How does the law define self-defense?

The metaphorical lines drawn between self-defense and assault are blurry for most people. Many debate the limits and permission of self-defense, with interpretations ranging from liberal to conservative. But regardless of common beliefs or misconceptions, it is the law and the law alone that dictates the rules of self-defense. Read on to learn the true meaning of self defense.

Self defense law

Depending on the state you live in, the laws governing self-defense can vary. But ultimately, the ground rules are relatively the same across the board. For example, Indiana law recognizes that citizens have the right to protect their home against unlawful intrusions, as well as to defend themselves and others from physical harm or crime. And this is essentially the same recognition for all state laws. The Indiana legislature presents its statute regarding self-defense with this recognition and defines the self-defense laws in Indiana Code 35-41-3-2.

Although in part, IC 35-41-3-2 says the following:

“A person is justified in using reasonable force against any other person to protect the person or a third person from what the person reasonably believes to be the imminent use of unlawful force.

However, a person:

(1) The use of deadly force is justified; Y

(2) You do not have a duty to withdraw;

… if the person reasonably believes that his force is necessary to prevent serious bodily injury to the person or a third person or the commission of a forced felony offense. No person in this state shall be put in legal danger of any kind for protecting the person or a third person by reasonable means necessary. “

Take a more comprehensive look at IC 35-41-3-2

Evidence of rationality

So to put it in a more understandable context, Indiana law says that a person has the right to defend himself if two kinds of “rationality” are evident. First, the victim must use a form of self-defense that is reasonable to the ratio of force used against her. For example, if a stalker pushes you, it is unreasonable to hold a blunt object to the head. That would not be considered self defense. However, if the assailant was swinging a blunt object on your head, you would have the right to do the same in self-defense.

Second, the victim’s belief that the person will harm her with unlawful force must be reasonable. For example, if a girlfriend is yelling at her boyfriend and then hitting him because he yelled at her, it wouldn’t be in self-defense because it wasn’t reasonable to think that her boyfriend was going to physically hurt her just because he yelled at her. to her.

Both elements of rationality must be present to qualify to defend yourself. But also, the same stipulations apply to self-defense using deadly force. If a person is trying to use deadly force against you or others, you have the right to defend yourself and others with the same deadly force. For example, if an intruder breaks into a house and points a gun at the family, the occupants have the right to shoot and kill the intruder to protect their own lives.

Additional elements of a self-defense case

If an attorney cannot persuade the prosecution that a person’s claim for self-defense is substantiated, then the case must go to trial and be presented before a judge and jury. In this situation, the criminal defense attorney would have to prove the aforementioned elements, as well as these 3 additional ones:

1. The victim was in a place where he had a right to be.

two. The victim:

to) acted without fault;

B) it did not provoke or instigate violence;

vs) did not voluntarily participate in the violence.

3. The victim showed reasonable fear and / or apprehension of harm or death.

So in the case of a stereotypical bar fight, two guys yelling at each other for “do something” gold “Hit me“It would be considered a provocation and a willingness to engage in violence. Therefore, if one man hits the other’s teeth, a self-defense claim will not stand in court.