re: Qualified Immunity for Concealed Permit Holders?

quote:

---

I still don't understand what the concealed carry class has to do with rewarding qualified immunity to some members of civilian society?

---

As it stands, the use of a firearm to defend oneself is very likely to result in a huge financial burden, if not bankruptcy, either from spending money to hire a lawyer to defend the inevitable civil suit from young scholar’s family, or, even worse, paying a judgment because they convinced a jury that some action you took in the collection of split seconds that made up the encounter was somehow slightly negligent.

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.