Imagine two men breaking in to your home, duct taping up you
and your spouse. Imagine those first few moments of fear, worry, and rage. But
instead of sitting still and engaging in unproductive self-loathing for letting
the bad guys get the drop on you, you break your bonds and manage to get to
your gun. Minutes later, one assailant is wounded and the other dead. Your wife
is injured, you’re stunned and deafened by the gunfire, and the police find you
with duct tape still on your body.
That part is truth; thankfully, no one died. It
happened Monday night in northwest Las Vegas. At least two men broke into a
home and restrained the couple inside. The second man, shot in his butt, drove
himself to the hospital where he was contacted by police. Another man lay dead
in the backyard. The circumstances may reveal more nuance than a random attack,
but the fact remains that if Nevada Democrats have their way, the wounded
robber and the family of the dead criminal could sue the homeowner. That’s
right: save your life and get sued.
SB
254, introduced just last week, would repeal entirely the civil immunity
protection from lawsuit when you legally and justifiably injure or kill someone
in self-defense. Just imagine the outcome Monday night if the gun owner hadn't been willing to risk his home and whatever money he had to fight a lawsuit and decided not to pull the trigger.
Imagine a lawyer concocting some story to get a sympathetic
jury to place fault on a gun owner who was just trying to protect his family or
stay alive. We have seen far too many examples lately where politically
motivated prosecutions targeted armed citizens and police officers for shooting
in self-defense. We have seen judges and juries both tainted by their own
biases and fail to do the right thing. Civil immunity when no law was broken
exists to spare someone who did no wrong from vindictive criminals who want to
gamble that their lawyer can tell a better story.
Democrats do not like gun owners who defend themselves,
period. Anything they can do erode the rights of gun owners and dial back the
protections of Nevada law furthers their goal of eventual gun disarmament. They
would rather have citizens too afraid of being sued to defend themselves. Death
of the innocent is preferable to self-defense. All this bill would do is
encourage frivolous lawsuits and make Nevada a more dangerous place.
They did not create a discretionary
exemption, where cases that were clearly ambiguous could be reviewed by a judge
for a lawsuit. Instead, they threw the whole thing out. This is a clear shot at
Republican Senator Roberson, who sponsored 2015’s SB 175 which added the very
protection Democrats are seeking to repeal. It’s personal with them, just with
the SB 115 library open carry bill.
Share your comments
with the legislators here. (SB254, “against”)
Imagine this happened, but the would-be victim was under the influence. Then every action he took to protect himself, would have been illegal.
ReplyDelete