[Halfmanhalfamazing]

Do not resist, or we will bury you.

The insanity continues.

[Psalm 144]

The bedrock of a totalitarian state. Might makes right.

[Mr. K]

WHAT THE F-ING F?????????????????????

People should start rioting over this one

[antonico]

The Court’s Majority Opinion was written by Judge David. A Mitch Daniel’s appointee. In case we needed any more proof Daniels isn’t fit for the Presidency.

[E. Pluribus Unum]

Indiana Supreme Court: citizens have no right to resist unlawful police entry

	05/16/2011 9:22:18 AM PDT · by Halfmanhalfamazing · 3 replies Examiner ^ | May 16th | Howard Portnoy In a move that flies not only in the face of the U.S. Constitution but defies common law dating back to the Magna Carta of 1215, the Indiana Supreme Court has ruled that residents of the Hoosier state have no right to resist unlawful police entry into their homes. In a 3-2 decision, Justice Steven David, writing for the majority, expressed the view that a right to resist an unlawful police entry into a home is against public policy and is incompatible with modern Fourth Amendment jurisprudence. We also find that allowing resistance unnecessarily escalates the level of violence and...
Indiana Supreme Court rules Hoosiers have no right to resist unlawful entry of homes by police
	05/16/2011 8:46:27 AM PDT · by SeekAndFind · 32 replies Hotair ^ | 05/16/2011 | Bruce McQuain No, you read it right. ThatÂ’s what the Indiana Supreme Court decided in what would be a laughable finding if it wasnÂ’t so serious: Overturning a common law dating back to the English Magna Carta of 1215, the Indiana Supreme Court ruled Thursday that Hoosiers have no right to resist unlawful police entry into their homes. The author of the story reporting this is right – somehow the ISC managed, in one fell swoop, to overturn almost 900 years of precedent, going back to the Magna Carta. In a 3-2 decision, Justice Steven David writing for the court said if...
Court: No right to resist illegal cop entry into home‏
	05/16/2011 6:25:46 AM PDT · by Cheeks · 42 replies nwitimes.com ^ | 5/13 | Dan Carden INDIANAPOLIS | Overturning a common law dating back to the English Magna Carta of 1215, the Indiana Supreme Court ruled Thursday that Hoosiers have no right to resist unlawful police entry into their homes. In a 3-2 decision, Justice Steven David writing for the court said if a police officer wants to enter a home for any reason or no reason at all, a homeowner cannot do anything to block the officer's entry. "We believe ... a right to resist an unlawful police entry into a home is against public policy and is incompatible with modern Fourth Amendment jurisprudence," David...
No Right to Resist Unlawful Police Entry: Indiana Supremes
	05/15/2011 8:17:50 AM PDT · by KeyLargo · 64 replies Outside the Beltway ^ | May 14, 2011 | James Joyner Outside the Beltway No Right to Resist Unlawful Police Entry: Indiana Supremes James Joyner May 14, 2011 For as long as the notion of individual rights has existed, one of them has been the notion that one’s home is sacrosanct. As of Thursday, that’s no longer true in Indiana. AP (“Court: No right to resist unlawful police entry“): People have no right to resist if police officers illegally enter their home, the Indiana Supreme Court ruled in a decision that overturns centuries of common law. The court issued its 3-2 ruling on Thursday, contending that allowing residents to resist officers...
(Indiana) Court: No right to resist unlawful police entry
	05/14/2011 3:32:09 AM PDT · by markomalley · 138 replies AP/Chicago Tribune ^ | 5/13/11 People have no right to resist if police officers illegally enter their home, the Indiana Supreme Court ruled in a decision that overturns centuries of common law. The court issued its 3-2 ruling on Thursday, contending that allowing residents to resist officers who enter their homes without any right would increase the risk of violent confrontation. If police enter a home illegally, the courts are the proper place to protest it, Justice Steven David said. "We believe ... a right to resist an unlawful police entry into a home is against public policy and is incompatible with modern Fourth Amendment...
Court: No right to resist illegal cop entry into home
	05/13/2011 6:33:44 PM PDT · by WildSnail · 81 replies NWI Times ^ | Friday, May 13, 2011 3:56 pm | Dan Carden INDIANAPOLIS | Overturning a common law dating back to the English Magna Carta of 1215, the Indiana Supreme Court ruled Thursday that Hoosiers have no right to resist unlawful police entry into their homes. In a 3-2 decision, Justice Steven David writing for the court said if a police officer wants to enter a home for any reason or no reason at all, a homeowner cannot do anything to block the officer's entry.
Court: No right to resist illegal cop entry into home
	05/13/2011 6:33:44 PM PDT · by WildSnail · 81 replies NWI Times ^ | Friday, May 13, 2011 3:56 pm | Dan Carden INDIANAPOLIS | Overturning a common law dating back to the English Magna Carta of 1215, the Indiana Supreme Court ruled Thursday that Hoosiers have no right to resist unlawful police entry into their homes. In a 3-2 decision, Justice Steven David writing for the court said if a police officer wants to enter a home for any reason or no reason at all, a homeowner cannot do anything to block the officer's entry.
Court: No right to resist illegal cop entry into home[Indiana]
	05/13/2011 6:35:22 AM PDT · by jaydubya2 · 194 replies nwitimes ^ | Thursday, May 12, 2011 | Dan Carden INDIANAPOLIS | Overturning a common law dating back to the English Magna Carta of 1215, the Indiana Supreme Court ruled Thursday that Hoosiers have no right to resist unlawful police entry into their homes. In a 3-2 decision, Justice Steven David writing for the court said if a police officer wants to enter a home for any reason or no reason at all, a homeowner cannot do anything to block the officer's entry. "We believe ... a right to resist an unlawful police entry into a home is against public policy and is incompatible with modern Fourth Amendment jurisprudence," David...

