Skip to comments.
Indiana First State to Allow Citizens to Shoot Law Enforcement Officers
AllGov ^
| June 11, 2012
| Noel Brinkerhoff
Posted on 06/12/2012 4:31:20 AM PDT by Rennes Templar
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-60, 61-80, 81-100 ... 421-429 next last
To: Spktyr
According to this could the Texas state authorities have intervened in the Waco stand off because the ATF was clearly violating the state rights of the residents in the compound.
Wouldn’t that have been a site to see. All the ATF and FBI agents getting surrounded by Texas Rangers and National Guard to force them to stand down and allow the Dividians to walk out.
61
posted on
06/12/2012 5:30:11 AM PDT
by
BobinIL
To: papertyger
Hubby should have taken his dispute with her to court, right. Tell him that next time.
She still had a right to call the cops ~ and they had a right to be secure in their persons ~ they don't lose their constitutional rights simply because they work for the government.
62
posted on
06/12/2012 5:30:47 AM PDT
by
muawiyah
To: papertyger
Hubby should have taken his dispute with her to court, right. Tell him that next time.
She still had a right to call the cops ~ and they had a right to be secure in their persons ~ they don't lose their constitutional rights simply because they work for the government.
63
posted on
06/12/2012 5:30:56 AM PDT
by
muawiyah
To: muawiyah
Your wife or child calls the cops ~ you shoot them because they didn't come with a warrant. No, that would be the "fairy tale."
64
posted on
06/12/2012 5:31:24 AM PDT
by
papertyger
("And how we burned in the camps later, thinking: What would things have been like if..."))
To: muawiyah
Does the law say cops can’t come without a warrant or does it say homeowner/resident can use force to stop unlawful entry by cop [or anyone?]
I don’t understand the disconnect. I think everyone would agree that we need some restraint on the unlawful tactics used by LE in crashing down doors of the wrong house and not being accountable.
What makes you think this law will prevent officers from showing up when they’re called for help - that’s not an illegal entry.
65
posted on
06/12/2012 5:36:26 AM PDT
by
Principled
(It's not enthusiasm for Romney, it's grim determination to remove Hussein)
To: trisham
Thanks for the info on Daniels’ background.
66
posted on
06/12/2012 5:38:08 AM PDT
by
Marylander
(Offendiphobia)
To: muawiyah
Hubby should have taken his dispute with her to court, right. No, wifey should have.....
Unless he was beating her, this is another "chicken mcnuggets" call.
67
posted on
06/12/2012 5:39:15 AM PDT
by
papertyger
("And how we burned in the camps later, thinking: What would things have been like if..."))
To: Rennes Templar
Tim Downs, president of the Indiana State Fraternal Order of Police, which opposed the legislation
Hey, if you guys aren't doing anything wrong, then you have nothing to fear - is that how it goes?
68
posted on
06/12/2012 5:42:06 AM PDT
by
andyk
(Go Juan Pablo!)
To: Rennes Templar
About d*mn time. Please God, let this go nationwide!
69
posted on
06/12/2012 5:42:06 AM PDT
by
jboot
(Emperor: "How will this end?" Kosh: "In fire.")
To: muawiyah
10 years ago there were few people more pro-cop than I was. I have seen them devolve into a hyper militarized street gang with a shoot first, screw the questions attitude. The war on (some) drugs caused it but my sympathy is tapped out. It’s time they got a clear message about their legitimate mission and who they work for.
70
posted on
06/12/2012 5:43:23 AM PDT
by
muir_redwoods
(I like Obamacare because Granny signed the will and I need the cash)
To: Rennes Templar
71
posted on
06/12/2012 5:50:27 AM PDT
by
Chickensoup
(STOP The Great O-ppression)
To: andyk
Hey, if you guys aren't doing anything wrong, then you have nothing to fear - is that how it goes? Well played andyk, well played sir.
72
posted on
06/12/2012 5:53:04 AM PDT
by
Principled
(It's not enthusiasm for Romney, it's grim determination to remove Hussein)
To: Rennes Templar
Perhaps this is just the beginning of “citizen safety” legislation.
To: muir_redwoods
74
posted on
06/12/2012 5:58:06 AM PDT
by
Venturer
To: muir_redwoods
If the police do not have a natural respect for the person, property and rights of the citizenry it is perfectly appropriate to legislate it for them. In light of the wave of abuses that we’ve seen nationwide, anything that makes a LEO stop and consider the consequences of his actions is a good thing.
75
posted on
06/12/2012 5:58:36 AM PDT
by
jboot
(Emperor: "How will this end?" Kosh: "In fire.")
To: Rennes Templar
Dear Mr. Police Officer.
1. Make certain that you have a warrant.
2. Make sure you have the correct house.
3. Serve your warrant in a polite and professional manner. If you think I’m dangerous, serve it while I’m not home and get someone to pick me up away from the house.
4. Don’t shoot my dog.
5. In general, treat me like what I am - NOT GUILTY until convicted in a court of law.
We’ll get a long fine.
Private Citizen
76
posted on
06/12/2012 5:58:40 AM PDT
by
Little Ray
(FOR the best Conservative in the Primary; AGAINST Obama in the General.)
To: muawiyah
If the cops weren’t acting like third-world death squads, this wouldn’t be necessary.
77
posted on
06/12/2012 6:01:38 AM PDT
by
Little Ray
(FOR the best Conservative in the Primary; AGAINST Obama in the General.)
To: muawiyah
Like I told your little friend there, you won't like things as well when all those other guys get to decide what's lawful all on their lonesome. You might imagine it's you against the criminals ~ there are thousands of folks out there who will imagine it's themselves against YOU the criminal. Eventually you will tire of carrying around all that ammunition just so you have some chance of escaping alive when your door dings theirs in the grocery store parking lot. And don't try to beat that woman to the strawberry pack ~ she's going to have to decide the law in such cases and it won't be pretty.
I could make a large baloney sandwich out of that.
78
posted on
06/12/2012 6:04:54 AM PDT
by
ZX12R
(FUBO GTFO 2012 !)
To: Little Ray
Great rules. But the sideshow-worthy flexibility of "probabaly cause" makes all of them moot.
1. No warrant is needed if there is "probable cause".
2. It doesn't matter if you go to the wrong house if there is "probable cause" somewhere nearby.
3. If there is "probable cause" you can wait to serve a warrant to someone after he is cuffed and prone on his face. Or pin it to his cooling corpse.
4. Shooting family dogs is always covered by probable cause. Even if no crime had been reported and the policeman was on patrol.
5. You're kidding right? They have PROBABALE CAUSE!
79
posted on
06/12/2012 6:12:44 AM PDT
by
jboot
(Emperor: "How will this end?" Kosh: "In fire.")
To: muawiyah
This “little friend” is a husband, father, small business owner, home owner, and Church member.
As for tiring “of carrying around all that ammunition.”
It hasn’t happened in twenty years: I wouldn’t expect it anytime soon.
80
posted on
06/12/2012 6:13:54 AM PDT
by
papertyger
("And how we burned in the camps later, thinking: What would things have been like if..."))
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-60, 61-80, 81-100 ... 421-429 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson