- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Qualified Immunity for Concealed Permit Holders?
Posted on 2/21/24 at 11:17 am
Posted on 2/21/24 at 11:17 am
Can someone explain this one to me? I saw a BR Business Report blurb and link about this.
My understanding of QI for officers would be we are asking them to inject themselves into dangerous situations all the time for public safety. It's their job to potentially have firearms encounters.
Not sure why that should get extended to concealed carry holders? There may be a perfectly logical explanation. I'm all for constituational carry.
quote:
One proposal gives concealed carry license holders a level of qualified immunity currently reserved for law enforcement and other government agents. Qualified immunity protects police officers and other public employees from civil liability, making it extremely difficult to sue them even when they injure or kill someone or violate certain laws or an individual’s rights.
Under the proposal, immunity would apply to private citizens who hold concealed carry permits—except in cases of gross negligence, intentional misconduct or the commission of a crime that results in a felony conviction.
My understanding of QI for officers would be we are asking them to inject themselves into dangerous situations all the time for public safety. It's their job to potentially have firearms encounters.
Not sure why that should get extended to concealed carry holders? There may be a perfectly logical explanation. I'm all for constituational carry.
14
Posted on 2/21/24 at 11:22 am to RaginCajunz
Pretty simple
If you have a conceal carry permit, you get some civil liability immunity if you shoot someone.
If you do not have conceal carry permit, you’ll have no protection from being found civilly liable for shooting someone.
This would protect the conceal carry industry and hopefully keep some of the stupidity at bay.
If you have a conceal carry permit, you get some civil liability immunity if you shoot someone.
If you do not have conceal carry permit, you’ll have no protection from being found civilly liable for shooting someone.
This would protect the conceal carry industry and hopefully keep some of the stupidity at bay.
Posted on 2/21/24 at 11:26 am to SlidellCajun
quote:
Pretty simple
If you have a conceal carry permit, you get some civil liability immunity if you shoot someone.
If you do not have conceal carry permit, you’ll have no protection from being found civilly liable for shooting someone.
This would protect the conceal carry industry and hopefully keep some of the stupidity at bay.
Having gone through the concealed carry class, I'm not sure why that permit should grant such immunity. I'd assume it is mostly a protectionary measure for the CC instructors' livelyhoods.
What about having that CC class should protect someone from a "bad kill?"
Posted on 2/21/24 at 11:32 am to RaginCajunz
I want to end qualified immunity or reduce it for law enforcement. It's been a terrible situation having them not responsible for their own decisions.
Expanding this beyond them is stupid although I'd immediately go get my concealed and carry for the protections...
Expanding this beyond them is stupid although I'd immediately go get my concealed and carry for the protections...
Posted on 2/21/24 at 11:33 am to SlidellCajun
quote:
If you have a conceal carry permit, you get some civil liability immunity if you shoot someone.
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. If there's someone out there without a permit who acts the exact same way, why should I have any more rights? Only reason I have a permit over constitutional carry (allowed in Texas where I live) is because certain establishments allow licensed carry, but not constitutional carry. We all still have to follow the same laws outside of which posted signs we must obey for trespassing reasons. I have no more training or responsibility as a license holder than when I didn't have the license.
No one should be civilly liable for legitimately hurting/killing an attacker. All should be equally liable if they have a bad shoot. License shouldn't play a part. I'd rather the license be useless, but some private businesses still give it preference.
Posted on 2/21/24 at 11:33 am to RaginCajunz
Scenario: Bad guy is beating the shite out of you in a mugging and reaches for a knife. You are able to draw your weapon and kill him. Police do not press charges. Bad guys family sues you in a civil court for a million because he was a good boy trying to earn money for college.
This law would tell the family to frick off.
This is an excellent bill.
This law would tell the family to frick off.
This is an excellent bill.
Posted on 2/21/24 at 11:33 am to RaginCajunz
quote:
Not sure why that should get extended to concealed carry holders? There may be a perfectly logical explanation. I'm all for constituational carry.
Do you not know that this civil immunity already exists in 23 states with any self-defense shooting. That's what "Stand Your Ground" Laws provide. Extending it to CCW permit holders is pretty much a non-issue.
Posted on 2/21/24 at 11:37 am to oklahogjr
quote:
I want to end qualified immunity or reduce it for law enforcement. It's been a terrible situation having them not responsible for their own decisions.
Swell idea when cops are leaving in masses and we have an invasion and activists destroying our country
Posted on 2/21/24 at 11:39 am to oklahogjr
quote:
want to end qualified immunity or reduce it for law enforcement. It's been a terrible situation having them not responsible for their own decisions.
Expanding this beyond them is stupid although I'd immediately go get my concealed and carry for the protections...
Imagine having an entire profession threaten to walk if something was proposed to make them accountable for their actions.
The obnoxious part of this is that active duty military is held to higher standards in every regard (often with lower pay, especially junior enlisted), with much more dire consequences when they really mess up.
Posted on 2/21/24 at 11:43 am to oklahogjr
quote:
I want to end qualified immunity or reduce it for law enforcement. It's been a terrible situation having them not responsible for their own decisions.
A police officer does not get qualified immunity if they are convicted of crime or fired for their conduct. If you get what you want you’ll have cops getting sued right and left by anyone with a gripe and they’ll have to be personally liable if they broke no laws and did nothing criminal. No one wants to be a cop now, who is going to sign up for that?
Concealed carry holders should have some level of qualified immunity, no issue with that one bit
Posted on 2/21/24 at 11:45 am to oklahogjr
quote:
I want to end qualified immunity or reduce it for law enforcement.
Let's end it for Politicians first, then work our way down.
Posted on 2/21/24 at 11:45 am to RaginCajunz
So why isn’t this an issue with open carry? We have been having open carry for decade’s, just apply the exact same principle to the law, but the firearm is concealed. This isn’t rocket science.
Posted on 2/21/24 at 11:46 am to ChanceOfRainIsNever
quote:
police officer does not get qualified immunity if they are convicted of crime or fired for their conduct.
That's easy, just quit before they can fire you, and get a job in a neighboring municipality.
Fortunately things like desertion, dereliction of duty, cowardice, etc don't exist for LEO like they do in UCMJ. Further, things like dishonorable discharge and bad conduct discharge only exist for military, not LEO, meaning once a LEO quits they can float around after resigning in disgrace with no penalties whatsoever.
This post was edited on 2/21/24 at 11:48 am
Posted on 2/21/24 at 11:46 am to NYNolaguy1
quote:
Imagine having an entire profession threaten to walk if something was proposed to make them accountable for their actions.
So if a cop lawfully arrests someone and that person sues them then they should have no civil liability protections whatsoever? Because that’s what you’re saying. That’s not “holding them accountable”, it’s stupid and unworkable in the real world
Posted on 2/21/24 at 11:48 am to ChanceOfRainIsNever
quote:
So if a cop lawfully arrests someone and that person sues them then they should have no civil liability protections whatsoever? Because that’s what you’re saying.
Did I say that?
Posted on 2/21/24 at 11:49 am to NYNolaguy1
That’s what you’re suggesting will lead to
Posted on 2/21/24 at 11:50 am to RaginCajunz
As mentioned already, many shootings ruled as justified in criminal court end up with the shooter getting completely gutted in the civil court. Examples are plentiful. Hence the huge uptick in CCA insurance that is out there now. I'm not a fan of qualified immunity but the idea that someone can lose their financial lives after defending themselves against an attack is beyond ludacris.
Posted on 2/21/24 at 11:50 am to ChanceOfRainIsNever
quote:
That’s what you’re suggesting will lead to
So I didn't say that?
I am suggesting more accountability and criminal punishment for things like cowardice, dereliction of duty, and desertion. I take it you think this is a bad thing.
Posted on 2/21/24 at 11:53 am to NYNolaguy1
quote:
I am suggesting more accountability and criminal punishment for things like cowardice, dereliction of duty, and desertion. I take it you think this is a bad thing.
It’s not a bad thing. Who wants cops who do that crap? I was an infantry Marine I know all about the UCMJ. Cops are already civilly liable for those things and can be sued because they’re not acting within the scope of their duties. You’re arguing for something that already exists
This post was edited on 2/21/24 at 11:54 am
Posted on 2/21/24 at 11:53 am to RaginCajunz
What if the attempted murderer has a concealed carry permit? This is a dumb law.
There are better ways to protect “good guys with a gun” than this. How about if a criminal court finds one acted reasonably in self defense or refuses to charge that makes them immune to civil damages?
There are better ways to protect “good guys with a gun” than this. How about if a criminal court finds one acted reasonably in self defense or refuses to charge that makes them immune to civil damages?
Page 1 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News