Gun owners immunity bill comes under fire
By Deanna Wrenn
Associated Press Writer
February 12, 2004 5:59 PM
INDIANAPOLIS -- Indiana lawmakers are debating whether to give
nearly blanket immunity to gun owners whose weapons are used in
crimes, a proposal supported by the National Rifle Association
but which opponents say goes too far.
The bill would grant immunity to people whose guns are used in
crimes committed by other people. Only gun owners who lend out
their weapons knowing it will be used in a crime would be held
legally liable.
The Indiana House has passed the bill 77-4. It's now before the
state Senate, where some senators believe it grants too much
immunity and may seek to narrow its protection next week.
Bill sponsor Sen. Robert Meeks, R-LaGrange, said he's trying to
protect responsible gun owners whose weapons are stolen.
"Your home is your castle," Meeks said. "There should be some
protection. This is about guaranteeing the rights of an
individual to bear arms."
Mary Anne Bradfield, a lobbyist for the National Rifle
Association, testified in support of the bill Thursday before the
Senate Criminal, Civil and Public Policy Committee. She said it
would protect hunters, competitive shooters and anyone else who
owns a gun.
However, Daniel Vice of the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence
said the legislation is far too broad.
"If you walk into a day care center and lay 10 loaded handguns on
the table and stand back and watch, you'd be completely immune.
We've never seen anything like this," said Vice, a staff attorney
for the Washington, D.C.-based antigun group.
The legislation as currently written would make Indiana the first
state to grant blanket immunity, Vice said, and Indiana is the
only state seriously considering such a policy.
The bill originally would have empowered judges to stop frivolous
lawsuits brought by prisoners, but the House amended it to add
the civil immunity for gun owners.
Several members of the senate panel worry the bill gives
negligent gun owners a way to avoid responsibility for their
actions.
"All they have to say is 'We had no idea,'" said Sen. John
Broden, D-South Bend.
The committee may amend and vote on the legislation when it next
meets on Tuesday.
Under current Indiana law, gun owners can be taken to court if
their weapons were stolen and used in a crime. Even if ultimately
found not to be liable, bill supporters said, they should not
have to pay for defending themselves.
"There is a need to protect people who have their homes broken
into and their firearms stolen," said Rep. Alan Chowning,
D-Sullivan, who ushered the bill through the House.
Vice said people who find themselves in that situations would be
protected by laws against frivolous lawsuits. He said such cases
are rare.
A 1997 incident that made it to the Indiana Supreme Court,
however, is driving the legislation. Burglary suspect Timothy
Stoffer, who was 27 at the time, had taken a gun from his
parents' home and used it to shoot and kill Allen County Police
Officer Eryk Heck. Heck's family sued Stoffer's parents. Stoffer
also had died during the incident.
The Stoffers knew of their son's repeated legal problems and had
hidden their money and valuables after his release from prison
because he had stolen from family members before, the court
found.
The Stoffers normally put their gun in the attic when
grandchildren came to visit, but they left the gun in its normal
spot _ between cushions of an arm chair _ around their son, even
when they sensed he was avoiding legal authorities.
The Supreme Court said Stoffer's parents should have foreseen the
danger. Justices said that simply locking a door prevents gun
access in some cases, but in other cases gun owners may need to
do more.
http://www.indystar.com/articles/9/120162-5159-127.html
today's editorial
Firing from the hip on gun negligence
February 13, 2004
Our position is: Acting to shield irresponsible gun owners from
lawsuits is a gross example of legislative overkill.
Taxpayers who worried that the Indiana General Assembly was
wasting its time on trivia such as the budget shortfall,
kindergarten and job development should be relieved to know that
august body has worked quietly into the night protecting the
negligent.
Slipped into a bill meant to protect prison personnel from
lawsuits by inmates is a measure that would lock the courthouse
doors to persons injured by firearms whose owners failed to keep
them out of the wrong hands.
House Bill 1349 would not exempt anyone from criminal
prosecution, but would ban liability lawsuits against
irresponsible gun owners unless they deliberately put their
weapons in the hands of criminals. Concocted to thwart a lawsuit
by survivors of a murdered sheriff's deputy, it would be the most
sweeping example yet of immunity from civil lawsuits granted to a
single special interest group, says the Brady Center to Prevent
Gun Violence, which is battling related legislation in Congress.
