The Right to Self-defense Or How to Enforce a Restraining Order HB 1071 | P J Klosinski

By P J Klosinski

You are the victim of an act of violence which qualifies you to receive a civil protection order. You receive approval from the court to protect yourself from further violence and are handed a piece of paper upon which is written in boldface type an order for protection directed at the offender advising of consequences for violation. Government has done its job, you are safe, right? Wrong. You have been provided all the protection the government allows under the eligibility requirements for an order of protection. Now you must wait until the order is violated for government to take action against the offender.

How are you allowed to defend yourself against violence?

Is that order on a piece of paper going to impede or stop the offender? Why are you reduced to being helpless to defend yourself against a violent act? You are not. You can apply for a license to carry a handgun and receive a permit so long as you are determined to be a “proper person” by government. So you decide that the situation is necessary to file the application, submit to the background check, supply your fingerprints and pay the fee to be given the privilege to wait to receive permission for self-defense with a firearm. The Right of every individual to determine self-protection is guaranteed in the Indiana Constitution. Yet what exactly has become of that right to defend life?

What limits your right to self-protection with a firearm?

The Indiana Constitution in plain language states “The people shall have a right to bear arms, for the defense of themselves and the State.” The Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution includes the statement “the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” The terms shall and shall not are recognized as absolute in law.

A Right defined in Black’s Law Dictionary 6th ed states; “A right guaranteed to the citizens by the United States Constitution and state constitutions and so guaranteed as to prevent legislative interference therewith”. Government has not been prevented from legislating conditions to inalienable rights turning your individual right into government privilege. Indiana Hierarchy Law demands compliance from Indiana government officials to the Constitution(s) including “All statutes of the general assembly of the state in force, and not inconsistent with such constitution(s).” Indiana government has a specific qualifying command in the Indiana Constitution stating” No law shall be passed the taking effect of which shall be made to depend upon any authority, except as provided in this Constitution”. Laws are forbidden from being passed based upon the will of the majority or the desire of the government for control. Is the current Code regulating firearms requiring permission from Indiana through license to carry a handgun by “proper persons” consistent with the Constitutions? When the Right to Life of an individual depends upon the ability to use guaranteed method of self-defense and that guarantee is abridged and not honored by government individual Life becomes the property of the government.

How has Indiana responded to the emergency situation requiring a restraining order?

This session Indiana has taken a controversial step in providing tangible defense for those qualified to receive an order of protection. HB 1071 approved by the Indiana House of Representatives by a vote of 72 Yea to 26 Nay with 2 excused addresses the emergency status of such situations. This proposed law would provide that a person “protected by a protection order; at least eighteen (18) years of age; and not otherwise barred by state or federal law from possessing a handgun” may carry a handgun without a license. There are qualifications placed upon this privilege. The maximum time to carry is “for a period ending sixty (60) days after the date the protection order is issued; or 60 days after the date the person applies for a license to carry a handgun, if the person applies for the license during the 60 day period following issuance of the civil protection order whichever is later.” An individual needing protection is constrained under this proposed law to a time limit on their ability to carry without a license. If they never file the application for a license within the required time allowed, the privilege to carry ends.

What do we conclude from the provisions of HB 1071?

First conclusion is that the General Assembly is violating, among other provisions, section 23 holding that “The General Assembly shall not grant to any citizen, or class of citizens, privileges or immunities, which, upon the same terms, shall not equally belong to all citizens.” Here once again we are confronted by that absolute shall not. Second, why should we not consider the agreement between individuals and Indiana government which declares “That all people are created equal; that they are endowed by their CREATOR with certain inalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness”? If each individual proper person is the sole possessor of their life and that life requires defense what authority exists for government to prevent self-defense of that life? Is the General Assembly finally realizing that a piece of paper will not prevent imminent harm by a determined offender? Do we as individuals have the right to demand those in danger of imminent harm be denied the inalienable right to self-defense of their life because the same government has determined every other proper person has not proven to government the necessity of the right to carry a handgun?

What if it were your life or that of your child?

HB 1071 provides a minimal exception to a law which has no authority to exist for a limited period of time to persons facing the possibility of violence by a repeating offender. Who decides the inalienable Right to Life? Life is an individual inalienable right life cannot be an endowed inalienable right without the ability to defend that life unless we are given a government qualified permission privilege.

How has Indiana decided to consider the Right of self- defense for all?

House approved bill 1071 includes a request to the legislative council to assign to an appropriate study committee the task of studying aspects of the repeal requiring a “proper person” to obtain a license to carry a handgun in Indiana. A request is made for a report of any appointed study and the request expires December 31, 2017. This study would involve the right to carry a handgun law which is being excepted for the victims receiving a restraining order. The Hierarchy of Law for Indiana demands compliance with the rule of law from the General Assembly. Does the Rule of Law provide authority for the General Assembly to violate inalienable rights because special interest or unwilling majority does not want the individual to possess the Right to Life? Why should it be necessary for the individual to be controlled when exercising Life? Why should an individual needing to defend their Life be held hostage to the wants of special interest groups within government? How can an individual ability to preserve one’s own Life be a threat to those who wish to turn that job over to a government funded entity?

The privilege granted to the few even for a limited time does not extend to allow all to ensure each their individual Right to Life equally. Indiana is prohibited from passing any law which depends upon any authority except as specifically provided in the Indiana Constitution. Life a Right defined and protected by the Indiana Constitution cannot be subject to legislation in order to be exercised. Requiring a license which must be paid for makes it a privilege controlled by the government rather than an Individual Right of our existence.

We are all created equal as individuals; those elected to protect individual Rights are placed in a position of administration to protect the minority of one according to the requirements of that office exclusively requiring compliance with the Indiana and U.S. Constitutions. Why are all individuals not being provided the guarantee Indiana has made? Must we all be under imminent harm before our Right to Life can be exercised through self-defense?



Scroll to Top