INDIANAPOLIS -- Hoosiers who use justified force to defend themselves or others couldn't be sued under a bill heard by a House panel Monday morning.

Attorney Guy Relford said the bill is targeted at criminals -- or the estate of a deceased criminal -- who sometimes sue a victim who shot or otherwise injured the person.

And he specified that it's about any force.

"It's not a gun bill," he said. "It's a self-defense bill and a victim protection bill."

But opponents noted House Bill 1284 goes further than that. For instance, an innocent bystander injured in a shooting also could be banned from suing.

"We've always had a right of self defense, but it just keeps being amped up," said Scott Severns, another attorney. "This raises the line of reasonable and cautious self defense and what can easily tip over into vigilantism."

He added that he understands why gun enthusiasts "want a cocoon of immunity," but the bill is not balanced.

No vote was taken on the legislation, but could come as early as next week.

Relford gave several examples of how such a law might be used. He noted a Kroger robbery in which the manager shot and killed the robber and then was sued by his family.

And Kystie Phillips testified about killing a man in Rising Sun in 2017 who was tussling with a police officer and reaching for the cop's gun. Her actions were deemed justified and no charges were filed, but a lawsuit was filed by the dead man's family. A GoFundMe page has raised almost $100,000 to help with legal fees.

Phillips cried and said the bill would deter frivolous lawsuits like she is dealing with today.

It appeared that those on the House Judiciary Committee generally agreed with a prohibition on a criminal filing suit when justified force is used.

But Rep. Ed Delaney, D-Indianapolis, questioned why the bill would be retroactive to lawsuits already filed.

"I'm just really troubled by this. I don't see what we are solving," he said.

And Rep. Ryan Dvorak, D-South Bend, noted several times that the bill would stop innocent bystanders from suing as well. For instance, if a cashier who had just smoked a joint shot a robber, but a stray bullet also injured a child, they would have no recourse.

"A person can still be negligent when defending themselves," he said. "I think this is a bit of a mess personally."

Rep. Jim Lucas, R-Seymour, disputed that idea, saying someone who acts recklessly can be held accountable.

"This is not going to turn Indiana into the wild west," he said. "It protects innocent Hoosier victims from being financially ruined and emotionally drug through basically a train wreck for years."

nkelly@jg.net