That's fine with Sen. Robert Meeks, R-LaGrange, who is sponsoring
the bill in the Senate. If Indiana is going to be first in
something, he's glad it's the movement to classify all gun owners
as untouchable.
He's far from alone. The House passed the bill-within-a-bill 77-4
in a late-night session last week. A Senate committee will take
it up next week.
Guarding the Second Amendment against "frivolous lawsuits" is
given as the rationale for this targeted immunity legislation,
but the argument shoots blanks. In many cases across the country
involving gun dealers, manufacturers and owners, courts have
ruled that there is no constitutional right to let a firearm
wander away.
In their eagerness to please those forces that oppose any and all
gun control, Meeks and his allies are sacrificing the
constitutional right to petition the courts for a nonexistent
right to live dangerously. Meanwhile, the budget deficit grows,
kindergarten is consigned to a study committee and voters wonder
what the exercise of their right has gotten them.
http://www.indystar.com/articles/3/120277-6623-021.html
INDIANAPOLIS -- Indiana lawmakers are debating whether to give
nearly blanket immunity to gun owners whose weapons are used in
crimes, a proposal supported by the National Rifle Association
but which opponents say goes too far.
The bill would grant immunity to people whose guns are used in
crimes committed by other people. Only gun owners who lend out
their weapons knowing it will be used in a crime would be held
legally liable.
The Indiana House has passed the bill 77-4. It's now before the
state Senate, where some senators believe it grants too much
immunity and may seek to narrow its protection next week.
Bill sponsor Sen. Robert Meeks, R-LaGrange, said he's trying to
protect responsible gun owners whose weapons are stolen.
"Your home is your castle," Meeks said. "There should be some
protection. This is about guaranteeing the rights of an
individual to bear arms."
Mary Anne Bradfield, a lobbyist for the National Rifle
Association, testified in support of the bill Thursday before the
Senate Criminal, Civil and Public Policy Committee. She said it
would protect hunters, competitive shooters and anyone else who
owns a gun.
However, Daniel Vice of the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence
said the legislation is far too broad.
"If you walk into a day care center and lay 10 loaded handguns on
the table and stand back and watch, you'd be completely immune.
We've never seen anything like this," said Vice, a staff attorney
for the Washington, D.C.-based antigun group.
By Deanna Wrenn
Associated Press Writer
February 12, 2004 5:59 PM
INDIANAPOLIS -- Indiana lawmakers are debating whether to give
nearly blanket immunity to gun owners whose weapons are used in
crimes, a proposal supported by the National Rifle Association
but which opponents say goes too far.
The bill would grant immunity to people whose guns are used in
crimes committed by other people. Only gun owners who lend out
their weapons knowing it will be used in a crime would be held
legally liable.
The Indiana House has passed the bill 77-4. It's now before the
state Senate, where some senators believe it grants too much
immunity and may seek to narrow its protection next week.
Bill sponsor Sen. Robert Meeks, R-LaGrange, said he's trying to
protect responsible gun owners whose weapons are stolen.
"Your home is your castle," Meeks said. "There should be some
protection. This is about guaranteeing the rights of an
individual to bear arms."
Mary Anne Bradfield, a lobbyist for the National Rifle
Association, testified in support of the bill Thursday before the
Senate Criminal, Civil and Public Policy Committee. She said it
would protect hunters, competitive shooters and anyone else who
owns a gun.
However, Daniel Vice of the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence
said the legislation is far too broad.
"If you walk into a day care center and lay 10 loaded handguns on
the table and stand back and watch, you'd be completely immune.
We've never seen anything like this," said Vice, a staff attorney
for the Washington, D.C.-based antigun group.
The legislation as currently written would make Indiana the first
state to grant blanket immunity, Vice said, and Indiana is the
only state seriously considering such a policy.
The bill originally would have empowered judges to stop frivolous
lawsuits brought by prisoners, but the House amended it to add
the civil immunity for gun owners.
Several members of the senate panel worry the bill gives
negligent gun owners a way to avoid responsibility for their
actions.
"All they have to say is 'We had no idea,'" said Sen. John
Broden, D-South Bend.
The committee may amend and vote on the legislation when it next
meets on Tuesday.
Under current Indiana law, gun owners can be taken to court if
their weapons were stolen and used in a crime. Even if ultimately
found not to be liable, bill supporters said, they should not
have to pay for defending themselves.
