Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: jessduntno

>> For you guys, (or gals) that would mean just about anything, wouldn’t it?

For me, since I **KNOW** I’m not a lawbreaker, I would assume any forced (and therefore unlawful) entry into my car or house was a crime against me, and blow away the perp, if I was able. Without worrying about if the perp was a fake cop, or a real but incompetent or evil one.

So — if you’re a cop, you had better approach me by ringing my damn doorbell — alone, not a herd of you — WAITING until I ANSWER the door, and then politely show me your BADGE and your SEARCH WARRANT.

What is so hard for you to understand about that concept? What is it about that concept that violates the precepts of living under the protection of a bill of rights?

I get that there are criminals out there, and that it may be necessary for the police to occasionally break a door down to get them. But — DON’T F__K UP AND BREAK **MY** DOOR DOWN, because I know I am NOT one of them. If you do break my door down, and I am able, I will protect myself, and my property, by SHOOTING TO KILL.

Get it? It’s just THAT simple. Under the Indiana law, the burden not to f__k up and forcibly enter the wrong dwelling now rests on the POLICE. The reward for not f__king up is the police stay alive and uninjured. The penalty for f__king up is to risk getting killed. As it SHOULD be. Instead of on the innocent, law-abiding citizen to guess how to respond to a forcible entry.


72 posted on 08/06/2012 2:24:34 PM PDT by Nervous Tick (Love the cult, respect the leader, but I simply can't drink the koolaid and die.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies ]


To: Nervous Tick

“I would assume any forced (and therefore unlawful) entry into my car or house was a crime against me, and blow away the perp, if I was able.”

Not what the law says. The law says - and I will copy it here for all you folks AGAIN - “The law describes the ability to use force to “protect the person or a third person from what the person reasonably believes to be the imminent use of unlawful force.”

Forced entry or violence was not what I argued was so GD wrong headed about this bill. You seem determined to put something in there that wasn’t there.

And that’s my point. A LOT of people can see harm that at there...

So even though we were talking about two different subjects....thanks for playing.


73 posted on 08/06/2012 2:30:22 PM PDT by jessduntno ("Racism is not dead...it is on life support - kept alive by politicians..." - Thomas Sowell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies ]

To: Nervous Tick

“Get it? It’s just THAT simple. Under the Indiana law, the burden not to f__k up and forcibly enter the wrong dwelling now rests on the POLICE.”

Not what the half-assed amendment says.


75 posted on 08/06/2012 2:31:56 PM PDT by jessduntno ("Racism is not dead...it is on life support - kept alive by politicians..." - Thomas Sowell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


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