Quick reference guide for handgun and self defense laws

[finity]

Indiana Law Guidelines for Handguns and Self Defense
·You must carry your handgun license anytime you are transporting your handgun.
·Do not point your handgun at anyone unless you intend to use justified deadly force.

I think you should change this to read "Do not use deadly force (gun, knife, club, other, etc) unless you or someone else is in fear of severe bodily harm". Pointing a handgun is not only restricted to when deadly force is justified. (IC 35-47-4-3)

At best, the way you have it written it is a moral judgement, not a law. Try not to confuse the two.

·No firearms carry on commercial aircraft or in secure areas of airports.
·No firearms on school property, unless you have your license and are picking up or dropping off a person at the school and you and the firearm remain in the vehicle.

The prohibition on firearms on school property is for all firearms not just handguns. You do not need a license to carry a long gun onto school property as long as both you & the gun stay in the vehicle.

You always (generally) need a LTCH if you carry a handgun off your property anyway, so including it is redundant.

Get rid of the license requirement wording.

·Cities and towns may have their own ordinances concerning weapons.
·You can use deadly force (firearms & knives) to prevent;
[FONT=&quot]o[/FONT]Serious bodily injury to yourself or someone else,
[FONT=&quot]o[/FONT]A threat of deadly force, or bodily injury, to yourself or someone else;
[FONT=&quot]o[/FONT]Someone from breaking in or damaging your home, or the car you are currently in,

Agreed but remember, deadly force is not just guns & knives. Anything that can be used to kill someone (club, car, fork, electrocution, etc.) is deadly force, too.

[FONT=&quot]o[/FONT]Trespass on with unlawful force, or criminal interference with, a property you or your family own, or a property that you are authorized to protect,
[FONT=&quot]o[/FONT]An airplane hijacking.

Ok here's where there's a problem. You can't use deadly force in the above situations UNLESS they are also threatening you with bodily harm while stealing your property or trespassing.

You CAN use reasonable force (which could include pointing a gun at them - see above) to prevent a property crime.

Get rid of the above statement.

There are a few other "no carry" zones as well:


- Penal facilities, shelters, halfway houses, etc.
- The Indiana State Fair (you can lock it in your car)
- Riverboat casinos
- The Indiana Statehouse and Government Center
- Federal buildings & other federal property (military bases, etc. & until February, national parks)

 

[jason867]

Well dang, already printed out a sheet of them on cards...

 

[mk2ja]

Well dang, already printed out a sheet of them on cards...

Add a "last updated" field in the corner, then from now on you can know how current that card is.

 

[jason867]

good idea

 

[SootKing]

alright heres a question...if someone gets out and starts beating the hell out of my truck with a bat or something and i feel threatened.. i can get out and shoot AND kill them?

 

[2ADMNLOVER]

alright heres a question...if someone gets out and starts beating the hell out of my truck with a bat or something and i feel threatened.. i can get out and shoot AND kill them?

In short , no .

 

[mk2ja]

alright heres a question...if someone gets out and starts beating the hell out of my truck with a bat or something and i feel threatened.. i can get out and shoot AND kill them?

In short , no .

You sure, 2ADMN? I'm looking at IC 35-41-3-2.

(b) A person:
(1) is justified in using reasonable force, including deadly force, against another person; and
(2) does not have a duty to retreat;
if the person reasonably believes that the force is necessary to prevent or terminate the other person's unlawful entry of or attack on the person's dwelling, curtilage, or occupied motor vehicle.

(emphasis added)

Sounds to me like it is pretty clear that the exact situation described by SootKing is grounds for the use of lethal force.

 

[finity]

You sure, 2ADMN? I'm looking at IC 35-41-3-2.

(emphasis added)

Sounds to me like it is pretty clear that the exact situation described by SootKing is grounds for the use of lethal force.

Looks good to me, too.

Just make sure you can fully explain why you felt is was necessary or how you felt threatened.

 

[mk2ja]

Just make sure you can fully explain why you felt is was necessary or how you felt threatened.

Actually, one step further. If you have to use force, including deadly force, DON'T TALK TO THE POLICE!

YouTube - Dont Talk to Police

This was posted earlier on INGO. I'll find the thread and add it to this post when I can.

ETA - Here's a good thing to consider from the original thread:

I remember that it's a good idea to have some type of statement ready for when the police come to talk to you **BEFORE** your atty is there.

So does anyone have a statement either on paper or in their mind that they are going to use?

Based on the video it seems the statement should be...

Officer I plead the 5th Amendment and request the present of legal representation before I can answer any questions.

 

[SootKing]

Looks good to me, too.

