No Right to Resist Unlawful Police Entry: Indiana Supremes

Outside the Beltway ^ | May 14, 2011 | James Joyner

[Washi]

The title of this article is so misleading, this was not a case of illegal entry by the police. It was legal and called for f one takes the time to read what actually happened.

Regardless of the specifics of this case, the court's ruling is that people have no right to resist even an unlawful police entry.

[brytlea]

Thank you.

[jonascord]

A classic example of why we have to dig a little, and not give the standard liberal kneejerk response. We are not permitted to mention the common denominator in all this 'thugness.' Can you see the problem? We have let the JBTs thump the ghettos for 50 years, because it's been out of sight, out of mind. Perhaps Ray Nagin's term is the best, a 'chocolate nation.' that we can ignore.

I'm of the opinion, however, that Lydon Johnson's Great Society created underclass gave the Thugs all the practice and let them develop the methodology and rationale. Now the rest of the United States is getting what the ghetto has been living with. Find me a Ghetto dweller who wouldn't, singing rap music, set a JBT on fire, and pee on the flames. Haven't you ever wondered why?

Now it's OUR turn. Do we REALLY want to be that brutalized? We have to jerk these JBT bugs up short, or they are going to go over the edge, and people are going to be standing on a pickup tailgate with a crowd and a rope necktie, waiting to do the dangle dance. Right now, whether its the civilians or the JBTs is 50/50.

(Hint: The Democrats prefer "rightwing teabaggers" doing the Dance...)

[Wolfie]

Ah for the good old days, when they were just doing this to druggies and nobody cared.

[KeyLargo]

“As a LEO, I find this decision to be abhorrent!”

Yes, most competent and experienced LEOs would be on the side of the victim of the police abuse of power just as most rational LEOs believe firmly in the 2nd Amendment.

It is always a certain group of incompetent,inexperienced and thugish LEOs that due to their overstepping constitutional rights cause case law and case precedent to be addressed in the higher courts.