-
Be sure to read this post! Beware of scammers. https://www.indianagunowners.com/threads/classifieds-new-online-payment-guidelines-rules-paypal-venmo-zelle-etc.511734/
BOLO Franklin Township
- Thread starter Mike D.
- Start date
The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana
Member Benefits:
Fewer Ads! Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership Discuss anti-gun legislation Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses Discover free outdoor shooting areas View up to date on firearm-related events Share photos & video with other members ...and so much more!
Member Benefits:
Clipped, my fat Aunt Hannah. I'd have made that dumb arse road kill in a heartbeat. Especially with that picture as evidence.
Ah, well that makes sense. I thought he was talking about me there for a second
...I thought I might be on the way to my very first infraction!
The behavior in that pic would likely be enough for me to respond with deadly force... in the form of gratuitous use of gas pedal. There’s no reason for someone to block my vehicle, get out, and approach me with gun in hand.
IndianaSoloMcfly
Expert
If it wasnt for the plate number itd be hard to find him. Hes got the generic fud look going on. Standard greaseball apparel, picking him out in a crowd would be like trying to find a stolen white Honda civic.
Id say the lady shoulda smoked him, but she may have totalled her car in the process.
Id say the lady shoulda smoked him, but she may have totalled her car in the process.
I just posted a picture I saw on Facebook. Is that a rule violation?
Not you. The subject of your post.
IndianaSoloMcfly
Expert
Also... if he is so mad about how slow the lady is driving then why is he parked in FRONT of her car...?
Oy vey - this is the shade of threads past!
I don't really disagree. But, that's an answer to a different question: would self defense of the deadly kind be justified.
I'm more curious about what crimes have been committed. That is the important question for LEOs getting involved.
There's always room for shoulda coulda woulda. But, LEOs are going to be constrained by what the law actually is and the events that are actually described.
ETA:
In a bit of an INGO-infinite-loop/singularity event, if the guy was approaching her "to see if something was wrong" while open-carrying (in his hand) and she drove at him such that he was in fear of his life, would he have been justified in shooting at her?
Oy vey - this is the shade of threads past!
I don't really disagree. But, that's an answer to a different question: would self defense of the deadly kind be justified.
I'm more curious about what crimes have been committed. That is the important question for LEOs getting involved.
There's always room for shoulda coulda woulda. But, LEOs are going to be constrained by what the law actually is and the events that are actually described.
I’d imagine intimidation/threat if forceable felony would apply.
Oy vey - this is the shade of threads past!
I don't really disagree. But, that's an answer to a different question: would self defense of the deadly kind be justified.
I'm more curious about what crimes have been committed. That is the important question for LEOs getting involved.
There's always room for shoulda coulda woulda. But, LEOs are going to be constrained by what the law actually is and the events that are actually described.
ETA:
In a bit of an INGO-infinite-loop/singularity event, if the guy was approaching her "to see if something was wrong" while open-carrying (in his hand) and she drove at him such that he was in fear of his life, would he have been justified in shooting at her?
Regardless of whether anyone technically committed a crime, a good LEO will appreciate information on unusual/suspicious activity in his or her patrol beat/district. Today's "not technically a crime" could be valuable information in tomorrow's road rage shooting.
Gun in hand is not “open carry”. Try not to lawyer this up too much.
Are you familiar with Indiana law on that topic? It isn't as intuitive as many people think.
The good news is that, there does appear to be a 'prior lawful' act, that is - going slow. (I might have the exact expression wrong, but it is something like that.)
The awkward thing is a "threat." There has to be a communication of a threat. "I keel you." or "I'll kick your donkey." Something like that.
I haven't read of the guy actually communicating a threat to the lady.
Oy vey - this is the shade of threads past!
I don't really disagree. But, that's an answer to a different question: would self defense of the deadly kind be justified.
I'm more curious about what crimes have been committed. That is the important question for LEOs getting involved.
There's always room for shoulda coulda woulda. But, LEOs are going to be constrained by what the law actually is and the events that are actually described.
... guy blocks her path and approaches her with a gun.... Juror printcraft votes she gets a pass on making him a speedbump.
Something something something kirk freeman says citizen vs. people dripping with blanket immunity.
With those "facts" I'm on the side of no. You can see if something is wrong without having your gun out.
I don't disagree.
I see this as an opportunity to help people understand the intersection (pardon the pun) of the law and society.
First, it isn't just a job, its really more a matter of who I am.
Second, I thought we weren't into chastising fellow gun owners about lifestyle choices like manner of carry.
Hopping out of a car with a drawn pistol would probably not be considered "open carrying" to any reasonable person. People don't hop out of their cars with pistols drawn to "see if someone is ok."
Totality of the circumstances, and all that.
