ranges around, and other gun boards, I've probably met most of you IRL or virtually in one place or another.

Finally, allow me to address The Case. Carmel has the best police officers around. To turn around something someone said up-thread, if you treat them right, they will be your best ally - and that includes gun rights. (There was one officer I had my doubts about, but he's gone. Kutnupe probably knows who I mean.) They are great cops. They are not, and we do not want them to be, lawyers. Sgt. Miller was ABSOLUTELY justified in citing LS. Maybe it was self defense, maybe it wasn't. But, as the judge said on the bench, that's for the judge to figure out. It wasn't personal to him, just like the hundreds of arrests LS made weren't personal. You all make it out like he was out to get LS. He wasn't. The only person making it personal was LS on this board.

Also, to LS - I really do think you were reckless. Indiana does (thank God) have a liberal self defense law, as well as a relatively liberal carry permit law. But, as you noted earlier, just because you can do something doesn't mean you should. IMNSHO, you should've shot the f'n dog.

In my 7 years with Carmel, this was only the second ticket that I think has been issued on that ordinance. The first was a depressed guy shooting at chipmunks from his back porch.... toward Keystone. :doh: We did a guilty plea with him. The reality is that until now, we didn't have a clear idea of how our ordinance would fit into the self defense framework. Now we do. (In retrospect, I'm pretty sure I could've convinced the judge the dogs weren't vicious, too.)

Anyway, I'm not sure how much I'll be able to check back on this thread. I have gone to a firm now, so I don't have alot of free time, especially with soccer season coming up with my kids. But, I will try.

Oh - and Judge Poindexter is one of the finest judges I've ever practiced in front of. I'm not sure how long he will stay in that court, but Carmel is lucky to have him as long as he stays. He was a damn good prosecutor in Marion County, but he's a better judge.

And I can't resist this, either. Most of you in Indiana are either going to have primaries in May, or a general election in November (or both) for local government officials. Do your homework and vote! All politics is local. It may seem like petty stuff, but those people wield much control over our daily lives.

Si vis pacem, para bellum. Take care.

 

[Benny]

Also, to LS - I really do think you were reckless. Indiana does (thank God) have a liberal self defense law, as well as a relatively liberal carry permit law. But, as you noted earlier, just because you can do something doesn't mean you should. IMNSHO, you should've shot the f'n dog.

Did you miss the part where he said he was only 99% sure he could have dispatched the dogs without a mishap and 99% isn't good enough?

Maybe you are OK with taking a 1% chance of killing/harming an innocent person when shooting(in the only safe direction) into the ground could do the job, but he wasn't.

 

[T.Lex]

Yep. I also caught the part where firing at that angle would mostly jeopardize him. I also caught the part where he wasn't 100% sure there weren't people in the direction he DID fire. His sureness was ~ 99% either direction.

It would've been 1 round, and chances are really good it would've embedded in the mutt.

Look, I'm not here to beat him up - he won, fair and square. But, getting back to what he said in court, he had a split second to make a judgment call. He made the one he thought was right. I would've made a different one (I think). I would've made the decision that I've been taught to make by my grandfather and every person I've talked to about tactical shooting.

Eliminate the threat.

My opinion - and that's what it is - is that there was no greater danger shooting at the angle he did toward the dog, as away from it.

 

[Benny]

My opinion - and that's what it is - is that there was no greater danger shooting at the angle he did toward the dog, as away from it.

Except everyone(including the dog) is still alive. Even if the odds of him harming someone are the same in all directions, maybe he didn't want to kill a dog just because the owner is stupid and has trouble keeping his dogs in check.

 

[Jack Ryan]

I'm guessing you shoot guns around your dogs then. My dogs used to be scared out of their wits whenever fireworks would go off, even at a fair distance.

I try to keep them away from it unless we are hunting something but they all get out there in the way. You can't scare them away with it short of shooting them. The one I've got right now will just stand there and watch the ground splatter around in front of her like she's watching for a mole to pop out of the ground. I'm always worried about their hearing because I think my old dog was pretty much deaf by the time he died.

 

[T.Lex]

@ Benny-
No good deed goes unpunished.

(Side note, I believe the dog owner got a citation for having his dogs loose, but paid it.)

I suspect most people in this thread have already done this, but people should look at this as learning opportunity. People should really REALLY examine what they would do in a situation like this. The little things - at what point do you pull your weapon out? At what point do you take the safety off (if your weapon has one, obviously)? At what point do you commit to the shot?

There are fine lines running along each of those decisions. And keep in mind, people across Indiana have been arrested (not just cited, as LS was) for even just showing a pistol in their waistband.

If the wrong civilian had seen LS that day, the call to the police might've been that there's some maniac shooting at friendly neighborhood dogs! (Ok, that's a bit of a stretch, but you never really know what non-gun-people will think that they see.)

