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.
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