| This thread has been locked, it will not receive new replies. |
|
Locked on 05/14/2011 8:49:55 AM PDT by Admin Moderator, reason:
By request of poster, duplicate |
Posted on 05/13/2011 6:33:44 PM PDT by WildSnail
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.
(Excerpt) Read more at nwitimes.com ...
The decision of the Ill. court may also get some excellent Officers killed for no other reason but to socially experiment with and implement their progressive socialist agenda.
I have seen it all right here in Afghanistan!
Remember, if the cops violate the fourth to get evidence to use against you, the court will throw it out.
This isn't a Fourth Amendment case anyway.
The judges are nutballs.
What does the Castle Doctrine say? To me it says if it's dark and somebody is kicking in my door I get to lay 'em out with machinegun fire if I need to. Doesn't matter if they are cops or the neighborhood kids.
ON THE OTHER HAND if I know they are cops, or children seeking candy, the burden of proof changes and I need some other reason than simply fear for my life and limb to shoot 'em down.
You have a case here where the perp already admitted he didn't live there, and he knew these guys were cops. They were invited in by the woman living there.
Do you realize that screaming FOURTH AMENDMENT in a case where the cops responded to a woman's call for help makes you sound so Shi'ite and Islamofascistic ~ bet your women folk just melt at your touch.
Please remember to duck at appropriate moments! It's OK. That's how we beat the Brits.
That is progressive socialist speak> Progressive socialist believe the U.S. Constitution is a “living” document that must change with them, to meet civil duties and safety etc.
Since “We the People” of the United states of America gave those limited powers to the government, why not take them back, since the existing government has clearly demonstrated to all of us that they will continue to abuse the limited authority we have given them!
TAKE IT BACK!
Will do and thanks much!
The decision is, of course, wrongly decided
I admit however that I am guilty of knee jerking to the title of the article. In this case a warrant was not needed.
My job for most of the last couple of decades before I retired was to deal with the handful of situations where the system didn't work right, or the customers were thieves, and the correct postage was not collected.
We have a case here that is clearly an exception. The sooner these geeks retire the better for everyone They are not up to the job.
The state of Indiana should also increase the number of people enfranchised. They've been backsliding in this. They are down to a mere 8 people who are allowed to vote for judges. They need MILLIONS!
This business of appointing judges has been such a failure ~
Then we should enforce the Declaration maybe ?......
Amen, my friend. Far too broad a decision for this case and it will be used to erode and trample rights. In this case, a warrant was not needed...but the decision they rendred in answer to this is flat out and out wrong.
If the rulers will not obey the Constitution....
Then maybe we should look to the Declaration?....
The court wrote a very poor decision. They will pay for it with early retirements.
Gators would only end up in the soup.
I can't handle it all but we've had some "name posters" here who failed to read the case itself and ended up mis-speaking.
This is the sort of thing we have to keep ahead of in campaign season.
There was no longer a need to be concerned with his rights as a co-tenant.
There are a lot of funny little peculiarities in this case that the court didn't consider ~ that tell the tale in its entirity. It's a very simple case. Cop answers call. Gets jumped by non tenant.
WOW!
I can dig that one. Can you believe the lawyer got this to the Supreme Court?
They're a regular Legal Fees Machine for the Plaintiff's Bar!
Indiana's cap on malpractice cases has left the lawyers hungry for anything.
The legal sharks would like to live in Illinois but you can't get heart surgery there, or even advice about your heart! Too many suits.
Why would you allow the government to shift the burden of proof from the government on to you?
Like it or not, the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled in many cases that an American can use what ever force necessary to defend him or her self against an unlawful arrest, even the use of deadly force!
What if your significant other called the law, can the law enforcement officer now assault you simply because she called them, for whatever reason? I don't think so, and the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that if one occupant has refused entry, the other occupant cannot give law enforcement consent to enter the private home.
From the limited information provided, I have forced entry into homes for the exact same thing. On domestic violence calls I need to talk with all parties involved seperately. This is a crime and needs to be investigated.
HOwever, just driving by and randomly wanting to walk into your home, no. They comments made by many posters suggest just than.
Just think if this was your sister, mother, daughter? If the officer did not check on her safety, and she was seriously injured, what would you do? Oh, thats ok, the boyfriend/husband said you couldn’t go into the house and check on her. I understand. The 4th amendment far exceeds the life of my sister.
Sometimes you people have to engage your brain before you engage your keyboard.
That's primarily for safety ~ the Courts have decided pretty regularly that safety for all during an arrest situation might even reqauire putting handcuffs on folks at the scene who are not subject to arrest.
Now, let's say they come by your house and see your dogs playing behind your fence, barking and so forth and they shoot the dogs and then run into your house guns in hand, Indiana courts have earlier ruled that you can shoot the cops dead!
If, as you have said, the court decision is a bad one then negative comments about the judge are appropriate. The decision is the issue is it not?
I’m sure ammo sales are skyrocketing in Indiana as a result.
it’s always been my impression that Indiana gunowners are well prepared ~ shouldn’t be a run on ammunition at all.
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.