Just make sure you can fully explain why you felt is was necessary or how you felt threatened.

what if he didnt say anything like im gonna kill you, he just got out and started beating your truck. according to that text it justifys killing them...and what is "reasonable force" from deadly force.

one more thing what would be a "duty to retreat" i dont understand that..meaning if i could just drive off vs being in gridlock traffic?

 

[mk2ja]

what if he didnt say anything like im gonna kill you, he just got out and started beating your truck. according to that text it justifys killing them...

This ---v

Actually, one step further. If you have to use force, including deadly force, DON'T TALK TO THE POLICE!

Just wait for a lawyer. Trying to do "the right thing" or telling "your side" can only get you into trouble. It is not worth it; play it safe, wait for a lawyer.

one more thing what would be a "duty to retreat" i dont understand that..meaning if i could just drive off vs being in gridlock traffic?

If you read it closely, you'll notice it specifies that a person DOES NOT have a duty to retreat. Some states require that a person first make an attempt to get away. The Indiana Code specifies that, in this state, you are under no obligation to try to get away: "A person... does not have a duty to retreat".

and what is "reasonable force" from deadly force.

I found this online (view source). It does not constitute legal advice, and IANAL.

When is it legal to use a gun in self defense?

Shooting a firearm at another person is considered “deadly force”. ... “Reasonable force” is the force required to preventor stop another person from using unlawful force against you or another person… and no more.

Don’t get caught up in discussions about whether you should “shoot to kill” or not. If you shoot someone, it is automatically considered use of deadly force. ... The only justifiable reason to use of any level of reasonable force, up to and including deadly force, is to make the person who is doing, or who you truly believe is about to do you grave harm, STOP what they are doing. If the person stops and he is no longer a threat to your safety, you must also stop or reduce the level of force to an equally reasonable level. This doesn’t automatically mean you have to put your gun away and shake hands. Holding your gun at ready might be reasonable. It depends on the circumstances. Again the best course of action is to leave the situation if at all possible, as soon as possible. (Note by mk2ja: it would be wise to retreat if possible, but, as noted above, it is not required by law.)

WARNING: Until and unless you have made the decision to fire your gun, DO NOT put your finger on the trigger. If you “accidentally” shoot someone you are holding at gunpoint, who is not an immediate deadly threat, you maybe convicted of negligent homicide and will most likely be sued. You also have to consider whether pointing the gun at the person is “reasonable” use of force.

BEWARE! A “warning shot” might be construed as “deadly force” by a jury. You MUST NOT, in my opinion, fire a “warning shot” under any circumstances. Consider this: the bullet fired as a warning shot will travel in the direction in was fired until something or someone stops it. Likewise, intentionally shooting someone in the hand, arm, or leg is still “deadly force.” I was in a gun shop one day and overheard a woman looking for a small gun say, “I don’t wanna kill ‘em, I’ll just shoot ‘em in the leg or somethin’.“ The other attorney will argue that if deadly force wasn’t necessary why did you shoot them at all?

I would add to that quote that the IC allows for use of said "reasonable force" to prevent or stop another person from using unlawful force against your property. (Again, I'm still not a lawyer.)


ETA - Mods, SootKing's question and the subsequent replies to it should really go into a separate thread. Can you guys break that out into a new thread?

ETA2 - I edited the quote about "reasonable force" because it was more powerful and coherent when kept together instead of the snippet I had initially.

 

[finity]

what if he didnt say anything like im gonna kill you, he just got out and started beating your truck. according to that text it justifys killing them...and what is "reasonable force" from deadly force.

one more thing what would be a "duty to retreat" i dont understand that..meaning if i could just drive off vs being in gridlock traffic?

Obviously, every situation is going to be very fact specific so it would be hard for someone to sit here & tell you that it would be OK to use deadly force on the guy.

YOU have to figure out in YOUR own head why YOU felt YOU HAD TO.

If the guy was just getting his kicks by pounding on the tailgate or bed of your truck & gave no other indication that he was moving toward the cab or that he wanted you to get out so he could attack you or steal your truck then I think it would be difficult to justify killing him.

OTOH, you could order him to stop & even be justified in drawing on him at that point to put some teeth into that request. If he stops & leaves, then good for you. Call the cops & your insurance agent. If not & he moves toward you, you now have justification to use deadly force.

Or, if possible, you could just drive away from the crazy dude & let the cops handle it.

I agree with Mk2ja that talking to the police immediately afterward may not be in your best interest especially IF the use of deadly force was was only marginally justified. But you WILL eventually have to give your side of the story (to either a prosecutor or a jury during trial) so you better have it figured out right away WHY you did it.