Published: 11 June, 2012, 21:31 Hold onto your holsters, folks: shooting a cop dead is now legal in the state of Indiana. Governor Mitch Daniels, a Republican, has authorized changes to a 2006 legislation that legalizes the use of deadly force on a public servant including an officer of the law in cases of unlawful intrusion. Proponents of both the Second and Fourth Amendments those that allow for the ownership of firearms and the security against unlawful searches, respectively are celebrating the update by saying it ensures that residents are protected from authorities that abuse the powers of the badge. Others, however, fear that the alleged threat of a police state emergence will be replaced by an all-out warzone in Indiana. Under the latest changes of the so-called Castle Doctrine, state lawmakers agree people have a right to defend themselves and third parties from physical harm and crime. Rather than excluding officers of the law, however, any public servant is now subject to be met with deadly force if they unlawfully enter private property without clear justification. In enacting this section, the general assembly finds and declares that it is the policy of this state to recognize the unique character of a citizen's home and to ensure that a citizen feels secure in his or her own home against unlawful intrusion by another individual or a public servant, reads the legislation. Although critics have been quick to condemn the law for opening the door for assaults on police officers, supporters say that it is necessary to implement the ideals brought by Americas forefathers. Especially, argue some, since the Indiana Supreme Court almost eliminated the Fourth Amendment entirely last year. During the 2011 case of Barnes v. State of Indiana, the court ruled that a man who assaulted an officer dispatched to his house had broken the law before there was no right to reasonably resist unlawful entry by police officers. In turn, the National Rifle Association lobbied for an amendment to the Castle Doctrine to ensure that residents were protected from officers that abuse the law to grant themselves entry into private space. There are bad legislators, the laws author, State Senator R. Michael Young (R) tells Bloomberg News. There are bad clergy, bad doctors, bad teachers, and its these officers that were concerned about that when they act outside their scope and duty that the individual ought to have a right to protect themselves. Governor Daniels agrees with the senator in a statement offered through his office, and notes that the law is only being established to cover rare incidents of police abuse that can escape the system without reprimand for officers or other persons that break the law to gain entry. In the real world, there will almost never be a situation in which these extremely narrow conditions are met, Daniels says. This law is not an invitation to use violence or force against law enforcement officers. Officers in Indiana arent necessarily on the same page, though. If I pull over a car and I walk up to it and the guy shoots me, hes going to say, Well, he was trying to illegally enter my property, Sergeant Joseph Hubbard tells Bloomberg. Somebody is going get away with killing a cop because of this law. Its just a recipe for disaster, Indiana State Fraternal Order of Police President Tim Downs adds. It just puts a bounty on our heads. Source: http://rt.com/usa/news/indiana-shooting-law-state-591/
As a resident of Indiana.....this is old news but it also retains control of a homeowner and their property. If cops bust your down without a warrant guns drawn in a threatening manner you should have the right to defend yourself. Mitch is right in saying in the real world these extreme conditions will probably be never met.
So basically, a cop that barges in without a warrant is subject to the same rules as everybody else?
As much as I'm against violence against cops, it seems like an unfortunate necessary step given a lot of what we've seen in recent years.
Wasdie
You don't need a warrant to enter a house. All you need is probable cause that a crime is being committed. Say I suspect you're being stabbed to death. That means I can enter your home and save you.
It makes sense on the surface, but wait until we get a case like Trayvon Martin's involving a cop being shot. That raises the legal wrangling up a knotch.
It makes sense on the surface, but wait until we get a case like Trayvon Martin's involving a cop being shot. That raises the legal wrangling up a knotch.
So basically, a cop that barges in without a warrant is subject to the same rules as everybody else?
As much as I'm against violence against cops, it seems like an unfortunate necessary step given a lot of what we've seen in recent years.
airshocker
You don't need a warrant to enter a house. All you need is probable cause that a crime is being committed. Say I suspect you're being stabbed to death. That means I can enter your home and save you.
Would you like to shoot me for that?
