Indiana: 1st State To Allow Citizens To Shoot Cops

Submitted by: yusuksomuch 5 years ago in

Handing a bit of self preservation rights back to the citizen by giving them the right to shoot at Indiana"s finest.
There are 57 comments:
Male 68
@collegebound - I know this is poo old, but are you from Anderson? I live in Anderson... originally from Indianapolis. Where I work we occasionally work with the cops here, and believe me, they are some of the worst at caring about their jobs
0
Reply
Male 15,187
They`d better do it legally, then.
0
Reply
Male 3,745
"The law didn`t need to be changed because there isn`t an epidemic of rogue police in Indiana, he said."

horse poo. Come to Anderson :|
0
Reply
Male 450
I live in Indiana and I am glad to see this coming to light.
0
Reply
Male 4,891
The problem with cops, is that the people who WANT to be cops...are the exact people who SHOULDN`T have authority.
0
Reply
Male 2,591
Good. Hope they get shot. Shouldn`t have took the job. Never met a cop I liked. Can`t call them for help, they`ll always try and somehow twist the situation around and accuse you of a crime. That`s their job. Not to help or protect you, only to accuse you to be later prosecuted and ultimately reprimanded. That is their sole purpose, don`t put the "serve and protect" framework around it. It doesn`t stand up.
0
Reply
Male 7,378
I support this version of Stand Your Ground.
0
Reply
Male 52
Killing a cop in self defense should be at most an affirmative defense/mitigating factor. This means protecting yourself from violent rogue police officers won`t mean ending up in prison. By passing a highly publicized law specifically allowing shooting cops the police officers will end up much more trigger-happy dueto increased fear from nutjobs.
0
Reply
Male 321
Finally.
0
Reply
Male 39,614

CrakrJak - if they ever post the video I`ll blog the back story of the attacker and the survivors. Or if you want the long winded version the Young Turks reported on it. takes 5 minutes
0
Reply
Male 1,754
Hellz yea!!! Citizens have a right to defend themselves from illegal entry by ANYONE. F*CK THE PO-LEESE!
0
Reply
Male 17,512
Gerry: That was your submission? I seen it in the `live submission` list, liked it. It should be posted.
0
Reply
Male 17,512
I`m betting this will make cops double check their address on warrants from now on, those no=knock warrants especially.
0
Reply
Male 7,123
@Agent00Smith

`Blah blah blah you people disgust me with your arguments`

Wow! You are so edgy and cool. Can I be your friend?
0
Reply
Male 39,614

You know what would compliment this thread nicely?
A Pro-Gun thread.
Like the video I`ve submitted a half dozen times that can`t get approved because it doesn`t fit in with some mods anti-gun bias.

Just a thought. Go back to your bickering.
0
Reply
Male 2,579
Blah blah blah you people disgust me with your arguments. Cops kill innocent people all the time, no one cares. What goes around comes around.
0
Reply
Male 7,123
of non-compliance. (Hey that was only 999 characters!)
h
Having said that I agree that the police get away with far too much when they kill someone illegally. They are trained professionals (or if they are not your society is in bad trouble) and should be held more accountable not less for misusing their power and being reckless of human life.
0
Reply
Male 5,413
About time. But getting rid of guns would be better.
0
Reply
Male 5,811
@LordJim: I believe you are correct. Also, police are never alone. If a person shoots one cop, the others are likely to kill him.
0
Reply
Male 7,123
The law itself may be reasonable, it`s what people will think it says that could get some police officers killed. Many people are not very bright or good at making decisions. Many people have scrambled their brains through drugs or booze. These are the people the police spend quite a lot of time encountering.

They may well find that their defence is not valid, but the cop stays dead. I don`t know how it works in the US, but in the UK the police don`t need a warrant if they believe a crime is in progress. Which is only sensible, really.

So, scenario; neighbours report screams and sounds of violence coming from a house where the guy has a history of domestic violence. They arrive, hear screams, no reply when they knock. They break down the door.

They guy is drunk, not bright and vaguely heard that you can shoot a cop for home invasion. Is he more or less likely to try and shoot it out? Are the cops, knowing this, more or less likely to shoot at the first sign o
0
Reply
Male 5,811
...But I see where you`re coming from, that the searches are unreasonable. Unfortunately, the law interprets it a different way, since people have tried to blow up planes fairly recently in your country. I think where it falls apart is that since you are never forced to submit, you give permission and therefore it is not unreasonable.
0
Reply
Male 5,811
@dstbstr: I don`t see how it`s irrelevant. Yes, you pay, but you have to abide by their rules. I agree with you 100% that it`s just smoke-and-mirrors, the illusion of security. I could tell you 5 ways to get a bomb on a plane here without ever getting on the plane itself.

