IN: Woman kills officer's attacker, now getting sued

[Grundy1133]

well i purchased it a few weeks ago just to be safe. the way i figure it, if i ever do have to use my gun for self defense, I'm going to court regardless and legal fees would cost more than i care to afford. im not exactly well off... so for me its a good investment

[C-dub]

well i purchased it a few weeks ago just to be safe. the way i figure it, if i ever do have to use my gun for self defense, I'm going to court regardless and legal fees would cost more than i care to afford. im not exactly well off... so for me its a good investment

If you do have to use your gun and IF they will actually cover your costs for that event. Insurance companies are notoriously stingy about when they will spend money and will look for any excuse to not pay up when it is for someone else. I hope you're only out the cost of your premium.

[chasfm11]

well i purchased it a few weeks ago just to be safe. the way i figure it, if i ever do have to use my gun for self defense, I'm going to court regardless and legal fees would cost more than i care to afford. im not exactly well off... so for me its a good investment

If you do have to use your gun and IF they will actually cover your costs for that event. Insurance companies are notoriously stingy about when they will spend money and will look for any excuse to not pay up when it is for someone else. I hope you're only out the cost of your premium.

[Grundy1133]

well i purchased it a few weeks ago just to be safe. the way i figure it, if i ever do have to use my gun for self defense, I'm going to court regardless and legal fees would cost more than i care to afford. im not exactly well off... so for me its a good investment

If you do have to use your gun and IF they will actually cover your costs for that event. Insurance companies are notoriously stingy about when they will spend money and will look for any excuse to not pay up when it is for someone else. I hope you're only out the cost of your premium.

TX LawShield

[C-dub]

well i purchased it a few weeks ago just to be safe. the way i figure it, if i ever do have to use my gun for self defense, I'm going to court regardless and legal fees would cost more than i care to afford. im not exactly well off... so for me its a good investment

If you do have to use your gun and IF they will actually cover your costs for that event. Insurance companies are notoriously stingy about when they will spend money and will look for any excuse to not pay up when it is for someone else. I hope you're only out the cost of your premium.

TX LawShield

???

Here’s a few thoughts from some others.
https://texags.com/forums/34/topics/2842359

[cirus]

This crap is the reason I avoid people as much as possible. Right or wrong means nothing anymore. Money is all that counts. I know lawyers are necessary but anyone that take a case like this has no morals.

[NNT]

I have friends who are lawyers, and they do have some morals. Mostly they are in tax and patent law. When the argument is made that the lawyer is loyal to the client at all costs for the most aggressive representation, then for good or bad there is a similarity to prostitutes. The opinion or judgement of the person being hired does not come into play. They do whatever they are paid to do. They maybe even get more money for getting the client off.

The judges need to use common sense and toss these cases. If not already law I would support creating one that says if you are injured in the act if committing a crime, no civil lawsuit can be brought.

[Oldgringo]

"This is why people sign up for concealed carry legal protection / insurance."

Better be certain you understand 'what isn't covered' if you decide to buy this stuff.

You could be horribly surprised to find all the premiums you paid...don't cover much of your legal costs, while the rest of the fees involved not covered come directly out of YOUR pocket.

So those of you feel comfortably covered ...may actually not be

Additionally, maybe one should not be in a really big rush to the gun. As right as one may be, one can count on some fee grabbing, ambulance chasing lawyer somewhere wanting alleged victim to sue somebody (one) for big buckaroo$. The moral of this comment is: be prepared for the act/s of doing right to be very co$tly?

[Pawpaw]

I have friends who are lawyers, and they do have some morals. Mostly they are in tax and patent law. When the argument is made that the lawyer is loyal to the client at all costs for the most aggressive representation, then for good or bad there is a similarity to prostitutes. The opinion or judgement of the person being hired does not come into play. They do whatever they are paid to do. They maybe even get more money for getting the client off.

The judges need to use common sense and toss these cases. If not already law I would support creating one that says if you are injured in the act if committing a crime, no civil lawsuit can be brought.

You can't deny someone's ability to file a civil suit, but in Texas, the outcome is a forgone conclusion:

CPRC §83.001. CIVIL IMMUNITY.
A defendant who uses force or deadly force that is justified under Chapter 9, Penal Code, is immune from civil liability for personal injury or death that results from the defendant’s use of force or deadly force, as applicable.

[Oldgringo]

I have friends who are lawyers, and they do have some morals. Mostly they are in tax and patent law. When the argument is made that the lawyer is loyal to the client at all costs for the most aggressive representation, then for good or bad there is a similarity to prostitutes. The opinion or judgement of the person being hired does not come into play. They do whatever they are paid to do. They maybe even get more money for getting the client off.

The judges need to use common sense and toss these cases. If not already law I would support creating one that says if you are injured in the act if committing a crime, no civil lawsuit can be brought.

You can't deny someone's ability to file a civil suit, but in Texas, the outcome is a forgone conclusion:

CPRC §83.001. CIVIL IMMUNITY.
A defendant who uses force or deadly force that is justified under Chapter 9, Penal Code, is immune from civil liability for personal injury or death that results from the defendant’s use of force or deadly force, as applicable.

The argument could drag out for day$ over, "as applicable". While every case seems to be alike, they all are different.

I hope to do what is best for me and mine at the time, and in the event, of . Perhaps I can help some other poor soul in the course of doing what I feel is right but, I'm to elderly to be lookin' for an opportunity to be a hero.

[crazy2medic]

Better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6!

[Oldgringo]

Better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6!

totally; however, in this instance the shooter was not under attack, was she?

[crazy2medic]

Better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6!

totally; however, in this instance the shooter was not under attack, was she?

True, but what kind of sorry society are we if nobody comes to the aid of those that hold the thin blue line!
I for one will go to an officers aid what ever the consequences!

[dlh]

Have no idea what Indiana law says about any of this. Would be interested in the comparative responsibility statute of that state and other issues.

Difficult to believe that case will get very far.

[Deltaboy]

The Judge should throw it out , dress down the Lawyer and the Perps family for wasting the Courts time.