Can you defend your attached garage as you would your home?

Timjoebillybob

Grandmaster
Rating - 100%
1   0   0
Feb 27, 2009
5,937
119
I tell ya. Reading comprehension has really gone down hill. That, or folks are purposefully obtuse.

IC specifically states "reasonable or deadly" is acceptable for unlawful entry of your home/curtilage. The words are quite literally written in Indiana Code.

Getting wrapped up in side conversations" and "what ifs" if interesting, but a distraction. This has nothing to do with "stealing your stuff". It has nothing to do with shooting anyone and everyone who visits your home. Nothing to do with feeling remorse. Nothing to do with an aggressive prosecutor and/or terrible defense attorney.

Should you follow the exact wording of IC? That's up to you, and what the situation warrants. But, the words absolutely do exist in our state law.
It doesn't state reasonable or deadly, it states "reasonable force, including deadly force" "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."

But it seems I might agree with your second sentence.
 

foszoe

Grandmaster
Site Supporter
Rating - 100%
24   0   0
Jun 2, 2011
11,187
113
I tell ya. Reading comprehension has really gone down hill. That, or folks are purposefully obtuse.

IC specifically states "reasonable or deadly" is acceptable for unlawful entry of your home/curtilage. The words are quite literally written in Indiana Code.

Getting wrapped up in side conversations" and "what ifs" if interesting, but a distraction. This has nothing to do with "stealing your stuff". It has nothing to do with shooting anyone and everyone who visits your home. Nothing to do with feeling remorse. Nothing to do with an aggressive prosecutor and/or terrible defense attorney.

Should you follow the exact wording of IC? That's up to you, and what the situation warrants. But, the words absolutely do exist in our state law.
You aren't the sole person who could be potentially deciding if it was reasonable to use deadly force though.
 

SheepDog4Life

Natural Gray Man
Site Supporter
Rating - 100%
5   0   0
May 14, 2016
3,254
83
SW IN
I tell ya. Reading comprehension has really gone down hill. That, or folks are purposefully obtuse.

IC specifically states "reasonable or deadly" is acceptable for unlawful entry of your home/curtilage. The words are quite literally written in Indiana Code.

Getting wrapped up in side conversations" and "what ifs" if interesting, but a distraction. This has nothing to do with "stealing your stuff". It has nothing to do with shooting anyone and everyone who visits your home. Nothing to do with feeling remorse. Nothing to do with an aggressive prosecutor and/or terrible defense attorney.

Should you follow the exact wording of IC? That's up to you, and what the situation warrants. But, the words absolutely do exist in our state law.
Yes, there is a reading comprehension problem... "reasonable or deadly" absolutely do not appear in the IC and is not equivalent to the "reasonable force, including deadly force," that is in the IC.
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.
I think this is the part we are talking about... the law is the same for dwelling, curtilage, or occupied motor vehicle.

I'll say it again, the law is the same in all of those locations.

What is "flexible" within the language of the law is what is reasonable force that is believed reasonably necessary. If a prosecutor or grand jury don't believe someone used reasonable force, that question gets puts to a jury.

The same law covers someone kicking in your front door while you're watching TV as covers someone attempting to break into your barn door that your dope chart puts at 236 yards from your front window/rest.

Equally reasonable? One, I would feel comfortable defending my actions in order to maintain my freedom... the other, not so much.

ETA: Being originally from Texas, I would prefer a "he needed shooting" standard... but that's not what we have. :)
 
Last edited:

eldirector

Grandmaster
Rating - 100%
10   0   0
Apr 29, 2009
14,264
83
Brownsburg, IN
Appears you and I are talking about two related, but completely different things. Likely not going to get resolved async over a forum.

I'll leave you to your dope charts.
 

Thor

Grandmaster
Site Supporter
Rating - 100%
2   0   0
Jan 18, 2014
10,040
113
Could be anywhere
I know, right?

But there are plenty of home commandos right here, posting in this thread, that seem to have no sense of the gray - that all is black and white. That ANY uninvited person is going to be shot regardless of circumstances. That's damned foolish.
So, why is the uninvited trespasser there? If someone has "wandered" into my garage why are they there?

Assuming they are there accidentally is damned foolish. It's up to them to get the flock out and not get shot or worse. Because THEY SHOULD NOT BE THERE!
 

Tactically Fat

Grandmaster
Site Supporter
Rating - 100%
20   0   0
Oct 8, 2014
6,999
83
Indiana
So, why is the uninvited trespasser there? If someone has "wandered" into my garage why are they there?

Assuming they are there accidentally is damned foolish. It's up to them to get the flock out and not get shot or worse. Because THEY SHOULD NOT BE THERE!
Because mistakes happen. Because people get drunk and make mistakes and enter the wrong places all the time.

Just because someone is in your curillage uninvited does not automatically mean they need shot. Full stop.
 

IndyBeerman

Was a real life Beerman.....
Site Supporter
Rating - 100%
5   0   0
Jun 2, 2008
7,515
113
Plainfield
Because mistakes happen. Because people get drunk and make mistakes and enter the wrong places all the time.

Just because someone is in your curillage uninvited does not automatically mean they need shot. Full stop.
And like there's never been someone to act like their drunk to try and get the drop on you.

Which reinforces what I have said, they can have anything in the garage they want, that's why I have insurance, I'm not opening the door from the house and play peek-a-boo.
It's when they breach the entry door to the house that it's game on.
 

ditcherman

Expert
Site Supporter
Rating - 100%
6   0   0
Dec 18, 2018
1,924
83
Just N of Indy...
And like there's never been someone to act like their drunk to try and get the drop on you.

Which reinforces what I have said, they can have anything in the garage they want, that's why I have insurance, I'm not opening the door from the house and play peek-a-boo.
It's when they breach the entry door to the house that it's game on.
It’s awesome everyone is free to make their own choices, as you had stated your preferences here. If I’m reading it right the original question was “can we” as in, are we allowed, to defend an attached garage? It’s been interesting reading, and from it I’m pretty sure we can if we can make the argument that we are preventing a forcible felony.
Like a few others on here, my opinion is that I’ll walk out into the dark night to defend my whole property. Just glad we have the choices we do. Not to just shoot anyone we see, that’s not a choice, but to defend what we choose to defend with proper measures.

I’ll see you thugs under the moonlight.
 
Top Bottom