As I said before, I don`t know the TSA rules, but since you aren`t forced to get the search (i.e. you aren`t forced to fly), and you can tell them to stop whenever you want, you are hamstrung. It`s their way or the highway, literally. But if the TSA were profiling people using the Israeli model, your people would b*tch about it being racist/unfair/etc. How is a TSA person to know that you are dangerous unless they search your belongings and/or person?
0
Reply
Male 28
Stating that it`s not our right to fly is accurate, but irrelevant in the discussion. The TSA is intending to move outside of airports, and into all public transportation. We`re giving up more of our freedoms for the illusion of security. It may be a privilege to fly, but I pay for that privilege. It is, however, my right to have protection from illegal search and seizure without probably cause. Unless I appear to be dangerous, it is unconstitutional to search my belongings.
0
Reply
Male 10,855
I`m pretty sure the state of Texas can shoot cops if they step far enough out of line. What I would really like to see in my state is a law that would prevent the death penalty being applied in cases where cops got killed while they were undercover. The way I see it they accept the risk of not being identified without their uniform.
0
Reply
Male 5,811
[quote]Now we just need to get the TSA to respect the 4th amendment too...[/quote]
Having done the equivalent of the TSA job in Canada, I can say that we, at least, needed to ask permission before we searched someone/looked in a bag etc. I don`t know if the TSA has to ask, but up here you can say stop at any time. When people would joke around and say "What if I say no?" I would tell them that Greyhound has reasonable rates.

Bottom line: It`s not your right to fly. If you want to do that then you have to go by their rules. You can always take the bus/train.
0
Reply
Male 1,008
vv wish we had something like a "like" button for comments
0
Reply
Male 762
To add to what I said...

If I mess up at work, it costs my company money and I get fired.

When a cop messes up at work, it costs someone their life and they walk away with a month of paid leave paid for by the public put in danger by said cop.
0
Reply
Male 3,445
This concerns me. I definitely think that cops are often overly-aggressive and that`s a real problem, but this doesn`t seem to be the right way of reigning them in at all. If someone assumes the cop is entering unlawfully, they`re more likely to shoot now because they`ll think they have a defense. But what if the cop does have a search warrant. I foresee lots of problems here.
0
Reply
Male 5,811
Oh MeGrendel, I know why you wrote it, I got a chuckle. ;-) Progressives can come across as p*ssies, we just don`t see it that way.
0
Reply
Male 28
We can see where we are as a country when so many people are willing to give up their 4th amendment rights. This law was passed in response to a ruling which stated that Indiana residents could NOT defend themselves from an office, even when the officer entered the property unlawfully. Now we just need to get the TSA to respect the 4th amendment too...
0
Reply
Male 762
I don`t think having this law is necessary. Maybe in Indiana since they have set a legal precedent that protects cops in almost all situations. We don`t need to make laws that deal specifically with cops, they just need to be accountable under the same laws we all live under. If a cop breaks into your house and they don`t have any legal right to do so and they get shot, guess what, you shouldn`t be charged with anything but self defense. If a cop breaks into your house and they end up killing someone and they had no right to be there, they should be charged with murder. The problem is the immunity cops end up getting from the same laws they claim to enforce. If cops are accountable for their actions under the same laws they seek to protect we will have more accountable and better cops. The second you start protecting them you make a dangerous situation for all the people they are suppose to protect.
0
Reply
Male 8,438
patchgrabber-"I wish I could pull a Ron Swanson. "

I am rather pleased to say that I don`t know what the hell a `Ron Swanson` is.

I realize the `progressive` joke was off topic, but it goes back to a humorous artilcle about `A Liberal`s Guide to Self-Defense`. Sorry if you didn`t get, or appreciate, the joke. Of course I don`t think a progressive would actually DO such a thing.
0
Reply
Male 1,497
Thats disgusting.
0
Reply
Male 1,837
The reality of this is that a cop is just another person in a different uniform. If I feel the need to kill somene to defend my family or my home, I don`t care how they are dressed or what the law is.
I am going to protect my family without regard to the consequences later, especially when there may not be a later if I don`t.
0
Reply
Male 1,008
Your other points are well met, I don`t know all the legal definitions in play here, but I suspect I am going to learn alot about it in the near future, as will we all.
0
Reply
Male 5,811
@Fancy: What concerns me is if the officer looks into the front window and sees drug paraphernalia or other illegal items. That gives them the right to enter without a court order does it not? That is the kind of situation I see getting an officer shot.
0
Reply
Male 1,008
this law doesnt target "most cops" just the ones who abuse their power
0
Reply
Male 20,829
yusuksomuch: Right. That`s why I don`t think this law will make much of an impact. Most cops entering a house know they need a court order from a judge to enter a house. A cop just entering a home without warning is nuts.

