6 Maryland State Troopers Club and Taser to Death a Diabetic Architect; 46 Others Watch.
Indiana First State to Allow Citizens to Shoot Law Enforcement Officers... and some people are actually wondering why?
Indiana law that lets civilians shoot cops in self-defense: good law or bad?
Temlakos~POTL~PWCM~JLA~☆
2012/06/12 17:21:06
|
|
|||||
|
110 votes
|
|
75% | |||
|
23 votes
|
|
16% | |||
|
13 votes
|
|
9% | |||
Last year, the Indiana Supreme Court said that an ordinary Hoosier had "no right to reasonably resist unlawful entry by police officers." Several Indiana legislators asked the Court to do that decision over. (Barnes v. Indiana, cause #82002-0808-CM-759.) The court would not re-hear the case. So the legislators ginned up this new law.
All right. What does that new law say, that the old law didn't? Less than you might imagine. The law already gave Hoosiers the right to defend their "castles" (defines as their homes, the land around them, and their cars while they were in them), and indeed to defend their personal space anywhere, with no duty to retreat. The new Indiana law now lets them defend themselves against officers of the law and other "public servants" who behave improperly, exceed their lawful authority, or do that which does not exactly fall under their sworn duty.
From the way a lot of law officers are reacting to it, you'd think the Indiana legislature had declared open season on them! For instance, Sergeant Joe Hubbard of the police in Jeffersonville, IN, says,
All right. What does that new law say, that the old law didn't? Less than you might imagine. The law already gave Hoosiers the right to defend their "castles" (defines as their homes, the land around them, and their cars while they were in them), and indeed to defend their personal space anywhere, with no duty to retreat. The new Indiana law now lets them defend themselves against officers of the law and other "public servants" who behave improperly, exceed their lawful authority, or do that which does not exactly fall under their sworn duty.
From the way a lot of law officers are reacting to it, you'd think the Indiana legislature had declared open season on them! For instance, Sergeant Joe Hubbard of the police in Jeffersonville, IN, says,
If I pull over a car and I walk up to it and the guy
shoots me, he’s going to say, “Well, he was trying to illegally enter my
property.” Somebody is going get away with killing a cop because of
this law.
No, Sergeant Hubbard. If you read the law more carefully, you’ll note that before that driver can shoot you, he must reasonably believe that you are doing more than giving him a speeding ticket.
And there's something else you have to consider: cops have often "gone rogue" on traffic stops. Watch this video below. That could be you someday. The new Indiana law will check that.
For more details, you can follow the link to the actual Indiana law, or the link below to the article. Now ask yourself: is this new Indiana law a good law, or a bad law?
Read More: http://www.conservativenewsandviews.com/2012/06/12...
Top Opinion
-
ordman 2012/06/12 17:54:05
"Citizens may resist unlawful arrest to the point of taking an arresting
officer's life if necessary.
Plummer v. State, 136 Ind. 306. This premise was upheld by the Supreme Court
of the United States in the case: John Bad Elk v. U.S., 177 U.S. 529. The
Court stated: "Where the officer is killed in the course of the disorder
which naturally accompanies an attempted arrest that is resisted, the law
looks with very different eyes upon the transaction, when the officer had
the right to make the arrest, from what it does if the officer had no right.
What may be murder in the first case might be nothing more than manslaughter
in the other, or the facts might show that no offense had been committed."
"An arrest made with a defective warrant, or one issued without affidavit,
or one that fails to allege a crime is within jurisdiction, and one who is
being arrested, may resist arrest and break away. If the arresting officer
is killed by one who is so resisting, the killing will be no more than an
involuntary manslaughter." Housh v. People, 75 111. 491; reaffirmed and
quoted in State v. Leach, 7 Conn. 452; State v. Gleason, 32 Kan. 245;
...
"Citizens may resist unlawful arrest to the point of taking an arresting
officer's life if necessary.
Plummer v. State, 136 Ind. 306. This premise was upheld by the Supreme Court
of the United States in the case: John Bad Elk v. U.S., 177 U.S. 529. The
Court stated: "Where the officer is killed in the course of the disorder
which naturally accompanies an attempted arrest that is resisted, the law
looks with very different eyes upon the transaction, when the officer had
the right to make the arrest, from what it does if the officer had no right.
What may be murder in the first case might be nothing more than manslaughter
in the other, or the facts might show that no offense had been committed."
