Two thugs in a Walmart parking lot

[indyjoe]

not necessarily

I agree. Even without a young child, 2 on 1 odds changes things.

 

[Caleb]

I agree. Even without a young child, 2 on 1 odds changes things.

not necessarily...1 person is more then enough to commit a criminal act.

 

[mospeada]

I think Xavier tends toward the dramatic at times.

 

[Rookie]

So, what is Indiana's view on a situation like this? I remember something about not having to flee (or something to that effect), but I don't know the specifics on what the law states. On the other hand, better to be judged by twelve than to be carried by six. I don't have a death wish, but I would happily die to protect my family...

 

[finity]

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.

Indiana has what is called a "stand your ground" provision. Your "no duty to retreat" is written into law & gives you immunity from civil action if you are found to have acted in self-defense or in defense of another from serious bodily harm or death. This is closely related to "the Castle Doctrine" but is not limited to your home or occupied car.

The "Castle Doctrine" allows deadly force to prevent someone from entering you home or occupied vehicle or to stop the attack on them after they have entered. Threat of bodily harm can be presumed from such actions.

All of the above is subject to reasonable-ness of course.

IANAL, YMMV

 

[Rookie]

Thank you - that is exactly what I was talking about.

 

[pierce195]

I think he did what was needed for him and his little girl to go home safe and make it to church on that day. If I were in his shoes I hope I would have done the same thing. If I was taking this call will working I would have told him the same thing the cop told him.

In these times when some people place more value on cars, toys, and other items than a human life. You can't go any palce without your firearm.

My girlfriend once asked me why I was carrying my gun in chuch. I asked her if she every watch the news about shootings in chuch. She has not brought it up again to this day.

 

[Dragnut06]

I think he did what was needed for him and his little girl to go home safe and make it to church on that day. If I were in his shoes I hope I would have done the same thing. If I was taking this call will working I would have told him the same thing the cop told him.

In these times when some people place more value on cars, toys, and other items than a human life. You can't go any palce without your firearm.

My girlfriend once asked me why I was carrying my gun in chuch. I asked her if she every watch the news about shootings in chuch. She has not brought it up again to this day.

correct my if im wrong but isn't it illegal to carry in church? i understand what they dont see they don't know. I know its illegal to carry in walmart but it doesn't stop me from doing it, whats the worst they can do ask me to leave whoopy dee doo. but if they don't see it i dont have it.

 

[ryanmercer]

correct my if im wrong but isn't it illegal to carry in church? i understand what they dont see they don't know. I know its illegal to carry in walmart but it doesn't stop me from doing it, whats the worst they can do ask me to leave whoopy dee doo. but if they don't see it i dont have it.

Only if they have a school/licensed day-care.

 

[CarmelHP]

correct my if im wrong but isn't it illegal to carry in church? i understand what they dont see they don't know. I know its illegal to carry in walmart but it doesn't stop me from doing it, whats the worst they can do ask me to leave whoopy dee doo. but if they don't see it i dont have it.

What?

 

[munky_3434]

correct my if im wrong but isn't it illegal to carry in church? i understand what they dont see they don't know. I know its illegal to carry in walmart but it doesn't stop me from doing it, whats the worst they can do ask me to leave whoopy dee doo. but if they don't see it i dont have it.

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

specifically post 11

 

[finity]

Persons with a license to carry a handgun cannot possess a handgun:

• In a commercial or charter aircraft (Ind. Code Ann. § 35-47-6-1);
• In an area of an airport where access is controlled by the inspection of persons and property (§ 35-47-6-1.3);
• In or on school property (including private schools and preschools; see section 35-41-1-24.7) (§ 35-47-9-2);
• In or on property that is being used by a school for a school function or on a school bus (§ 35-47-9-2);
• On board a riverboat gambling operation during an excursion (see 68 Ind. Admin. Code 1-7-1);
• On the fairgrounds during the annual state fair (80 Ind. Admin. Code 4-4-4(b); any person properly licensed to carry a firearm must secure the firearm in a locked compartment of his or her vehicle, where it will not be visible, per 80 Ind. Admin. Code 4-4-4(d)); or
• In or on the port area (see 130 Ind. Admin. Code 4-1-7).

Licensees also cannot carry in child caring institutions. See 465 Ind. Admin. Code 2-9-80(b)(3); 465 Ind. Admin. Code 2-10-79(b)(3); 465 Ind. Admin. Code 2-11-80(b)(3); 465 Ind. Admin. Code 2-12-78(b)(3); 465 Ind. Admin. Code 2-13-77(b)(3). In addition, child care centers must prominently post in places regularly viewed by parents prohibitions against the use or possession of firearms, unless required as a condition of employment. 470 Ind. Admin Code 3-4.7-19(a)(5)(C).

Legal Community Against Violence

While it is an anti-gun group, I find it ironic that they have the best compilation of gun laws I could find.

Nothing about churches or other business's (i.e. Walmart).

 

[munky_3434]

Legal Community Against Violence

While it is an anti-gun group, I find it ironic that they have the best compilation of gun laws I could find.

Nothing about churches or other business's (i.e. Walmart).

most churches run daycares and/or private schools.

 

[mconley]

Think about this he thought he was being followed, cut thru cars... they still followed, moved a cart in they way... followers were upset and frustrated they were out whitted, they DID mean harm. A+ for you man, the gun was used without being fired. Awesome

 

[mconley]

plus it is not illegal to carry in wal-mart, it is aginst their policy... if you dont show it they dont know you have it... rather be judged by 12 than carried by 6

 

[Dragnut06]

What?

yea it's illegal to carry in walmart. its "private property" and they dont want ppl to carry guns in the store.

Edit: well this is what i was told my a police officer.

 

[mustangmaniac92]

I just had a daughter that is 2 weeks old, but if some guy looks at her when she's older.... I'm gonna shoot first ask questions later!! LOL No, seriously... I'm kinda split on this one. I can see both sides of excessive/right. To each their own I guess

 

[Crystalship1]

yea it's illegal to carry in walmart. its "private property" and they dont want ppl to carry guns in the store.

Edit: well this is what i was told my a police officer.

A police officer who doesn't know the law apparently.

It is NOT illegal to carry in a Walmart or any other non-government owned or operated facility. It may be against their RULES, and they can ask you to leave. If you refuse to leave, NOW you've broken the law.

 

[ATM]

plus it is not illegal to carry in wal-mart, it is aginst their policy... if you dont show it they dont know you have it... rather be judged by 12 than carried by 6

yea it's illegal to carry in walmart. its "private property" and they dont want ppl to carry guns in the store.

Edit: well this is what i was told my a police officer.

Their policy is to follow state law which, in Indiana, means you may freely carry there with your LTCH. No problem.

 

[munky_3434]

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

specifically post 11

evidentally the issue of carry in wal-mart is still on-going.....please read the above ...post 11