Also, what if a cop just walks up the porch of a home and plans to knock on the door--no entry, just knocking on the door of someone`s home? Where`s the line of `Unlawful Entry` drawn? Sidewalk? Porch?

And what`s defined as `property.` Will a car fall under this law? As the article states, if a cop in Indiana pulls over a car, and it`s just the cop and the driver, no one else around, could the driver shoot the cop and later state that he was defending himself from the cop`s unlawful entry?

It`s easy for a cop to stay out of harms way from avoiding gunfire from a legal home entry (lots of witnesses around), but if cars fall into the definition of property, things can get a lot stickier.
0
Reply
Male 1,008
Or even worse, a white guy shoots a black cop, oh man, the potential for disaster is high.
0
Reply
Male 5,811
Apologies @Yusuk, when you said you still want this law in your state I just assumed.
0
Reply
Male 1,008
Im not in Indiana, but it is going to be very interesting to see how this plays out the first time a black man shoots a white cop in his house.
0
Reply
Male 5,811
@yusuk: I don`t think the law is necessarily bad either, I just see a big court case in your state`s future is all.
0
Reply
Male 1,008
I totally agree with you patchgrabber, but i still want this law in my state, I want the days of the untouchable officer to be over.
0
Reply
Male 5,811
[quote](unless, of course, you`re a progressive and will stop and ponder `How have I personally, or society as a whole, offended this officer to cause him to rape my wife?`)[/quote]
Sometimes, MeGrendel, when you talk here this is what I wish I could pull a Ron Swanson.


0
Reply
Male 5,811
Where the line will get really blurry is when someone just thinks it`s illegal entry even when it`s legal and they`ll shoot. Fancy is right about this just being another defense in court, but it`s like I said in another thread, most people won`t know where that line is because they don`t understand the precise nature of the law, they`ll just think "Sweet, now I can shoot `dem piggies wif mah 12-gauge iff`n they come in mah castle."
0
Reply
Male 8,438
This law has nothing to do with changing what happens, but protecting the citizen`s rights after the fact.

If you walk in on an officer raping your wife, you WILL protect her regardless what the law says. (unless, of course, you`re a progressive and will stop and ponder `How have I personally, or society as a whole, offended this officer to cause him to rape my wife?`)

But AFTER, the officer (or his widow) will have no recourse to state `I`m gonna sue you because what you did was illegal!`
0
Reply
Male 1,008
A court order has never been unlawful intrusion. A court order is pretty much the definition of following the law.
0
Reply
Male 20,829
DuckBoy87: There are limited characters for any given Header on I-A-B. If you can accomplish a full description with every detail of this story--and make it interesting--in 50 characters, have at it, bro.
0
Reply
Male 1,008
Fancy, it only applies to UNLAWFUL entry.
0
Reply
Male 20,829
Anyone who shoots at cops that are trying to enter a home didn`t need this law anyway. This just gives them a legal excuse.

And doesn`t every cop just wait for a court order from the local judge to enter a home anyway? That`s what 20 years of watching TV courtroom dramas have taught me. A court order wouldn`t be "unlawful intrusion" anymore, right?

Either way, I`m pretty sure this just gives criminals another defense when they`re on trial.
0
Reply
Male 1,008
I love the "opponents see potential for mistakes and abuse", and no mention of all the mistakes and abuse that as ALREADY HAPPENED by police and other civil servants. This law really will be hard to apply, but maybe it will make police think a bit longer before deciding to violate somebodies rights and get all gestapo in their home.
0
Reply
Male 376
"IAB, I understand you need the clicks to produce revenue, but why make such misleading titles?"

0
Reply
Male 3,625
Talk about a misleading title...

... shoot cops WHO UNLAWFULLY ENTER THEIR (the citizen) HOME.

IAB, I understand you need the clicks to produce revenue, but why make such misleading titles?
0
Reply
Male 39,614

That`s a great link photo for the article!
You get a good score just on that!
0
Reply
Male 5,811
How does a court find that there is "no right to reasonably resist unlawful entry by police officers"? I am dumbfounded how a court can say that something illegal is ok.
0
Reply
Male 1,008
Not my caption but at least its posted.
0
Reply
Male 1,008
Link: Indiana: 1st State To Allow Citizens To Shoot Cops [Rate Link] - Handing a bit of self preservation rights back to the citizen by giving them the right to shoot at Indiana`s finest.
0
Reply