"An arrest made with a defective warrant, or one issued without affidavit,
or one that fails to allege a crime is within jurisdiction, and one who is
being arrested, may resist arrest and break away. If the arresting officer
is killed by one who is so resisting, the killing will be no more than an
involuntary manslaughter." Housh v. People, 75 111. 491; reaffirmed and
quoted in State v. Leach, 7 Conn. 452; State v. Gleason, 32 Kan. 245;
Ballard v. State, 43 Ohio 349; State v Rousseau, 241 P. 2d 447; State v.
Spaulding, 34 Minn. 3621.
"When a person, being without fault, is in a place where he has a right to
be, is violently assaulted, he may, without retreating, repel by force, and
if, in the reasonable exercise of his right of self defense, his assailant
is killed, he is justified." Runyan v. State, 57 Ind. 80; Miller v. State,
74 Ind.
"These principles apply as well to an officer attempting to make an arrest,
who abuses his authority and transcends the bounds thereof by the use of
unnecessary force and violence, as they do to a private individual who
unlawfully uses such force and violence." Jones v. State, 26 Tex. App. I;
Beaverts v. State, 4 Tex. App. 1 75; Skidmore v. State, 43 Tex. 93, 903.
"An illegal arrest is an assault and battery. The person so attempted to be
restrained of his liberty has the same right to use force in defending
himself as he would in repelling any other assault and battery." (State v.
Robinson, 145 ME. 77, 72 ATL. 260).
"Each person has the right to resist an unlawful arrest. In such a case, the
person attempting the arrest stands in the position of a wrongdoer and may
be resisted by the use of force, as in self-defense." (State v. Mobley, 240
N.C. 476, 83 S.E. 2d 100).
"One may come to the aid of another being unlawfully arrested, just as he
may where one is being assaulted, molested, raped or kidnapped. Thus it is
not an offense to liberate one from the unlawful custody of an officer, even
though he may have submitted to such custody, without resistance." (Adams v.
State, 121 Ga. 16, 48 S.E. 910).
http://groups.google.com/grou...
So what PD do you work for?
If memory serves, an officer has to have a reason to make an arrest, and if a person is doing wrong, there is no justification for an arrest, and I do not believe I can state it any clearer than that.
Many people have been killed when officers broke into the wrong address, and it is only justice for the resident that has their home broken into by mistaken police to be able to legally defend their property and lives by killing the ones that illegally broke into their home, in lieu of it being the police that are the only ones allowed to use deadly force in this instance.
If law enforcment wants to enter my home they must knock on my door, identify themselves, and give me time to verify who they are before entering, or they will meet armed resistance, period, and that is the way it should be for everyone.
I can not think of anything more embarrassing for anyone that believes in self defense than being attacked in their own home without being able to fight back, so I always have access to a firearm when in my own home.
I find it strange for anyone with a carry permit to be armed when away from home, and not provide the same measure of protection, by being armed, when at home.
As to not having anything to worry about, a person never knows who it is if people break into their home, and I would rather be safe than sorry. Anyone with a ligitment reason for entering my home can knock on my door, identify themselves, give their reason, and if they claim to be law enforcment, give me time to verify who they are, of they will meet armed resistance, and anyone breaking down my door will be shot immediately, period.
As I stated before, anyone breaking into my home will be met with gunfire, and although I am no longer a young man, I can still hit my target, or targets, as the situtation demands.
Granted, the old adage of two shots to center of mass has changed a little over the years to two shots to center of mass and one shot to the head, just in case of body armor, unless you use a firearm that normal vests will not stop.
Since you do not know the layout of my home, there is no way anyone can break into it while aiming at me, and it gives me the advantage of knowing where the are, while they will not know where I am untill some of them have already been killed.
Anyone, police included, breaking into a person's home should be fair game for the home owner to shoot in self defense, and if it happens enough times, maybe police will get the message, that you do enter into anyones home without prior notice.
Many people have their property posted no trespassing, have animials that would give a warning if anyone approached the home, and would realize that meant someone without any business was on their property, and be prepared to receive them.
I would rather be prepared and take the proper precautions a hunderd times when it was not necessary, than to not do it the one time it was.
As I posted before, anyone with a ligitment reason for entering my home can phone ahead to let me know they are comming, knock on my door, identify themselves, give their reason, and if they claim to be law enforcment, give me time to verify who they are, of they will meet armed resistance, and anyone breaking down my door will be shot immediately, period.
My children, and the people that I know always phone ahead before comming to my home, and anyone I do not know has no business there, so anytime a person comes to my home unannounced, they are suspect.
But this isn't about LAWFUL arrests, now is it?
a Marine veteran was killed in this style because they did not have a warrant, did not inform them they were coming in, and came bashing through the house guns ablaze... since he didnt know who it was he grabbed his gun and went on the defense and was shot to death... 72 bullets were fired from a total of 6 officers at this man