Indiana has passed a new law in the interest of allowing citizens to better protect themselves.
[quote]In enacting this section, the general assembly finds and declares that it is the policy of this state to recognize the unique character of a citizen's home and to ensure that a citizen feels secure in his or her own home against unlawful intrusion by another individual or [b][u]public servant.[/b][/u] By reaffirming the long standing right of a citizen to protect his or her home against unlawful intrusion, however, the general assembly does not intend to diminish in any way the other robust self defense rights that citizens of this state have always enjoyed. Accordingly, the general assembly also finds and declares that it is the policy of this state that people have a right to defend themselves and third parties from physical harm and crime. The purpose of this section is to provide the citizens of this state with a lawful means of carrying out this policy.[/quote]
What it allows.
[quote] A person is justified in using reasonable force against another any other 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.[/quote]
Also,
[quote]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.[/quote]
The bill goes onto explain more, but that's the important part.
So basically if you [b][u]feel[/u][/b] that unlawful force upon you or a present third party, unlawful entry to your home or vehicle is imminent, you have the right to take appropriate action including the use of lethal force against [b][u]any other person.[/u][/b] (this includes cops, firefighters, etc)
I certainly understand the reasoning, however I worry that this create more "kill or be killed" scenarios, so I'm on the fence about this.
Discuss.
-
I agree with the principle of being able to use force and potentially lethal force to defend yourself and/or others around you, but it's that "feel" clause that has me a bit wary. "Feeling" that you or another person is in danger is a lot different from you or another person actually being in danger. Take an intruder in your home for example. I believe that in such a scenario, there are too many variables for a one-size fit all approach. Did you know the intruder? Was he or she armed? etc. Now I don't believe in those spineless progressive laws which state that you cannot use force unless they use/attempt to use force first, and/or you cannot escape (bullcrap if they think I'm going to flee my own home), but I also don't believe that you should be able to wake up one morning and decide to shoot your cousin or really close neighbor who always visits your home even uninvited without being guilty of some crime. I think maybe a better law instead of the "feel" clause would be to define some general requirements in order for danger to be recognized by the law. Ex, your relation to the perpetrator, their disposition, etc.