Started By
Message

re: Qualified Immunity for Concealed Permit Holders?

Posted on 2/21/24 at 1:49 pm to
Posted by cwill
Member since Jan 2005
54755 posts
Posted on 2/21/24 at 1:49 pm to
Sounds like a really, really bad idea...very Louisiana these days.
Posted by White Bear
Yonnygo
Member since Jul 2014
15218 posts
Posted on 2/21/24 at 1:52 pm to
You can bet your arse there will not be “clean” concealed carry passed in this state. What a fkn joke.
This post was edited on 2/21/24 at 1:53 pm
Posted by RaginCajunz
Member since Mar 2009
5913 posts
Posted on 2/21/24 at 1:52 pm to
quote:

In comparison to the above scenario, think of qualified immunity as a presumption that the concealed carry defender was right and justified and immune from suit unless they can prove gross neligence, malicious intent, etc. It hasn’t eliminated the possibility that they can be held liable for bad actions. It’s a decision that, as a matter of public policy, we don’t want to subject defenders to that kind of civil liability if any aspect of their actions was justified. As a society, we would rather err on the side of the defenders.



Then this should be the norm legally, not a protected class for a person who sat through an instructional day. This has the same feel to me as "hate crime" laws. Just a conservative version. I had a great instructor who I know personally. Someone who takes the coursework seriously. I'm not sure people who sat through even the best 8 hours of class are more or less likely to be right or justified than most random people put in a bad situation.



Posted by LSUbest
Coastal Plain
Member since Aug 2007
12109 posts
Posted on 2/21/24 at 1:54 pm to
quote:

I fail to see why it should create a class of citizen protected from BS civil lawsuits.


All you're asking is why.

Why NOT?

Lay out what's wrong with protecting me from a civil lawsuit for a "good" kill.
Posted by CDawson
Louisiana
Member since Dec 2017
16968 posts
Posted on 2/21/24 at 1:59 pm to
quote:

This is dumb to me, and I have a license to carry. I only have the right to use my weapon if I fear death or great bodily harm to myself or another.


Yep, I think that is why it says this

"except in cases of gross negligence, intentional misconduct or the commission of a crime that results in a felony conviction."
Posted by RaginCajunz
Member since Mar 2009
5913 posts
Posted on 2/21/24 at 2:00 pm to
quote:

All you're asking is why.

Why NOT?

Lay out what's wrong with protecting me from a civil lawsuit for a "good" kill.


It should simply the universal law of the land. I don't like special carveouts for one group.

I understand it for officers of the law who are pushed into life or death scenarios by request of society. Joe Blow who sat through a class doesn't seem to rise to the level of a special protection from prosecution.

Posted by Indefatigable
Member since Jan 2019
30417 posts
Posted on 2/21/24 at 2:01 pm to
quote:

Lay out what's wrong with protecting me from a civil lawsuit for a "good" kill.

Because current law already protects you from civil liability for a “good” kill.

quote:

Why NOT?

Using this standard instead of “why” for new legislation is exactly why Louisiana’s constitution, revised statutes, and tax code, etc are such a hot mess.
Posted by Jack Bauers HnK
Baton Rouge
Member since Jul 2008
5823 posts
Posted on 2/21/24 at 2:03 pm to
quote:

Then this should be the norm legally, not a protected class for a person who sat through an instructional day. This has the same feel to me as "hate crime" laws. Just a conservative version. I had a great instructor who I know personally. Someone who takes the coursework seriously. I'm not sure people who sat through even the best 8 hours of class are more or less likely to be right or justified than most random people put in a bad situation.


I don’t necessarily disagree with you. But if i had to pick a group to which the QI might apply within the population of every person present within the borders of Louisiana, the group that presented themselves for training and demonstrated a minimum proficiency with a handgun would not be the worst group to pick.
Posted by LSUbest
Coastal Plain
Member since Aug 2007
12109 posts
Posted on 2/21/24 at 2:03 pm to
quote:

Because current law already protects you from civil liability for a “good” kill.


Can you tell me what statute?
Posted by FATBOY TIGER
Valhalla
Member since Jan 2016
10224 posts
Posted on 2/21/24 at 2:03 pm to
quote:

You won’t need to be on a list.


