Life and property

imported post

If someone is stealing the wheels from my car in my drive way, can I use deadly force (my .44 MAG) against them in the great State of Indiana ???

imported post

If you want to be dragged into court and probably charged with something, go for it. If someone is stealing your wheels, call the cops, call a neighbor and have them block off the street....

Walk outside with your gun and tell them to stay put or they will be shot, and hold them till the police come...

There are a lot better outcomes than shooting and killing someone in your yard stealing wheels.

imported post

If you are that worried about you wheels being stolen, I think it is high time you switch to some steelies untill you can park somewhere more secure. You have auto insurance, that's what comprehensive coverage is for. Switch it to a $0 deductable. The added premium is much cheaper than court fees.

imported post

squarepeg wrote:

If you are that worried about you wheels being stolen, I think it is high time you switch to some steelies untill you can park somewhere more secure. You have auto insurance, that's what comprehensive coverage is for. Switch it to a $0 deductable. The added premium is much cheaper than court fees.

Click to expand...

Not to mention what a .44 might do to your tire.

imported post

A Castle Doctrine (also known as a Castle Law or a Defense of Habitation Law) is an American legal concept derived from English Common Law, which designates one's place of residence (or, in some states, any place legally occupied, such as one's car or place of work) as a place in which one enjoys protection from illegal trespassing and violent attack. It then goes on to give a person the legal right to use deadly force to defend that place (his/her "castle"), and/or any other innocent persons legally inside it, from violent attack or an intrusion which may lead to violent attack. In a legal context, therefore, use of deadly force which actually results in death may be defended as justifiable homicide under the Castle Doctrine.

Indiana and Georgia, among other states, already had stand your ground caselaw and passed "stand your ground" statutes

Heres indiana's law code: http://www.in.gov/legislative/ic/code/title35/ar41/ch3.html

Go
:celebrate's

imported post

Unoid wrote:

Indiana and Georgia, among other states, already had stand your ground caselaw and passed "stand your ground" statutes

Heres indiana's law code: http://www.in.gov/legislative/ic/code/title35/ar41/ch3.html

Click to expand...

I would hate to be the one to have to defend myself to a jury in this instance. It's significantly different than an intruder breaking into your house, Castle Doctrine notwithstanding. In this case, your life is not in immediate danger. Deadly force may not be considered "reasonable force" in this case.

imported post

Is there anywherethat lists all the states with Castle Doctrines? That would be a good map to put on the front page.

imported post

I agree the circumstances would provide the details of the outcome.

If I go out and confront the thief, and shout " hey!!!.... drop the lug wrench and get away from my car " thief stands and says " I'm gonna bash your head in with this wrench if you don't go back in the house " I reply " I have a gun...get away from my car " thief moves towards me. I pull the trigger.

Imagine the same scenario with any item on my property, a shovel, a rake, anything that belongs to meand does not belong in a thief's hands.I feel there is a bad idea floating around in society's head that people have to be a coward first. I'm not condoneing needless death, but i'm quite franklyin favor of cutting down confrotational thieves.

Isure after a few instances, an indivigual whoused their firearmsto defend their property and ultimately their life would have theirpermit pulled and labeled a vigilante with hourly drive-by's by LEO's.

Slightly unrelated but does anyone remember the instance of the school teacher who shotLEO's a few years back for forced entry into his home here in Indy, I think he did 4 years awaiting trial and was ultimately acquitted.

imported post

The only state where deadly force may legally be employed in the defense of property is Texas. Therefore, you better be damn sure your life is in jeopardy before you use deadly force; thus, if he already has the wheels and is running away, you're just SOL, but at least you're alive.

imported post

Indiana codified the Castle Doctrine in the last session. You may protect your property or property you are in control of.

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.

imported post

Shinz1212 wrote:

Indiana codified the Castle Doctrine in the last session. You may protect your property or property you are in control of.

Click to expand...

Exactly, if you're in control of it. You are not in control of your property if the thief already has it and is running away, and thus, as I said in my last post, deadly force would not be justified. Also, do not forget that your life has to be in jeopardy, which it is not if you confront the thief while he is in he act of stealing the wheels or is already running away with them.

imported post

tattedupboy wrote:

Shinz1212 wrote:

Indiana codified the Castle Doctrine in the last session. You may protect your property or property you are in control of.

Click to expand...

Exactly, if you're in control of it. You are not in control of your property if the thief already has it and is running away, and thus, as I said in my last post, deadly force would not be justified. Also, do not forget that your life has to be in jeopardy, which it is not if you confront the thief while he is in he act of stealing the wheels or is already running away with them.

Click to expand...

This is the exact type of response I hear most often, a person with a weak grasp of the law in place cannot utilize his own rights to the law. Knowledge is POWER, know your rights and your state's laws.

I'm sure there are a million ways to spin a scenario to your advantage in a forum, but as the old saying goes, "dead men tell no tales"

imported post

tattedupboy wrote:

The only state where deadly force may legally be employed in the defense of property is Texas. Therefore, you better be damn sure your life is in jeopardy before you use deadly force; thus, if he already has the wheels and is running away, you're just SOL, but at least you're alive.

