Posted on 08/06/2012 9:26:31 AM PDT by QT3.14
A new law in Indiana authorizes the general public to use deadly force against public servants (including law enforcement officers) who unlawfully enter private property.
The measure, approved by Gov. Mitch Daniels in March, (who himself is a Bilderberg member, making the situation even more interesting) is a real game changer as the script has been flipped on the police when it comes to deadly force.
(Excerpt) Read more at theintelhub.com ...
No-knock warrants = armed home invasions
Funny you say that. The other day I was watching a YouTube of two guys
on a homeowner's security cam at his front door wearing ski masks with
'FBI' jackets trying to jimmy, then try to kick in his door. When that failed
they started tearing off a screen off a window next to the door.
Home owner fired a few shots and you can see the two running off like hell!!
Botched Paramilitary Police Raids:
An Epidemic of “Isolated Incidents”
“If a widespread pattern of [knock-and-announce] violations were shown . . . there would be reason for grave concern.”
—Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy, in Hudson v. Michigan, June 15, 2006.
An interactive map of botched SWAT and paramilitary police raids, released in conjunction with the Cato policy paper “Overkill: The Rise of Paramilitary Police Raids,” by Radley Balko.
You forgot #6. Bad guy sees cops at door and flushes contraband and down toilet while police wait outside.
“Just out of curiosity: are you a cop or ex-cop?”
Why? You a con? Ex-con? WTF does that have to do with anything? The numbers are the numbers. You get a handful of these things a year out of MILLIONS of civilian interactions and all cops are JBT’s. Stupid. Just plain stupid. We’re done.
I’m talking about a no-knock warrant. You’re in bed and you hear the cops kick your door in. They’ve got the wrong address. They entered illegally.
And nobody gets shot.
No-knock warrants = armed home invasions
I'm trying to imagine which of our Founding Fathers would have gone along with that.
If I’m in bed and someone kicks the door in, the starting assumption has to be that that’s an illegal entry and can be legitimately met with deadly force.
>> We’re done.
OK. That is the most common reaction of someone unable or unwilling to defend their position, so don’t feel *too* bad. You’re not alone. Not very skilled at persuasion, but definitely not alone.
BTW, I’m skeptical you’re the businessman you hold yourself out to be.
Businesspeople can reason and work with numbers.
You forgot #6. Bad guy sees cops at door and flushes contraband and down toilet while police wait outside.
“And nobody gets shot.”
Dealer stays in business instead of jailed. H goes back out on street - high school kid dead from overdose. Somebody dies after all.
Did you miss the part that said “unlawfully enter private property?”
Would your response be to grovel on the floor and thank them for unlawfully entering your private property?
Perhaps you would find someplace like Cuba or North Korea more in tune to your liking.
Dealer stays in business instead of jailed. H goes back out on street - high school kid dead from overdose. Somebody dies after all.
A "maybe" juxtaposed with a "certainty" based entirely on the premise that the cops are too stupid to make a case against the dope dealer any other way than by executing an armed home invasion.
Did you miss the part that said “unlawfully enter private property?”
Did you miss the part where I conjecture that this will cause a lot of DB’s while some armchair lawyer insists he’s right and out of the million or so Leo’s in the country, not all are Jack booted thugs?
Drop the strawman.
Alcohol is a legal substance.
Surely you’ve heard of people (college students, usually) dying of alcohol poisoning/overdose.
But people haven’t died because they sell alcohol since the repeal of Prohibition.
It used to be said “”better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer”. Now it is said that “Officer Safety must be priority number one”. LEO’s have lost their way and their true purpose.
“A “maybe” juxtaposed with a “certainty” based entirely on the premise that the cops are too stupid to make a case against the dope dealer any other way than by executing an armed home invasion.”
All that flies in the face of “maybe they are in the wrong house?”
Maybe a lot of things. Maybe a lot more DB’s out there.
You're done! lol
Apples and oranges.
The topic is 'unannounced dynamic entries', or whatever term you wish to use. These (hopefully) constitute a tiny percentage of the 'MILLIONS of civilian interactions' you quote.
And there are certainly more than 'a handful of these things a year'.
Thus, the silly percentage you posited is bigtime bogus.
You're done.
“Would your response be to grovel on the floor and thank them for unlawfully entering your private property? Perhaps you would find someplace like Cuba or North Korea more in tune to your liking.”
Why, because they think a lawful shooting based on what might be a clerical error would be applauded by morons? Got that here already, it seems.
Sorry - I don’t think that an unlawful entry in error couldn’t be sorted out by other means than a gun, cowboy, but it could. All this anti-LEO shoot first don’t worry about the consequences sounds like pure BS to me. Does that disappoint you? And no, there wouldn’t be any “groveling” if someone came into my house without reason or unless there was an error. I promise.
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.