Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

To: GladesGuru

Section 11. Search and seizure

Section 11. The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable search or seizure, shall not be violated; and no warrant shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the person or thing to be seized.

http://www.law.indiana.edu/uslawdocs/inconst/art-1.html#sec-11

What part of this is unclear? So we need a law for the law?

What happens when they search your house? Once they are in the door it is over. Any thing they perceive as a threat can and will be confiscated whether it is under lock and key or not. Do you really think that they are not going to ransack your house ‘conducting a search?’ What about the lovely family dog who perceives them as a threat being shot dead due to an unlawful entry search and seizure activity?

This ruling needs to get overturned like...yesterday. This ruling truly had little to do with the case at hand that had probable cause, after the officers were called to home.


89 posted on 05/17/2011 3:55:20 AM PDT by EBH ( Whether you eat your bread or see it vanish into a looter's stomach, is an absolute.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies ]


To: EBH

Looks like it’s over. Getting my passport renewed, and leaving for a free country as quickly as possible.


92 posted on 05/17/2011 4:03:52 AM PDT by Lazamataz (The Democrat Party is Communist. The Republican Party is Socialist. The Tea Party is Capitalist.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 89 | View Replies ]

To: EBH
What I wonder is how this ruling intersects with the Indiana castle doctrine statute.
(a) A person is justified in using reasonable force against another person to protect the person or a third person from what the person reasonably believes to be the imminent use of unlawful force. However, a person:
(1) is justified in using deadly force; and
(2) does not have a duty to retreat;
if the person reasonably believes that that force is necessary to prevent serious bodily injury to the person or a third person or the commission of a forcible felony. No person in this state shall be placed in legal jeopardy of any kind whatsoever for protecting the person or a third person by reasonable means necessary.

(b) A person:
(1) is justified in using reasonable force, including deadly force, against another person; and
(2) does not have a duty to retreat;
if the person reasonably believes that the force is necessary to prevent or terminate the other person's unlawful entry of or attack on the person's dwelling, curtilage, or occupied motor vehicle.

Indiana Code 35-41-3-2 - Use of force to protect person or property
142 posted on 05/17/2011 6:04:46 AM PDT by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 89 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson