Oklahoma Governor Signs Defensive Display Bill into Law

[newtothis]

Don't forget, "He needed killin'" is an affirmative defense in Oklahoma.

That was a legitimate defense in many parts of the South until the early 1960's.

Jason Isbell of the Band "Drive By Truckers" wrote a song (Decoration Day) about how a relative of his was in a hatfields /McCoy style feud and the successful defense at the trial was "he needed killin".

 

[Bill of Rights]

This isn't the point I'm making. I have no issue with Joe Citizen pointing a gun, of even firing, during self-defense or during the commission of a forcible felony. My issue is the "prevent" part. Prevent implying that it is possible that the crime has not yet occurred. If you get into an argument with your neighbor, and he says he's going to whup your ass, and starts walking across the street can you pull out your Roscoe and point it at him? "Prevent" would appear to be subjective based on the person.

AOJ applies, certainly, and disparity of force. If my neighbor is 6'3" and 350#, all muscle (including between his ears) and enjoys MMA as a pastime, and the only thing between us is that street and/or my gun, I'd say that the chances that a court will look upon my actions to stop a fight before it starts in a favorable light would be greater than if my neighbor is 5'2" and a frail 120#.

Roscoe? Is that like a John Thomas?

Please do not advocate the pulling out of one's John Thomas in an attempt to stop a fight. IC 35-45-4-1(e) might come into play. Laughter might, as well, though that would be size-dependent.

My grandpa always used that word. He didn't carry a "Roscoe" on his person, but he for damn sure always carried a "hawkbill" everywhere he went (and he wasn't a painter). lol

I think both of those are regional terms.

Don't forget, "He needed killin'" is an affirmative defense in Oklahoma.

That was a legitimate defense in many parts of the South until the early 1960's.

Jason Isbell of the Band "Drive By Truckers" wrote a song (Decoration Day) about how a relative of his was in a hatfields /McCoy style feud and the successful defense at the trial was "he needed killin".

I'd heard/read that that was Texas where that defense was successfully used in court.

Once.

In the 1800s.

I'm too lazy to look up details at the moment.

Blessings,
Bill

 

[Sticky]

Are LEO's held to the same standard as Joe Citizen?

No.

IC 35-47-4-3
Pointing firearm at another person
Sec. 3. (a) This section does not apply to a law enforcement officer who is acting within the scope of the law enforcement officer's official duties or to a person who is justified in using reasonable force against another person under:
(1) IC 35-41-3-2; or
(2) IC 35-41-3-3.
(b) A person who knowingly or intentionally points a firearm at another person commits a Class D felony. However, the offense is a Class A misdemeanor if the firearm was not loaded.

My understanding from the above is that an on-duty officer is exempt from being charged under 35-47-4-3(b), as long as he is "acting within scope". Of course, individual departments may have stricter requirements before pointing. The ability of John Q. to point without being charged is listed under 35-41-3-2 and 35-41-3-3.