 |
| Apple puts a lo-res camera on the iPad 2 and passes the savings along to you! |
Having had a couple of rather high-profile cases involving people with toter's permits in the national news in the last few years, it did my heart good to see the Comprehensive Indiana Gun Law class put on by Guy Relford of TFT packed with eagerly note-taking students.
I'm still processing my notes, which I plan to append to my notes from MAG-40 this past summer. While an 8-hour classroom seminar can't be as in-depth as twenty+ classroom hours, it can be a lot more state-specific. Is it a crime to point a gun at somebody in Indiana? Depends. Is it a crime to shoot somebody in Indiana? Depends. Can I sell this gun to that guy in Indiana? Depends.
The class covered all that and more, and was presented not by some random dude with an NRA certificate, a rubber-stamped state licensed instructor, or a retired reserve deppity, but by a lawyer specializing in 2nd Amendment stuff who's doing the Lord's work on the RKBA front here in Hoosierland. Guy is as hip to the current gun law situation as it applies to Hoosiers as anyone and provides the cites for everything he says. Recommend.
Now this is the kind of class I'd like to see here in AZ.
ReplyDeleteAny law enforcement types among the eager citizenry? Seems like a class that would be right in their wheelhouse. Just wondering if any took up the opportunity.
ReplyDeleteI would definitely spend the gun fund on this kind of class. Doing my own research, both by reading the statutes and on-line is almost worse than not knowing.
ReplyDeleteIt was announced at my NRA RSO class last weekend that my club is putting together a similar sort of class. I aim (pardon the pun) to take it.
ReplyDeleteSo pleased to see this sort of approach to "gun safety" becoming more widespread. I'm going to have to do some localbridge mending on this very topic in the coming months.
ReplyDeleteGun ownership is an individual right and gun usage certainly ought to be an individual responsibility. If you're up for both, it's only good sense to know what you face legally as a result.
Thanks, Tam!! It was a pleasure to have you in the course and I really appreciated your input! Folks can check out the dates for future courses at www.tactical-firearms.com.
ReplyDeleteGuy
About twelve years ago the county prosecutor was offering a free legal clinic for da vimen on use of force. My wife attended because, hey, free!
ReplyDeleteThe highlight of the day was the prosecutor telling the ladies not to shoot a home intruder because it could just be some poor drunk who was lost and confused.
TBeck
ReplyDeleteThe advice from your prosecuter to your wife is very interesting, and is illustrative of the mindset of a lot of folks in power. "yes, you can defend yourself, but not really".
I would be interested in knowing your jurisdiction.
In Texas, the statute is crystal clear , you are justified in using deadly force against another...who...-PC 9.32(b)(1)(A) "unlawfully and with force entered or was attempting to enter unlawfully and with force, the actors occupied habitation, vehicle or place of business or employment..."
You are not required to enquire of the intruder in your living room if he is, indeed, merely a surly drunk who has crashed the wrong apartment.
It is my belief that there has been a concerted effort to make the concept of "legal self-defense" so convuluted and complicated that many law-abiding people will simply not defend themselves because of fears of what the justice system may do to them.
Perhaps the tide is changing as more people are engaged on the subject. I hope so.
Regards
GKT
Far too many believe training is beneath them and even more wouldn't choose to acquire further knowledge of the law, i.e., get more training (particularly if it doesn't involve range time.)
ReplyDeleteGood on you.
"Some poor drunk who was lost and confused", broken into someone else's home and now has a bullet hole has discovered Nature's way of telling him that it is time to sober up, if he survives.
ReplyDeleteWhy do I have the nagging suspicion that the prosecutor has had too much to drink more than once?
Ed,
ReplyDelete"Why do I have the nagging suspicion that the prosecutor has had too much to drink more than once?"
If they worked for Marion County, the odds are good. ;)
May I ask what the price of the class was?
ReplyDeleteIs it 'generally' cheaper than consulting an attorney? (I know those costs can vary widely)
We moved from the wilds of Orlando to a small town in Northeast Indiana. Some of our habits were strange to the locals, such as locking our doors. One contractor gave me a strange look when he kept having to unlock the front door to go outside to his truck.
ReplyDeleteI explained that the front door was not left unlocked unless the owner was sitting on the front porch. I know, Southrons are weird.
That said, the admonition reflected a very different mindset.
KM,
ReplyDeleteHere's his info.
CA has so many damned strange laws and double-plus contradictory ones too, that we spent an extra hour of the Attorney's time in a Q&A session after he ran the gamut of Shoot No-Shoot and various other CA gunsteroonie legal issues in my CCW class.
ReplyDeleteAnd then he passed out business cards and a brochure so if anybody actually has to DO something gunwise, when they wind up in the Sacramento caboose as follows...he could cover.
I hope...