Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Considering how police generally respond to folks shooting at them I will hazard to guess that not many will have the opportunity to test the validity of this law in court. But then again, so it goes with idiotic reactionary Republicans who rush to pass idiotic statutes which their constituency are generally too stupid to correctly interpret what is and what isn't a lawful search, considering the myriad of state and Supreme Court rulings establishing what is and what isn't a lawful search.
The Indiana State Supreme Court effectively took away citizens 4th amendment rights in Indiana this law was in response to that.
Why did Indiana push this law?
The state Supreme Court had previously ruled that citizens had no legal right to resist police officers, even in a case of unlawful entry. So before this new law was passed, explains Republican state Sen. Michael Young, people had no legal right to protect themselves from abuse at the hands of authorities. Indeed, he says, a homeowner could do nothing in the hypothetical case in which he returned home to find a police officer raping his wife — other than filing a lawsuit later.
Being inside your home, and being outside in public view inviting the public to your public yard sale are two different things. No one tore anything apart in that video.
Again what is it about PRIVATE PROPERTY do you not understand? It wasn't his property no crime had been committed he had no reason to act the way he did.That cop actually for that matter NO POLICE OFFICER is a member of the public when they are on duty they are law enforcement they are to enforce laws etc...not snatch someone's private property up and fondle it like he did and ignore the woman asking him to get off the property.
Public view, the renter invited the public to her yard sale. The officer was responding to a citizen complaint. Nothing in his actions would justify shooting him as you suggest.
Anyway, as much fun as this has been, heading out to play. Have a nice holiday.
I never suggested shooting him now did I? I pointed out in Indiana you can shoot ANYONE who illegally enters your private property. Yes he was responding to a citizen complaint so why not calmly and nicely ask the woman after informing her he had a complaint about her guns she was selling...maybe it would have gone much more smooth.Instead he acted like a thug.
The Indiana State Supreme Court effectively took away citizens 4th amendment rights in Indiana this law was in response to that.
The proper response to what even I consider to be judicial over reach by the Indiana Supreme Court in its extraordinarily broad ruling would be an appeal to Federal court. Making bad law because of a bad decision is as extraordinarily ill-conceived as the decision that prompted the laws passage in the first place.
Quote:
Sen. Michael Young, people had no legal right to protect themselves from abuse at the hands of authorities. Indeed, he says, a homeowner could do nothing in the hypothetical case in which he returned home to find a police officer raping his wife — other than filing a lawsuit later.
Thank you for corroborating my judgement regarding the utter stupidity of reactionary Republican legislators (not that there aren't ridiculously stupid legislators on the progressive side of the aisle). Extrapolating that a decision that one cannot resist a presumptive unlawful search into the inability to resist a forcible sexual assault is the height of absurdity. It is just as absurd giving the false impression (not unlike "Stand Your Ground") to every semi-literate "Constitutional scholar" that they have right to use deadly force because they think(sic) they have the intellect to determine what is and what isn't Constitutional. Had state senator Young had drank more coffee and less tea, he could have passed a reasonable piece of legislation granting a citizen the right to resist WITHOUT violence any search that they in good faith believe to be unlawful. Such a law would have resulted in a few more citizens landing in jail but at least they and the officers involved would be a live to argue about it.
When you stand in front of an apartment complex you rent in, I don't think you are on your "private property." It's a public garage sale, where people can come up and observe the merchandise. That's basically what these guys did. When the woman threw a fit, they also respectfully backed down and didn't push a confrontation in any way. At no point did the cops suggest that they would forcefully enter that chick's apartment and search it without a warrant. That would have definitely been illegal. But that didn't happen. So I don't really see the big deal here.
They weren't observing the merchandise with an eye to buy it - they were there enforcing a non-existant law - and if you walk onto my property carrying a firearm - and you are not a law enforcement officer carrying a warrant - you are going to be asked to leave. These cops were wrong - they knew they were wrong - and it is a good day in America because this family stood up for themselves and refused to be sheeple. Good job!
Wait, what? The officers walked on a place open to the public? Stomped like a storm trooper? Are we watching the same video? And he left when ordered to by the woman. I see where the officers were polite and well mannered and the woman was on the testy side. I didn't see ANY search and seizure.
Like I said before, nothing to see here, move along.
An officer in uniform, carrying a weapon is not a member of the public. If he wanted to shop - he could do that on his own time, sans the badge and weapon, and on his own dime.
An officer in uniform, carrying a weapon is not a member of the public. If he wanted to shop - he could do that on his own time, sans the badge and weapon, and on his own dime.
I'll remember that sage(sic) piece of advise when I cut in front of the local cops at WaWa. NOT!
Undoubtedly, she has a long criminal record. Good for her - the low life.
Undoubtedly? How do claim that? If this is just your unsubstantiated opinions - then surely there must be some doubt involved in your reasoning. I mean, do you have a copy of her criminal convictions? If so - please post them here for all of us to see.
Undoubtedly, my arse.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
