Indiana passes "Right to resist police" law

[daddyo]

http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2012/05/robert-farago/in-defense-of-indianas-new-resistance-to-police-law/

[JayC]

http://www.thetrutha...-to-police-law/

We're lucky that we already had this law here Although it could be strengthened a great deal.

[Guest cardcutter]

What a mine field to go dancing in. I can see the truth in both sides of this argument.

[daddyo]

Would like to get a LEO's take on this...

[Guest 6.8 AR]

Why? A valid police warrant against a party is valid. If you have no reason to believe you are

subject to a warrant or arrest, you have the right to defend yourself, don't you? Look at the SWAT

raids on wrong addresses and yes, there some dirty cops. It is not a catch all to defend yourself if

you are subject to arrest. If you are a criminal, go ahead, and make their day. find out the hard way.

If someone bashes down my front door in the middle of the night, I'm not going to wait for him to

shoot me. If he has a warrant he'd better announce it. But, I'm not a criminal.

Tyranny comes in various forms. You do have the right to defend yourself against tyranny, don't you?

[gregintenn]

and yes, there some dirty cops

No way!

[DaveTN]

This will be misunderstood and people will be charged with felonies… or worse.

This addresses illegal entry by the Police; not what the homeowner perceives as illegal entry. Whether or not the entry was legal will be decided in a courtroom; not in a doorway.

[daddyo]

Yeah, sumthin' tells me that if a no-knock warrant is issued, and they get my house confused with someone else's in the middle of the night, it's not going to end well for me - law or no law.

Edited May 8, 2012 by DaddyO

[Guest 6.8 AR]

Everything is always misunderstood. I have no doubt if anyone bashes in my door I will do whatever I can,

which is probably not much.

Charged with what kind of felony? If there is a warrant, announce it. If there isn't don't enter. I imagine it

is because of those no-knock warrants that this passed. I may be wrong.

A police state is not a civil society, DaveTN. No-knock warrants are about as wrong as can be, if that is

indeed, the reason for this passing.

[Guest A10thunderbolt]

If someone knocks down my door at night its not ending well, they will have time to yell Police but I am still checking to see first. Luckily I have cameras. ( The way my house is setup they have to come down a hallway guarded by a 12 Gauge to get me.)

[Jonnin]

I have no problem with a no-knock warrant in theory --- but it shoud be a seldom used thing. It puts the police and the suspect both at extreme risk --- and is only really useful for extremely dangerous raids, like a movie style drug baron's home with many armed hired goons. Dunno how often that sort of thing comes along, but it should be ultra rare.

I cannot understand getting the wrong address in a world full of GPS and databases. If some idiot that wants to sell me random worthless junk can figure out my name, phone number, mailing address, workplace, and more, the cops really should be able to get the correct place for their suspect pretty much 99.9999% of the time, and that 0.000001th time should be investigated while the screw ups take an unpaid vacation.

I approve of the law: if someone shoots a LEO that broke in unannounced in the dark, well, that goes back to the no knock being used when it maybe should not have been. It put the LEO at risk.

[sigmtnman]

Supreme court has already upheld the right, so not sure why a law would be necessary.

[Jonnin]

Supreme court has already upheld the right, so not sure why a law would be necessary.

75% or more of our laws are redundant anyway. If you seek logic, the laws of the land is not a good place to go hunting for it.

[Mark@Sea]

Because the Indiana state supreme court decided citizens had no right to resist illegal entry/searches. The law is a backlash.

The Indiana sheriff who announced he would use this decision to conduct sweep searches of entire neighborhoods (warrants and probable cause be damned) was a posterboy for the effort to get this passed.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

I thought it was that. Wasn't sure. Thanks, Mark.

That sheriff was an idiot for saying that.

[daddyo]

Actually, it's a good thing for us whenever freedom haters display their idiocy to the rest of the world. Sometimes there's just enough common sense and outrage among the populace to realize what's going on and they do something about it.

[JayC]

This will be misunderstood and people will be charged with felonies… or worse.

This addresses illegal entry by the Police; not what the homeowner perceives as illegal entry. Whether or not the entry was legal will be decided in a courtroom; not in a doorway.

I'm pretty sure the law is a reasonable person standard... Meaning if a reasonable person believed the entry to be unlawful this law kicks in... a lot better than a true unlawful entry requirement.

This isn't a lot different from shooting somebody laws... you have to convince a jury of your peers a reasonable person would think the entry to be unlawful.

[JayC]

Because the Indiana state supreme court decided citizens had no right to resist illegal entry/searches. The law is a backlash.

The Indiana sheriff who announced he would use this decision to conduct sweep searches of entire neighborhoods (warrants and probable cause be damned) was a posterboy for the effort to get this passed.

They just should have passed a law that stated all exigent circumstances are null and void in IN.... that would solve the real problem... no warrant, no entry, like the Constitution intended.

[E4 No More]

Because the Indiana state supreme court decided citizens had no right to resist illegal entry/searches. The law is a backlash.

The Indiana sheriff who announced he would use this decision to conduct sweep searches of entire neighborhoods (warrants and probable cause be damned) was a posterboy for the effort to get this passed.

He must be the same guy that's the posterboy for stupid.