Why would you shoot the officer when you could just shoot the person stabbing you?
So basically, a cop that barges in without a warrant is subject to the same rules as everybody else?
As much as I'm against violence against cops, it seems like an unfortunate necessary step given a lot of what we've seen in recent years.
airshocker
You don't need a warrant to enter a house. All you need is probable cause that a crime is being committed. Say I suspect you're being stabbed to death. That means I can enter your home and save you.
So basically, a cop that barges in without a warrant is subject to the same rules as everybody else?
As much as I'm against violence against cops, it seems like an unfortunate necessary step given a lot of what we've seen in recent years.
airshocker
You don't need a warrant to enter a house. All you need is probable cause that a crime is being committed. Say I suspect you're being stabbed to death. That means I can enter your home and save you.
Would you like to shoot me for that?
That would be the exigent circumstances doctrine. It requires more than probable cause to believe a crime is being committed. It requires cause to believe that someone is in imminent danger of harm OR that evidence is being destroyed. Officers can't just decide they're going to raid a house because they have probable cause to believe someone is forging checks or growing pot inside. They would need a warrant or some other exception to the warrant requirement.
Is there any way to gauge "probable cause"? Sounds more like individual discretion to me.
Ilovegames1992
Nope....these kind of laws just keep the honest people honest more than anything. If someone is going to do something illegal they will do it regardless.
Is there any way to gauge "probable cause"? Sounds more like individual discretion to me.
Ilovegames1992
The test is supposed to be whether a reasonable person in the position of the officer would have objective grounds to believe (X crime) is occurring. Those grounds have to be specific and articulable rather than vague hunches or instincts. If the officer is relying on info provided by some other non-law enforcement entity, he may have to corroborate part of the report himself before acting. Probable cause is ultimately an objective test based on the totality of the circumstances known to the officer at the time.
So basically, a cop that barges in without a warrant is subject to the same rules as everybody else?
As much as I'm against violence against cops, it seems like an unfortunate necessary step given a lot of what we've seen in recent years.
airshocker
You don't need a warrant to enter a house. All you need is probable cause that a crime is being committed. Say I suspect you're being stabbed to death. That means I can enter your home and save you.
So basically, a cop that barges in without a warrant is subject to the same rules as everybody else?
As much as I'm against violence against cops, it seems like an unfortunate necessary step given a lot of what we've seen in recent years.
Wasdie
Silly law. Cops are allowed and required to enter a premise when a crime is currently ongoing. What this law does is make a cop think twice about stopping the commission of a crime.....and the potential death of citizens. And to agree with it....well I question your logic.
this is bit too far. I think you should be able use force if they are using unjustified force against you (basically if they barge in and start shooting your family), but if a cop just walks in, you get to kill him?
I personally don't see a problem. Most people call the cops and they show up much later. Unless your say SWAT then most likely you will be let in. Even in NYC cops don't have the right to enter without cause or a warrent. The larry davis case proved that. All this does is clearify what police can and can't do.
Most people complain the police did not get there fast enough and can't wait to open the door and start talking.
So basically, a cop that barges in without a warrant is subject to the same rules as everybody else?
As much as I'm against violence against cops, it seems like an unfortunate necessary step given a lot of what we've seen in recent years.
thegerg
Silly law. Cops are allowed and required to enter a premise when a crime is currently ongoing. What this law does is make a cop think twice about stopping the commission of a crime.....and the potential death of citizens. And to agree with it....well I question your logic. "Cops are allowed and required to enter a premise when a crime is currently ongoing." Not necessarily. so you basically want cops to just wait around like penguins? I'm no fan of cops of having too much power, but they should be able to do their job
So basically, a cop that barges in without a warrant is subject to the same rules as everybody else?
As much as I'm against violence against cops, it seems like an unfortunate necessary step given a lot of what we've seen in recent years.
LJS9502_basic
Silly law. Cops are allowed and required to enter a premise when a crime is currently ongoing. What this law does is make a cop think twice about stopping the commission of a crime.....and the potential death of citizens. And to agree with it....well I question your logic. Personally, I'd rather have cops over-react than under-react.