Click to expand...

IC 35-47-2-4 Version a
Qualified or unlimited licenses to carry handguns; fees; exemptions from payment of fees
Note: This version of section effective until 7-1-2007. See also following version of this section, effective 7-1-2007.
Sec. 4. (a) Licenses to carry handguns shall be either qualified or unlimited, and are valid for:
(1) four (4) years from the date of issue in the case of a four (4) year license; or
(2) the life of the individual receiving the license in the case of a lifetime license.
A qualified license shall be issued for hunting and target practice. The superintendent may adopt rules imposing limitations on the use and carrying of handguns under a license when handguns are carried by a licensee as a condition of employment. Unlimited licenses shall be issued for the purpose of the protection of life and property.

imported post

HiRoller wrote:

tattedupboy wrote:

Shinz1212 wrote:

Indiana codified the Castle Doctrine in the last session. You may protect your property or property you are in control of.

Click to expand...

Exactly, if you're in control of it. You are not in control of your property if the thief already has it and is running away, and thus, as I said in my last post, deadly force would not be justified. Also, do not forget that your life has to be in jeopardy, which it is not if you confront the thief while he is in he act of stealing the wheels or is already running away with them.

Click to expand...

This is the exact type of response I hear most often, a person with a weak grasp of the law in place cannot utilize his own rights to the law. Knowledge is POWER, know your rights and your state's laws.

I'm sure there are a million ways to spin a scenario to your advantage in a forum, but as the old saying goes, "dead men tell no tales"

Click to expand...

Actually, my grasp and knowledge of the law is quite strong, thank you very much. The fact of the matter remains that the criminal justice favors the criminal in situations such as this, regardless of what the law actually says. Even with the letter of the law seemingly on the side of the law abiding citizen, you are still going to have to convince 12 people that you acted accordingly if something like this ever happens. So, do not attempt to second guess my knowledge of the law and how it works for law abiding citizens, because I do know what I'm talking about.

imported post

This is not an attack on your knowledge or bashing someone, but I bet you did go back and read thru the posted excerpts from the IC. Dialog and forums are here to promote awareness. If someone says one thing that will get me to think or dig a little deeper, it's done it's job.

Personally, If I were in the in the scenario suggested, on my property, armed with one of my many firearms, I would give the thief every opportunity to flee. However, if he made just one half step towards me or used language in any sort ofthreating manner, I would sayhe just commited suicide by home owner.



Sincerely, Clint Eastwood

imported post

Tatted is correct. Our justice system is curropt and out of touch with common citizens.
IE: (rapists / molesters = instant death penalty, instead of 3 years in jail)

Just hope that the DA in lake county follows STATE laws isntead of allowing charges pressed.

imported post

Unoid wrote:

Tatted is correct. Our justice system is curropt and out of touch with common citizens.
IE: (rapists / molesters = instant death penalty, instead of 3 years in jail)

Just hope that the DA in lake county follows STATE laws isntead of allowing charges pressed.

Click to expand...

If I can't rely on this guy to defend my interests, who can I rely on ?

Welcome





[align=center]
Carl Brizzi,
Marion County Prosecutor[/align]


[align=left]"Criminals have a choice...[/align]
[align=right]
Victims don't"[/align]


I ran for Marion County Prosecutor because I care about our community and I want to do everything I can to ensure safety, not just for my family but for all of us.

My vision for the Marion County Prosecutor's Office continues to be based on three fundamental principles: Prosecution, Protection and Prevention.

Tough, but fair, prosecution is job one. My primary responsibility as Marion County Prosecutor is to put violent criminals in jail, where they can no longer endanger our society. What good is opportunity or economic prosperity if we can't feel safe in our own homes or walking down the street at night?

As Prosecutor, I target habitual violent criminals, gun-toting felons and drug dealers who threaten our freedom and destroy people's lives. It is my mission to prosecute deserving offenders aggressively and without apology

[align=right]--Carl Brizzi
Marion County Prosecutor[/align]

imported post

Don't shoot someone over a set of rims thats just asking for trouble. As its already been said here thats what your car insurance is for. That said if you ask the person to get the hell off your property and they try to attack you then shoot them. But you will probably wish you hadn't, what its going to cost you in legal fees would buy you 100 sets of rims. I honestly hope to god that I never even have to draw a weapon let alone use one.

imported post

dwilson9725 wrote:

Don't shoot someone over a set of rims thats just asking for trouble. As its already been said here thats what your car insurance is for. That said if you ask the person to get the hell off your property and they try to attack you then shoot them. But you will probably wish you hadn't, what its going to cost you in legal fees would buy you 100 sets of rims. I honestly hope to god that I never even have to draw a weapon let alone use one.

Click to expand...

+1 on that!!

I have seen questions like this asked before...

I do not like the thought of some joker stealing my property... But insurance will cover it.

I personally cannot justify killing a man over my property. Just like I cannot understand how a criminal can kill someone for a few dollars or a watch.

It is sad that people are so eager and willing to kill another over something that can be replaced.

imported post

A criminal can easily be replaced... :idea: