(IN) Family seeks change in self-defense law

Status
Not open for further replies.

Drizzt

Member
Joined
Dec 24, 2002
Messages
2,647
Location
Moscow on the Colorado, TX
Family seeks change in self-defense law
By MICHAEL W. HOSKINS
Daily Journal staff writer
[email protected]

April 8, 2005

The family of a White River Township man shot and killed a year ago by a neighbor is trying to change Indiana’s self-defense law, which shielded the shooter from criminal prosecution.

Civilians should have to follow rules similar to what police must obey in a shooting and should have to attend classes before getting a permit to own a weapon, the family says.

Family members are working with State Rep. David Frizzell, who represents part of White River Township, to make the changes.

“As citizens, we do have the right to defend ourselves,†said Terry Doty, uncle of the man shot last year. “But I don’t think we need to strap on guns like in the wild West and shoot without calling police. That’s not what our society is wanting to become.â€

Doty said discussions about changing the law stem from the death of his nephew, 44-year-old Bruce Mills, last spring. Mills was shot by a neighbor in the Oak Meadows Mobile Home Community on March 29, 2004.

Mills had been smashing windows of an empty trailer with an ax handle, and witnesses said he made an aggressive move toward Daniel Floyd, who had come outside his mobile home to investigate the noise.

Floyd fired at Mills with a 9-mm handgun from 8 to 9 feet away, hitting him in the neck and lower body. Mills stumbled, collapsed against the vacant trailer and died.

Floyd told authorities he was protecting himself and his family, and witnesses corroborated his account. He was not arrested.

In June, Johnson County Prosecutor Lance Hamner asked a grand jury to decide whether Floyd should face charges. They decided no.

“We weren’t happy with (Floyd) being a vigilante and taking the law into his own hands without calling 911,†Doty said. “There’s nothing we can do about our nephew’s situation, but we’d like to do this in memory of him and make sure the next family has some recourse.â€

Indiana law gives Hoosiers the right to use deadly force against an attacker if it’s necessary to prevent serious injury or death.

In summary, the law says a person is justified in using reasonable force to protect himself or someone else from what he believes to be illegal force.

Frizzell said he is interested in working with Mills’ family to explore possible changes.

“It’s very difficult to know how you can prevent something like this from happening, but we want to make sure it benefits everyone in the state,†he said.

Doty said the family plans to dub any potential legislation as Mills Bill in honor of his nephew. They want state law to mandate that people call 911 or alert police before shooting in self-defense, he said.

The Johnson County Sheriff’s Office agrees with that idea and encourages people who witness a crime or fear for their safety to call 911.

“The best advice is to call and have us investigate,†Chief Deputy Doug Cox said. “If there’s time, let us make the call about what to do.â€

If a person does shoot, the family wants individuals to follow the procedures police are required to obey when firing on someone.

Police are allowed to use deadly force when someone poses a threat of serious physical harm or threatens the officer with a weapon or to prevent a felon from escaping, Cox said.

In training, officers are encouraged to shout, “Please stop,†before firing, Cox said. But he said police are not required to give the warning and sometimes do not have time.

“If given the chance, we want them to,†Cox said. “But it’s often a split-second decision; and if we’re taking fire, we can’t be stopping to think about saying something.â€

Doty said civilians should have to follow the same guidelines if put into a situation where they fear for their safety.

The family would also like to require Hoosiers to attend classes on gun use before obtaining a permit, Doty said.

He said that Frizzell has not made any promises to the family and that legislators likely will not discuss the issue until next year.

“That’s fine. We just don’t want the ball dropped,†Doty said. “Things can happen. It just depends on how interested (lawmakers) are and what kind of pblic backing there is.â€

http://www.thejournalnet.com/Main.asp?SectionID=1&SubSectionID=113&ArticleID=50250
 
Call 911, eh? Do these idiots realize that self defense situations can and do occur ANYWHERE? Do these idiots realize that even Verizon Wireless and AMPS cellular will not be reachable everywhere? Hold on, I need to call 911 before I shoot you. "Sorry, we are unavailable, please hold for approximately 30 seconds.

To that, I give this picture:

s_fightback.jpg

I guess this family wants others to succeed where their relative didn't, ie murdering and maiming men, women, and children. They didn't do enough enabling their relative to commit violent criminal acts against their fellow man, now they want to his fellow criminals to do the same thing.

Shame on them, and shame on the media for giving them any sort of airplay.
 
The complaintants need to learn a few rules"

1. Don't bring an axe handle to a gunfight. Even if you aren't shot, you're gonna look silly with it sticking out of your rear end, and people will call you "tripod". The nice part about that is you won't need an extra chair.

2. Nice people own guns too, so don't assume you can jump the fence and start breaking their property and then threaten the owner without consequences.

3. Try not to look too stupid in calling for some law requiring training or permitting of law abiding firearms owners. Especially when the people of the Grand Jury have already spoken and no-billed the shooter. THAT should speak louder than your whining about Uncle Dummy.

4. As to the rep who is "promising" to bring this up in legislation, he might well be looking for a new job come next election. Common work-a-day folks have pretty much had it with "criminal's rights", and some are finally taking their own seriously.

5. If you have trouble with telling right from wrong, I suggest YOU call 911 before threatening your neighbor in his own yard with a large stick and ending up with a 9MM hickey. Those aren't as bad as 12 gauge hits-takes a lot of bondo to fill the crater.

6. If all else fails, why don't you dig a hole for yourself and a can of spray paint to sign your name on a junk piece of wood. Somebody will feel sorry for you and cover the hole-if you leave the shovel on top.
 
The family would also like to require Hoosiers to attend classes on gun use before obtaining a permit, Doty said.

Is the permit to own/buy a gun or to carry one?

-Bill
 
whm, to carry. $25 for 4 years.

Talk about the delusional raving of an emotional distaught family. :rolleyes: BTW, why do you think the paper did not list Bruce Mills' prior convictions? :D

Anyone else have "South Park" flash through their mind in reading this? Uncle Jimbo's "they're coming right for us!" :D

"911"! BLAM! BLAM! BLAM! Gee, officer, I called 911. :evil:

This has zero chance of becoming law here. Another politician pandering to someone's grief and shame in being related to a thug. "It's not his fault that he's a thug! It's the law's fault because. . . um . . . er . . . he done got shot. That's why!"

In my many years of being involved in the criminal justice system, I am convinced that this state is a better place because of what happened. Future Bruce Millses should take note.
 
Last edited:
They've got it all figured out, don't they? I guess their point is that if only that bad man had been forced by law to take a training course and qualify on a range BEFORE he shot their nephew, they'd feel much better about the whole thing?

:scrutiny:

I don't know what the deceased's "wingspan" was, but I can tell you right now I feel confident that, from eight feet away, I could fatally brain you with an ax handle without taking a step.

If a person does shoot, the family wants individuals to follow the procedures police are required to obey when firing on someone.

Police are allowed to use deadly force when someone poses a threat of serious physical harm or threatens the officer with a weapon or to prevent a felon from escaping, Cox said.

Uh huh. So they don't actually have any idea what the police are required to do in this situation, then, do they? Nice.
 
I don't know what the deceased's "wingspan" was, but I can tell you right now I feel confident that, from eight feet away, I could fatally brain you with an ax handle without taking a step.

Hmmm.....Lesseee.....I'm 6'4" and buy dress shirts with 36" sleeves, so lets say 3' arms. Add in a 4' axe handle...nope, doesn't make eight feet.

DON GWINN IS A HUGE FREAKING APE!!!

Must be!

:what: :neener: :D

On a more serious note....that one lousy foot of free space between me and a guy my size with an axe handle means I am way, way too late getting my gun out and shooting to stop!
 
Re Priors

El Tejon, you seem well informed on this, did he have prior convictions? That thought crossed my mind reading the story.
They could call the principle that you are justified in shooting some one convincingly threatening you with violence the Mills Doctrine.
 
The family and the ....

esteemed state representative seemed to be a bit confused. On the one hand they suggest us ordinary peons have to follow the same rules as police but on the other hand they suggest we should be required to call 911 first.

"In training, officers are encouraged to shout, “Please stop,†before firing, Cox said. But he said police are not required to give the warning and sometimes do not have time." So, sometimes the police officers don't even have the time to shout two, one-syllable words prior to shooting to save their own life but I will magically somehow always have time to open my cell phone, dial, wait through one or more rings, and explain the situation (in way more than two syllables I'm sure) prior to being able to legally defend myself on my property from a guy 8 feet away with an axe handle? Nope.

migoi
 
The family needs to learn that if they raise a dirtbag child, it will fail the test of natural selection.
A good whuppin with a peach switch might have changed his life, 20 years ago.

Write him off to lack of training in being a human being.
And yes I do believe that creatures that act like that are not human.

Sam
 
sv, I am advised by the tilecrawler grapevine that: 1. yes, he did have priors; 2. Johnson County, Indiana is a better place to live in today.

No need for the fancy name change; I see no need to memorialize Mills. Heck, we don't even like changing clocks here. We'll just stick to calling it what we always have: Indiana Code 35-41-3-2, defense of persons and property.

migoi, I have dealings with Cox before, professionally and we have lectured at Butler together. He seems like a squared away dude. I am certain what he actually said was chopped up a bit. Of course, I have more patience with that kind of thing since it happens to me in the news. :D
 
Actually,

I have no quarrel with what Cox said. He was telling the truth - when the situation has deteriorated to the point you have to use a firearm to keep from dying then any steps which do not increase the speed of stopping the threat should be discarded or ignored. I was quoting Cox to point out that the police don't have an inviolate rule about pausing prior to defending yourself. The police are encouraged to use that phrase, not mandated, with no penalties if the bad guy is acting too quickly to make pausing to utter those words fatal to the police.

My problem is with the family and the state representative, David Frizzell. Those individuals are the ones that don't seem to understand that speed is of the essence in those situations. From the quotes in the article I would guess that Chief Cox is probably muttering under his breath something along the lines of "Let's put you on the receiving end of a dirtbag with an axe handle, on approach at 8 feet, and see how long you're willing to wait before you shoot."

I'm sorry if I was unclear.

migoi
 
Boo Hoo!! our son the maniac was killed while on a rampage! How unfair that the law allows people to defend themselves from maniacs like our son! I want the law changed! Wah, Wahhhh!!!
Josh
 
4. As to the rep who is "promising" to bring this up in legislation, he might well be looking for a new job come next election. Common work-a-day folks have pretty much had it with "criminal's rights", and some are finally taking their own seriously.

That's exactly what this comes down to, isn't it. "Criminals' rights." How can even the dumbest people fail to understand that CRIMINALS (like the deceased moron Bruce Mills) are not the ones we should be looking out for?!

This family needs to step back and realize just how unsympathetic their relative really was, and then **** about pressing for a law that would have limited the rights of a threatened victim in favor of some miscreant's "right" to be protected from people who are defending themselves against him.

I have an idea: If you don't want to get shot, don't make yourself be perceived as a threat by other people!


They've got it all figured out, don't they? I guess their point is that if only that bad man had been forced by law to take a training course and qualify on a range BEFORE he shot their nephew, they'd feel much better about the whole thing?

I think that what they are hoping for is that if a guy followed the training or this new law they're proposing and stopped to call 911, that might have given their miscreant relative the time he needed to brain the gun-bearer with the axe handle. They're looking for ways to assure that criminals don't get shot by good people. That's all this comes down to. They are lobbying for criminal protection, under the guise that it's somehow "barbaric" or "wild west" for people to protect themselves using an effective handgun as opposed to a useless, ineffective cellular phone.

-Jeffrey
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top