Self Defense Shooting

[BoilerWes]

Man Claims Self Defense in Fatal Shooting of Neighbor | ABC News Blogs - Yahoo!

Not sure if this case has been discussed here or not.

Multiple fails on the gun owners part. I can't imagine that he will not go to jail.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

I don't think that is what "stand your ground" was intended to protect you from.

 

[johnnythefist]

sounds like he was looking for a fight

 

[armedindy]

wow, what a moron

 

[Birds Away]

Just more fuel for the antis

 

[armedindy]

Just more fuel for the antis

true, but we give them double the fuel when we dont also stand up and claim that what this guy did is unacceptable...

 

[bluewraith]

I don't think I would call that a self defense shooting. Indiana has it clear in IC that you are not to provoke.

IC 35-41-3-2
Use of force to protect person or property
Sec. 2. (a) A person is justified in using reasonable force against another person to protect the person or a third person from what the person reasonably believes to be the imminent use of unlawful force. However, a person:
(1) is justified in using deadly force; and
(2) does not have a duty to retreat;
if the person reasonably believes that that force is necessary to prevent serious bodily injury to the person or a third person or the commission of a forcible felony. No person in this state shall be placed in legal jeopardy of any kind whatsoever for protecting the person or a third person by reasonable means necessary.
(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.
(c) With respect to property other than a dwelling, curtilage, or an occupied motor vehicle, a person is justified in using reasonable force against another person if the person reasonably believes that the force is necessary to immediately prevent or terminate the other person's trespass on or criminal interference with property lawfully in the person's possession, lawfully in possession of a member of the person's immediate family, or belonging to a person whose property the person has authority to protect. However, a person:
(1) is justified in using deadly force; and
(2) does not have a duty to retreat;
only if that force is justified under subsection (a).
(d) A person is justified in using reasonable force, including deadly force, against another person and does not have a duty to retreat if the person reasonably believes that the force is necessary to prevent or stop the other person from hijacking, attempting to hijack, or otherwise seizing or attempting to seize unlawful control of an aircraft in flight. For purposes of this subsection, an aircraft is considered to be in flight while the aircraft is:
(1) on the ground in Indiana:
(A) after the doors of the aircraft are closed for takeoff; and (B) until the aircraft takes off;
(2) in the airspace above Indiana; or
(3) on the ground in Indiana:
(A) after the aircraft lands; and
(B) before the doors of the aircraft are opened after landing.
(e) Notwithstanding subsections (a), (b), and (c), a person is not justified in using force if:
(1) the person is committing or is escaping after the commission of a crime;
(2) the person provokes unlawful action by another person with intent to cause bodily injury to the other person; or
(3) the person has entered into combat with another person or is the initial aggressor unless the person withdraws from the encounter and communicates to the other person the intent to do so and the other person nevertheless continues or threatens to continue unlawful action.
(f) Notwithstanding subsection (d), a person is not justified in using force if the person:
(1) is committing, or is escaping after the commission of, a crime;
(2) provokes unlawful action by another person, with intent to cause bodily injury to the other person; or
(3) continues to combat another person after the other person withdraws from the encounter and communicates the other person's intent to stop hijacking, attempting to hijack, or otherwise seizing or attempting to seize unlawful control of an aircraft in flight.
As added by Acts 1976, P.L.148, SEC.1. Amended by Acts 1977, P.L.340, SEC.8; Acts 1979, P.L.297, SEC.1; P.L.59-2002, SEC.1; P.L.189-2006, SEC.1.

 

[hoosierdoc]

It's hard to really say, but was he actually on their property when it occured? I don't think you can stand your ground when you're on their property and you are the initial aggressor (displaying firearm) and they go to arm themselves in defense. I'd like to see the video.

 

[BroadbandBrat]

Wow what a moron!! A birthday party that happens once a year?!? If it were that bad, I'd just talk to them when they sober up the next day and ask them to keep it down next time. Why be retarded?

 

[45calibre]

does texas have brandishing laws? if it doesnt and the other guy pointed first cant he claim self defense?