But you are if you have a CHL or the LTC.
Posted by LSUbest
Coastal Plain
Member since Aug 2007
12109 posts
Posted on 2/21/24 at 2:07 pm to
quote:

It should simply the universal law of the land. I don't like special carveouts for one group.


While I would prefer that it apply to all that were LEGALLY carrying, I don't take other's candy if I can't have one.
I go earn mine.

You mad about veterans getting free lifetime CC permits?
Posted by Indefatigable
Member since Jan 2019
30417 posts
Posted on 2/21/24 at 2:07 pm to
quote:

Can you tell me what statute?

RS 14:19 and 14:20 for starters. I’m sure there are more along with jurisprudence if you care to look for it.

You have the right to use force in defense of your selves or others in Louisiana.
Posted by RaginCajunz
Member since Mar 2009
5913 posts
Posted on 2/21/24 at 2:08 pm to
quote:

I don’t necessarily disagree with you. But if i had to pick a group to which the QI might apply within the population of every person present within the borders of Louisiana, the group that presented themselves for training and demonstrated a minimum proficiency with a handgun would not be the worst group to pick.



Yes. If I had to pick one group to give the special reward to, CC holders would probably be a smart pick.

I just disagree with the premise that we SHOULD pick one group to give such a designation to.
Posted by brass2mouth
NOLA
Member since Jul 2007
19939 posts
Posted on 2/21/24 at 2:10 pm to
quote:

The larger problem is that while it doesn't protect them from criminal (as they see it) acts, it does protect them from mistakes, negligence, etc etc etc.


It protects them from mistakes, yes, not negligence but only if those mistakes aren’t clearly defined in previously established rules/case law. That’s how QI works.
Posted by Jack Bauers HnK
Baton Rouge
Member since Jul 2008
5823 posts
Posted on 2/21/24 at 2:12 pm to
quote:

Because current law already protects you from civil liability for a “good” kill.


Current law does not protect you from civil liability for a “good” kill. Any argument they come up with as to anything you did that fell below the standard of absolute perfection leads to potential comparative fault. Perhaps you shot several times but that last shot fell outside of the 1.5 second time frame some random expert thinks you could have made the decision to stop shooting because the aggression or danger had ceased. That evidence of something done slightly wrong on your part means you cannot get summary judgment (outright dismissal of the claims against you) and you will have to either settle or go in front of a jury where they’ll do everything they can to make you out to be a careless hothead just itching to shoot a young scholar who needed an involuntary contribution to his midnight basketball team.

Defending yourself for a “good shot” will cost lots of money one way or the other. Of course, I’d rather be alive for my family and broke than dead. Even better if i can be both alive and not spending money to defend myself for eliminating a threat. I would support some benefit of the doubt being given to self-defenders to avoid this situation.
Posted by RaginCajunz
Member since Mar 2009
5913 posts
Posted on 2/21/24 at 2:13 pm to
quote:

While I would prefer that it apply to all that were LEGALLY carrying, I don't take other's candy if I can't have one.
I go earn mine.

You mad about veterans getting free lifetime CC permits?


Nope. I think the idea of CC permits was stupid to begin with. But, if you have to sit through a dumb class to get the permit...vets have sunk more time in GOV training and firearms training than Joe Blow who paid his $150 and wasted a Saturday.

The CC permit class isn't some master class that teaches you perfect judgement in bad situations. It doesn't create a master race of shooter who is infallible.

Let everyone carry concealed as god intended. Fix the law to protect everyone from frivolous lawsuits.




Posted by Indefatigable
Member since Jan 2019
30417 posts
Posted on 2/21/24 at 2:17 pm to
There should be plenty of examples of that happening under current law then.
Posted by cutigersfan
Member since Jan 2019
584 posts
Posted on 2/21/24 at 2:18 pm to
I am an Army vet. I was just reading your post, and 1 thing caught my attention. Aren't all Marines infantry first, MOS secondary ?
Posted by udtiger
Over your left shoulder
Member since Nov 2006
103380 posts
Posted on 2/21/24 at 2:19 pm to
I like it
Posted by FATBOY TIGER
Valhalla
Member since Jan 2016
10224 posts
Posted on 2/21/24 at 2:19 pm to
quote:

Let everyone carry concealed as god intended.


I don't need his permission

quote:

frivolous lawsuits.


lawyers would go broke (which isn't a bad thing)
first pageprev pagePage 3 of 5Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram