Did the indiana sd law change?

[glockman22]

I'm posting this because at work they hired a new guy who was a deputy in Marion Co. for 2 years. Well we were talking today at lunch and he said that indiana took the right to defend your self away. I'm thinking WTF I haven't heard any thing of this. So to all you officers on here is this guy telling the truth or is it all bs. I figured if they did we all would have heard about it somewhere. and by all my searching all the state laws I can find on the subject still state we can defend our selfs and do not have the duty to retreat. Any one with info on this?

 

[ElsiePeaRN]

I would certainly have asked him more questions about his statement. We still have the right to defend ourselves.

He is likely talking about the Indiana Supreme Court decision that states we do NOT have the right to defend ourselves against LEOs who are entering our homes, even if the entry is not legal.

https://www.indianagunowners.com/fo...ht_to_resist_illegal_cop_entry_into_home.html

 

[Kirk Freeman]

Any one with info on this?

http://www.in.gov/judiciary/opinions/pdf/05121101shd.pdf

 

[glockman22]

I would certainly have asked him more questions about his statement. We still have the right to defend ourselves.

He is likely talking about the Indiana Supreme Court decision that states we do NOT have the right to defend ourselves against LEOs who are entering our homes, even if the entry is not legal.

https://www.indianagunowners.com/fo...ht_to_resist_illegal_cop_entry_into_home.html

thanks for the replys, but he said this was like 4 or 5 years ago cause i asked when after he made the statement, he is also telling me some things about the requirements to be a conservation officer have changed which they might have, but either way i thought cop or not he obviously doesn't know as much as he thinks he does, if a state had the right to defend and then revoked it, it would be EVERYWHERE in the news and so fourth. I still think I would have heard about it if they did. So I am going to stick with the laws I have read and firmly understand, besides I hear laws, especially pertaining to fire arms, aren't exactly in the list of things officers are taught.

 

[Hiram2005]

Yeah, I had LEO's tell me if you shoot someone outside your house, to drag 'em inside before you call the cops too.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

glockman, did you hear this inside a gun shop?

4 or 5 years ago was 2006. Maybe he is thinking of the recodification of the lack of duty to retreat? (Indiana did not have a duty to retreat but when a state with a large number of electoral votes repealed their duty to retreat, Indiana had to join in the act).

 

[glockman22]

Yeah, I had LEO's tell me if you shoot someone outside your house, to drag 'em inside before you call the cops too.

HA, cops have told me and my dad that.

glockman, did you hear this inside a gun shop?

4 or 5 years ago was 2006. Maybe he is thinking of the recodification of the lack of duty to retreat? (Indiana did not have a duty to retreat but when a state with a large number of electoral votes repealed their duty to retreat, Indiana had to join in the act).

no we were at work, a tire store,lol. So I am kind of confused now, do we have the duty to retreat, or no?

 

[Titanium_Frost]

No duty to retreat. Castle Doctrine still applies to all but LEO (officially).

 

[a.bentonab]

Indiana did not have a duty to retreat but when a state with a large number of electoral votes repealed their duty to retreat, Indiana had to join in the act

Do tell

 

[Kirk Freeman]

Do tell

About what? Florida? What do you want me to tell about?

 

[Doug]

Yeah, I had LEO's tell me if you shoot someone outside your house, to drag 'em inside before you call the cops too.

Well, yes, of course.
If you can get the home-owner to falsify evidence, it makes getting a conviction sooo much easier.

Doug

 

[Colt556]

Here 's a clue....

He WAS a Deputy for TWO years....

NOW he works at a TIRE STORE.....

 

[bigus_D]

glockman, did you hear this inside a gun shop?

4 or 5 years ago was 2006. Maybe he is thinking of the recodification of the lack of duty to retreat? (Indiana did not have a duty to retreat but when a state with a large number of electoral votes repealed their duty to retreat, Indiana had to join in the act).