[Brownie63]

Unbelieveable. Velkome to Amerika.

[Forgotten Amendments]

And what will our “conservatives?” say about this? Nothing! The airwaves will be full of more important things. Like, what rapper gets invited to the White House, what mean thing George Soros said, and calling Ron Paul crazy.

[cpdiii]

There is this little problem for that piece of sh-- law in Indiana. It is called the 4th amendment.

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

[jmaroneps37]

These people are friggin’ insane!

[Jack Hammer]

Clearly a violation of the Fourth Amendment; this will be overturned by a higher court very soon.

The judges voting for this were/are ignorant fools, unsuitable for the positions they hold.

[cotton1706]

The English fought this battle with King John and prevailed and James Otis fought this battle with the British in the Writs of Assistance case and prevailed.

We don’t need to pay attention to these judges and their “opinions.”

If a police officer or any other “official” enters your home without cause or without a warrant, shoot him dead just as you would any other criminal.

[Logical me]

Keep your powder dry, a civil war is about to start.

[Adder]

http://www.in.gov/judiciary/opinions/supreme.html

I don’t know...sees like Barnes was in the right here and its the Court who is wrong.

The Ciourt is saying to allow the ploice in to do what they want and file a complaint later.

That sounds like bull...file a complaint???? You kiddin me?

[sjmjax]

Liberal Judges, Liberal Politicians, Liberal Academics - will all lead eventually to a Totalitarian State.

[Adder]

http://www.in.gov/judiciary/opinions/supreme.html

I don’t know...seems like Barnes was in the right here and its the Court who is wrong.

The Court is saying to allow the police in to do what they want and file a complaint later.

That sounds like bull...file a complaint???? You kiddin me? So it can be ignored?

This particular case seems a bit tough because it involved “do-mestic violence” and we all know if a woman complains she is immediately in the right, giving police powers they would not normally posess. In a sense Barnes is lucky he was not simply killed for upsetting a woman.[/sarc]

Sorry, tho I am no lawyer nor do I play one on tv, I do see the 4th ammendment issues here, from reading the case history: Barnes denied the cops entry and they requested entry. They did not say the had cause they requested entry and he said no and the woman did not give permission either. Not sure why that isn’t 4th ammendment territory.

[Castigar]

“a right to resist an unlawful police entry into a home is against public policy and is incompatible with modern Fourth Amendment jurisprudence”

Isn’t this absolutely the opposite of fourth amendment jurisprudence?

[Zathras]

Ms Kimber, Smith and Wesson voted 3-0 voted the other way.

[G Larry]

On the heels of the AZ slaughter of an innocent man, this may end up in the USSC?

[PapaBear3625]

I can see the court's reasoning, in that the police may not realize that the entry is illegal.

OK, then. The Republican controlled Indiana legislature needs to put out legislation declaring that police officers illegally entering a home immediately lose their status as police officers, along with their pensions. Make cops very leery of making "mistakes".