"There is a need to protect people who have their homes broken
into and their firearms stolen," said Rep. Alan Chowning,
D-Sullivan, who ushered the bill through the House.
Vice said people who find themselves in that situations would be
protected by laws against frivolous lawsuits. He said such cases
are rare.
A 1997 incident that made it to the Indiana Supreme Court,
however, is driving the legislation. Burglary suspect Timothy
Stoffer, who was 27 at the time, had taken a gun from his
parents' home and used it to shoot and kill Allen County Police
Officer Eryk Heck. Heck's family sued Stoffer's parents. Stoffer
also had died during the incident.
The Stoffers knew of their son's repeated legal problems and had
hidden their money and valuables after his release from prison
because he had stolen from family members before, the court
found.
The Stoffers normally put their gun in the attic when
grandchildren came to visit, but they left the gun in its normal
spot _ between cushions of an arm chair _ around their son, even
when they sensed he was avoiding legal authorities.
The Supreme Court said Stoffer's parents should have foreseen the
danger. Justices said that simply locking a door prevents gun
access in some cases, but in other cases gun owners may need to
do more.
http://www.indystar.com/articles/9/120162-5159-127.html
today's editorial
Firing from the hip on gun negligence
February 13, 2004
Our position is: Acting to shield irresponsible gun owners from
lawsuits is a gross example of legislative overkill.
Taxpayers who worried that the Indiana General Assembly was
wasting its time on trivia such as the budget shortfall,
kindergarten and job development should be relieved to know that
august body has worked quietly into the night protecting the
negligent.
Slipped into a bill meant to protect prison personnel from
lawsuits by inmates is a measure that would lock the courthouse
doors to persons injured by firearms whose owners failed to keep
them out of the wrong hands.
House Bill 1349 would not exempt anyone from criminal
prosecution, but would ban liability lawsuits against
irresponsible gun owners unless they deliberately put their
weapons in the hands of criminals. Concocted to thwart a lawsuit
by survivors of a murdered sheriff's deputy, it would be the most
sweeping example yet of immunity from civil lawsuits granted to a
single special interest group, says the Brady Center to Prevent
Gun Violence, which is battling related legislation in Congress.
That's fine with Sen. Robert Meeks, R-LaGrange, who is sponsoring
the bill in the Senate. If Indiana is going to be first in
something, he's glad it's the movement to classify all gun owners
as untouchable.
He's far from alone. The House passed the bill-within-a-bill 77-4
in a late-night session last week. A Senate committee will take
it up next week.
Guarding the Second Amendment against "frivolous lawsuits" is
given as the rationale for this targeted immunity legislation,
but the argument shoots blanks. In many cases across the country
involving gun dealers, manufacturers and owners, courts have
ruled that there is no constitutional right to let a firearm
wander away.
In their eagerness to please those forces that oppose any and all
gun control, Meeks and his allies are sacrificing the
constitutional right to petition the courts for a nonexistent
right to live dangerously. Meanwhile, the budget deficit grows,
kindergarten is consigned to a study committee and voters wonder
what the exercise of their right has gotten them.
http://www.indystar.com/articles/3/120277-6623-021.html
INDIANAPOLIS -- Indiana lawmakers are debating whether to give
nearly blanket immunity to gun owners whose weapons are used in
crimes, a proposal supported by the National Rifle Association
but which opponents say goes too far.
The bill would grant immunity to people whose guns are used in
crimes committed by other people. Only gun owners who lend out
their weapons knowing it will be used in a crime would be held
legally liable.
The Indiana House has passed the bill 77-4. It's now before the
state Senate, where some senators believe it grants too much
immunity and may seek to narrow its protection next week.
Bill sponsor Sen. Robert Meeks, R-LaGrange, said he's trying to
protect responsible gun owners whose weapons are stolen.
"Your home is your castle," Meeks said. "There should be some
protection. This is about guaranteeing the rights of an
individual to bear arms."
Mary Anne Bradfield, a lobbyist for the National Rifle
Association, testified in support of the bill Thursday before the
Senate Criminal, Civil and Public Policy Committee. She said it
would protect hunters, competitive shooters and anyone else who
owns a gun.
However, Daniel Vice of the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence
said the legislation is far too broad.
"If you walk into a day care center and lay 10 loaded handguns on
the table and stand back and watch, you'd be completely immune.
We've never seen anything like this," said Vice, a staff attorney
for the Washington, D.C.-based antigun group.