Do tell

About what? Florida? What do you want me to tell about?

Hmmm... I thought it was clear that he was looking for clarification on how the law was changed (according to your first post). I'm curious about the same thing... No, not florida.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

Hmmm... I thought it was clear that he was looking for clarification on how the law was changed (according to your first post). I'm curious about the same thing... No, not florida.

O.K., so, is this a crack about my age? Oh, Freeman's getting older so he must remember.

Well, kids, gather 'round, let Uncle Kirk get his cane and totter on over onto the cracker barrel to tell the story of the law that was not needed.

It was ayyy back in the year 2005, three years before the election of The One and the end of all our problems. I wore an onion on my belt which was the style at the time, I took the ferry to West Lafayette for a bee, which is what we called nickels. Give me five bees for a quarter, we'd say and that's when I saw Jay D. Rockefeller flying over in his . . . . wait, oh, yeah, the point.

In 2005 Florida which still had the duty to retreat before deadly force could be used changed their statute. The NRA, for some reason, thought all other states should do the same.

Indiana had eliminated the duty to retreat by Supreme Court decision in 1865. However, the General Assembly wrote the abolition (it was already abolished) into the Indiana Code with Public Law 189-2006 (P.L. 189-2006). You can find it today at Indiana Code 35-41-3-2.

 

[bigus_D]

I had misread your post thinking you were providing commentary that would support the ex-officer's assertion that we had had our rights reduced. Didn't mean to comment on your age, but you sound older than me. In my time it was all garlic on the belt. Those onion old timers didn't know scratch.

 

[a.bentonab]

About what? Florida? What do you want me to tell about?

I was under the impression that IN did not have a duty to retreat. When and why did this change?

**EDIT** I wrote the above before I saw another page of replies

But 35-41-3 states that IN does NOT have a duty to retreat
Three times in fact

 

[mrjarrell]

I was under the impression that IN did not have a duty to retreat. When and why did this change?

It didn't. It was just codified by the legislature. Apparently, they were bored and ignorant.

 

[a.bentonab]

glockman, did you hear this inside a gun shop?

4 or 5 years ago was 2006. Maybe he is thinking of the recodification of the lack of duty to retreat? (Indiana did not have a duty to retreat but when a state with a large number of electoral votes repealed their duty to retreat, Indiana had to join in the act).

OK I think I know what is going on here. The way I read it first, I read that IN didn't have a duty to retreat, but by IN "joining in on the act" they changed that so that IN did have a duty to retreat.

Instead, IN never had a duty to retreat, but when other states started repealing their duty to retreat laws, IN wanted to look cool too and therefore put a law on the books to say that IN doesn't have a duty to retreat, which some people are saying was unnecessary.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

Codification=>putting a law on the books.

I was under the impression that IN did not have a duty to retreat. When and why did this change?

From 1816 to 1865 Indiana DID have a duty to retreat before applying deadly force in the self-defense.

In 1865 with the Civil War to give an very vivid example of the dangers of turning your back to the enemy, the Indiana Supreme Court did away with the duty to retreat.

From 1865 to 2006 Indiana had no duty to retreat by judicial determination. There was no "law on the books" but the courts did not require a duty to retreat.

In 2005 a state with many electoral votes, Florida, was the very first state in the Union (according to the media because power is to the media what sugar is to ants) to abolish by statute the duty to retreat. NRA decided that it needed follow on victories to score political points.

In 2006 a friendly Indiana General Assembly voted to codify (put a law in writing) the no duty to retreat rule which it did in P.L. 189-2006. NRA put out a great "victory" press release and those of us involved in the law just and went on.

IN wanted to look cool too and therefore put a law on the books to say that IN doesn't have a duty to retreat, which some people are saying was unnecessary

We wanted to sit at the cool kids' table.

 

[glockman22]

thanks for all the info freeman, I love learning. And thanks to all others who replied. I thought that guy was full of it.