Click the Pic
Donate monthly and end FReepathons!
Sponsors will donate $10 For each new monthly sign-up
Posted on 01/17/2012 11:10:10 AM PST by digger48
INDIANAPOLIS -- A Senate committee voted unanimously Tuesday morning in support of a bill that would allow homeowners to use force to resist an illegal police entry.
The bill comes after a controversial Supreme Court decision in May that held that current Indiana law didn't allow homeowners to violently resist police officers under any circumstances.
The bill specifies under what circumstances police could enter a home: with a warrant, in pursuit of a fleeing criminal suspect, to prevent someone from being harmed or at the invitation of a resident.
Otherwise, a resident could use reasonable force, including a gun if necessary, to prevent entry.
(Excerpt) Read more at theindychannel.com ...
http://www.theindychannel.com/politics/30221517/detail.html
Lawmakers Consider Right To Resist Police -
Indiana homeowners would have limited rights to resist police officers trying to enter their homes in a handful of instances under a bill that state legislators are considering.
A state Senate committee is scheduled to hold a public hearing Tuesday on a bill that follows a public uproar over a state Supreme Court ruling in May that said homeowners cannot violently resist police officers even during an illegal entry.
The bill’s sponsors said it is narrowly crafted to set out the rights of homeowners.
The bill would allow homeowners to use force if the police officer is unidentified or not acting on official duty.
Officers would be allowed to enter a home when chasing a criminal suspect or when they believe someone inside is in danger.
.......
more at link
The media has reworded this gem to sound rediculous. Woo hoo!
Try this. See if it is as dramatic.
“Police home entry conditions are better defined: Homeowner may not be responsible for resisting”
The bill exonerates a homeowner that resists police entry into their house if certain “defined” conditions are not met. As in, a law abiding citizen, defends their home against illegal entry by criminals or anyone else.
It ain’t as dramatic as it sounds.
Agreed - and such a law should not even be necessary, but here we are...
It gives citizens some legitimate rights of push back unless the law is followed, and as it should be. When illegal entry is made by anyone including LE to one’s castle it should never be the owner and public’s obligation to curl up and assume the fetal position.
“a law abiding citizen, defends their home against illegal entry by criminals or anyone else”
There is no “anyone else.” If someone enters a home illegally they are a criminal, even if they are also cops.
If we may NOT defend against an illegal entry by LEO, then ANYONE wearing black who batters your door down will get the same benefit.
Naturally gangs would never take advantage of that.
This will get effed up beyond belief....u watch...
This will get effed up beyond belief....u watch...
In the barnes case...his spouse could be injured...and police have a right to make sure that all parties are safe...if they just leave cuz barnes says so...and someone really is hurt....then they get sued for negligence......u watch how this unfolds
No, they do not. The Supreme Court has ruled multiple times that the police have no affirmative obligation to ensure the safety of a private citizen.
See: DeShaney v. Winnebago City and Castle Rock v. Gonzales
if they just leave cuz barnes says so...and someone really is hurt....then they get sued for negligence......u watch how this unfolds
The DeShaney case invalidates that asertation.
The Indiana Supreme Court ruled as if the husband had the right to beat her to death with the cops just standing aside. Some took the ruling to mean that the husband was in his rights to resist the police coming in at her request.
It was pretty much a practical test of Sharia Law versus American Common Law. The questions were pretty basic ~ (1) Do women have rights to resist their husbands beatings, (2) Do women have the right to call the cops for help, (3) Can the cops help protect the woman from her husband, (4) Can the husband shoot the cops or his wife, (5) ..... etc
There's lots of good stuff in this.
We had the Pro-Sharia Law faction on FR trying to hide behind the 4th Amendment!
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.