[QUOTE="famicommander"]Good. The police are no different than anyone else. They should be held to the same standards as private citizens.l4dak47
Police are NOT regular citizens they protect and serve the public on a state level. They are trained and armed and often underpaid and have to deal with idots,scum,cheats,rapist,murders ect while trying to enforce the law.
[QUOTE="l4dak47"][QUOTE="famicommander"]Good. The police are no different than anyone else. They should be held to the same standards as private citizens.noscope-ak47
Police are NOT regular citizens they protect and serve the public on a state level. They are trained and armed and often underpaid and have to deal with idots,scum,cheats,rapist,murders ect while trying to enforce the law.
lol "protect and serve' my ass. All they've ever done here in my community is harass us and go after people who do victimless crimes. They are quite aggressive in my community. tbh, I consider them scum. They have way too much power and they do not not nearly enough regulations to make sure they're not abusing it.
[QUOTE="l4dak47"][QUOTE="famicommander"]Good. The police are no different than anyone else. They should be held to the same standards as private citizens.noscope-ak47
Police are NOT regular citizens they protect and serve the public on a state level. They are trained and armed and often underpaid and have to deal with idots,scum,cheats,rapist,murders ect while trying to enforce the law.
They shouldn't be above the law though, as many state and federal workers seem to be. They should be held to the same standard as us. Instigate violence, prepare for retaliation.
Police are NOT regular citizens they protect and serve the public on a state level. They are trained and armed and often underpaid and have to deal with idots,scum,cheats,rapist,murders ect while trying to enforce the law.
lol "protect and serve' my ass. All they've ever done here in my community is harass us and go after people who do victimless crimes. They are quite aggressive in my community. tbh, I consider them scum. They have way too much power and they do not not nearly enough regulations to make sure they're not abusing it. This^ It's good there's a law allowing a person to defend themselves against cops. Wasn't there an elderly man who died just recently when police arrived at his house, but he wouldn't let them in. So they broke down the door and beat the mean to death, then claimed to be trying to help the man. Cops these days are crooked and sick.
Police are NOT regular citizens they protect and serve the public on a state level. They are trained and armed and often underpaid and have to deal with idots,scum,cheats,rapist,murders ect while trying to enforce the law.
lol "protect and serve' my ass. All they've ever done here in my community is harass us and go after people who do victimless crimes. They are quite aggressive in my community. tbh, I consider them scum. They have way too much power and they do not not nearly enough regulations to make sure they're not abusing it.
Ok smoke your weed in your house and don't hang on the street. If your a minority then your SOL if you live in the burbs. There are a couple **** on the force but you can file complaints and it will be addressed if it has merit. When said ass on a power trip does something you think is wrong get his shield number and name then file the complaint. I can tell you if you get too many of those it becomes grounds for dismissal. You also have your elected officials that cab address the problem just in case you feel the chain of command is not taking care of the issue.
Police are NOT regular citizens they protect and serve the public on a state level. They are trained and armed and often underpaid and have to deal with idots,scum,cheats,rapist,murders ect while trying to enforce the law.
noscope-ak47
lol "protect and serve' my ass. All they've ever done here in my community is harass us and go after people who do victimless crimes. They are quite aggressive in my community. tbh, I consider them scum. They have way too much power and they do not not nearly enough regulations to make sure they're not abusing it.
Ok smoke your weed in your house and don't hang on the street. If your a minority then your SOL if you live in the burbs. There are a couple **** on the force but you can file complaints and it will be addressed if it has merit. When said ass on a power trip does something you think is wrong get his shield number and name then file the complaint. I can tell you if you get too many of those it becomes grounds for dismissal. You also have your elected officials that cab address the problem just in case you feel the chain of command is not taking care of the issue.
Police around here dont follow up on complaints, and i doubt that's just a local thing... You act like it does something, it doesn't.
Log in to comment