 

[Benny]

I try to keep them away from it unless we are hunting something but they all get out there in the way. You can't scare them away with it short of shooting them. The one I've got right now will just stand there and watch the ground splatter around in front of her like she's watching for a mole to pop out of the ground. I'm always worried about their hearing because I think my old dog was pretty much deaf by the time he died.

The only dogs I've owned are German Shepherds and for that reason, I wouldn't ever take them shooting with me...I want their ears crisp and ready to hear any bump in the night.

If I want a dog to take shooting with me, I'll get one with floppy ears(more than likely it would be a lab).

 

[Benny]

@ Benny-
No good deed goes unpunished.

(Side note, I believe the dog owner got a citation for having his dogs loose, but paid it.)

I suspect most people in this thread have already done this, but people should look at this as learning opportunity. People should really REALLY examine what they would do in a situation like this. The little things - at what point do you pull your weapon out? At what point do you take the safety off (if your weapon has one, obviously)? At what point do you commit to the shot?

There are fine lines running along each of those decisions. And keep in mind, people across Indiana have been arrested (not just cited, as LS was) for even just showing a pistol in their waistband.

If the wrong civilian had seen LS that day, the call to the police might've been that there's some maniac shooting at friendly neighborhood dogs! (Ok, that's a bit of a stretch, but you never really know what non-gun-people will think that they see.)

1. I agree with your first sentence, but that doesn't mean it's right.

2. Were the people that got arrested intimidating someone without reason? If so, they deserved it...In LS's case, he wasn't intimidating anyone, unless you think the sight of a gun to a dog means something.

3. Friendly neighborhood dogs unleashed and trespassing in his yard(yeah, "trespassing" may not be the correct word for a dog, but IANAL).

4. To quote someone, use this button:

. It's at the bottom right of your post window. If you want to quote multiple people, use this button:

. It is directly to the right of the quote button.

 

[Rookie]

I have to say that I am very impressed that you chose to respond to this thread. It takes someone with good character to defend their actions knowing they probably aren't going to be popular.

I retract my earlier statement and apologize for my assumptions.

 

[ATM]

I retract nothing.

And my assumptions are always correct.

 

[Rookie]

Blah, blah, bacon, blah.

 

[E5RANGER375]

@ Benny-
No good deed goes unpunished.

(Side note, I believe the dog owner got a citation for having his dogs loose, but paid it.)

I suspect most people in this thread have already done this, but people should look at this as learning opportunity. People should really REALLY examine what they would do in a situation like this. The little things - at what point do you pull your weapon out? At what point do you take the safety off (if your weapon has one, obviously)? At what point do you commit to the shot?

There are fine lines running along each of those decisions. And keep in mind, people across Indiana have been arrested (not just cited, as LS was) for even just showing a pistol in their waistband.

If the wrong civilian had seen LS that day, the call to the police might've been that there's some maniac shooting at friendly neighborhood dogs! (Ok, that's a bit of a stretch, but you never really know what non-gun-people will think that they see.)

1. you lost. get over yourself.

2. he didnt necessarily win, The man was innocent. He had to defend his freedoms from a police department and you who were wrong and tried to oppress him.

3. your city has lost business over this case. My family and I eat out everyday and will never set foot in your city again because of this. plus my wife likes to shop ... but will never do so in carmel again.

4. great, your a gun owner so was hitler. so does it really matter? nor will it win you any friend points.

5. did I mention you lost because you had no case by the law?

6. did you really just try to in a way compare Liberty to the guy who was popping chipmonks? come on.

7. you work for a private firm now ... good. at least tax payers wont have to pay for witch hunts anymore.

 

[Roadie]

@ Benny-
No good deed goes unpunished.

(Side note, I believe the dog owner got a citation for having his dogs loose, but paid it.)

I suspect most people in this thread have already done this, but people should look at this as learning opportunity. People should really REALLY examine what they would do in a situation like this. The little things - at what point do you pull your weapon out? At what point do you take the safety off (if your weapon has one, obviously)? At what point do you commit to the shot?

There are fine lines running along each of those decisions. And keep in mind, people across Indiana have been arrested (not just cited, as LS was) for even just showing a pistol in their waistband.

If the wrong civilian had seen LS that day, the call to the police might've been that there's some maniac shooting at friendly neighborhood dogs! (Ok, that's a bit of a stretch, but you never really know what non-gun-people will think that they see.)

Really??

Under what IC? Indiana has no brandishing law, so how can "showing a pistol in their waistband" result in an arrest? I find it hard to believe that there were not other extenuating circumstances, ie a threat.

 

[E5RANGER375]

Really??

Under what IC? Indiana has no brandishing law, so how can "showing a pistol in their waistband" result in an arrest? I find it hard to believe that there were not other extenuating circumstances, ie a threat.

good thing he didnt say OC was illegal or wrong ....... this thread might have turned into 500 pages before i have my morning coffee

 

[Benny]

good thing he didnt say OC was illegal or wrong ....... this thread might have turned into 500 pages before i have my morning coffee

Dammit dude, you didn't give him enough time!